olives Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) I've been testing a blend of GB 444 wax (75%) and coconut slab wax from Candles & Supplies (25%) and wicking is proving to be almost impossible. I've been testing every size imaginable of rrd, CD, hemp wicks, ECO, and even ribbon wicks with completely inconsistent results from test batch to test batch. I'm adding 8% FO, and pouring each batch between 140 - 145. Edited to add: I'm heating to 185 and adding FO at 185 as well. My most common issue seems to be severe tunneling that ends up extinguishing the flame. Example photos are below. This happens no matter if I size up or down in follow-up batches. Any guidance would be much appreciated! Edited January 22, 2018 by olives Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonshine Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 What is your lot number of 444? what is the biggest eco you plugged in there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olives Posted January 22, 2018 Author Share Posted January 22, 2018 I've been ordering 5 lb bags from TFCC so unfortunately no lot number on those...and the largest ECO I've used is the ECO 16 in a 16 oz straight-sided jar with a 3.58" diameter. Same tunneling/extinguishing! I'm going to give that one a try it again, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 That tunneling could be Caused by cavities or what some call sinkholes. do you poke relief holes? 444 is notorious for those around the wick. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olives Posted January 22, 2018 Author Share Posted January 22, 2018 I don't poke relief holes, but I'm thinking you might be onto something with the air cavities. Would pouring at a lower temperature help prevent air cavities? I like the smooth tops that the higher pour temp seems to give me, but I'd gladly trade that for candles without air cavities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 Lower temps may help a bit. But 444 for whatever reason is known lately for cavities. It might be worth poking holes after it cools and doing a repour just to be certain. Then start testing wicks again. In that width jar I would provably start with an eco 10 or 12 depending on the fragrance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olives Posted January 22, 2018 Author Share Posted January 22, 2018 3 minutes ago, TallTayl said: Lower temps may help a bit. But 444 for whatever reason is known lately for cavities. It might be worth poking holes after it cools and doing a repour just to be certain. Then start testing wicks again. In that width jar I would provably start with an eco 10 or 12 depending on the fragrance. Thanks @TallTayl, I will give that a go. The air cavities would also explain the inconsistencies in the wick performances during my testing. Always something!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trappeur Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 16 hours ago, TallTayl said: That tunneling could be Caused by cavities or what some call sinkholes. do you poke relief holes? 444 is notorious for those around the wick. Glad I saw this TTayle about sink holes as I've got a little bag of 444 I'm going to give a shot at testing. I can't remember last when I have poked any relief holes in my candles as I never had that problem, that's using 464. Question....what have you found is a good round about pour temperature for pretty decent tops? Would you say that 444 generally requires a 2'nd pour over the tops of the candles? Or can you get the candle to be a 1 pour jobby? With 464 I pretty much all the time have to do a 2'nd pour but then too my candles all get those little doo dads in the tops of them and I need that 2'nd little repour to get the doo dads to bind to the top of the candle. Now if I pour about 150 give or take they are usually slick as glass. Trappeur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 The only sink holes I have had were with wooden wicks when I poured warmer than usual. I was in a hurry(of course). I could tell right away because the wood wick would not stay lit. When I looked closely there was a gap 😫. A quick smooth and heat gun fill and all was good. I don't take temps, but wait for the wax to cloud, almost congeal, before pouring. Knocks wood, no cavities in those. Shiny smooth tops. Beautiful burn. I live for single pour. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olives Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, TallTayl said: I live for single pour. SAME! But this whole tunneling issue has got me a bit panicked and re-thinking my whole process. My candles could look perfect and smooth on top, yet have air cavities inside that would essentially make it a dud candle. So I feel like I need to now go the relief hole route for every candle I make...time-consuming, but I can't let candles go out the door that could possibly be duds. @TallTayl - do you poke relief holes in every single candle you make to sell? If so...are you filling the holes with a repour of wax, or hitting the tops with a heat gun and letting the wax melt into the holes? Honestly, I often wonder how some of these smaller-scale makers (P.F. Candle Co., for example, or Seawicks) who aren't Yankee, yet are still running businesses, deal with the quirks that we do...I can imagine that they don't have time to do repours on the thousands of candles they make every week! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Since I learned the temp to pour my particular candles, I do not poke holes any more. My tins are shallow compared to taller status jars, for instance, and cool differently. Occasionally i poke a cooled candle for quality assurance. from what I have seen, quite a few small scale makers (like home based) have no idea what lies beneath the surface of their candles. Bigger brands like those you mentioned I would have to believe follow GMP to ensure their products are safe and reliable. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonshine Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I have poured the 444 in 8 and 16 ounce Mason jars, tins and maxi tealights along with a few ceramics and haven't come across any major sink holes I get some pitted or crystallized tops but so far so good I pour very cool like 100-105 into warmed containers BUT my pours have been mostly wickless, not all, for wick testing - I skewer a hole after almost set to plug in wicks the ones that have had tabbed wicks have been good so far also but I may see this as well down the road when I settle on a wick and test again - or get a different lot number 🙈 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olives Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 1 minute ago, moonshine said: ...I may see this as well down the road when I settle on a wick and test again - or get a different lot number 🙈 ...or the moon is full, or the wind is blowing in a certain direction...LOL! The inconsistencies are making me nuts! I'm doing more testing today and my first plan of attack is to lower my pouring temp to see what that does. Every day, it's back to the drawing board! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trappeur Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Hey Moonshine....I know you use 415.....are you thinking of possibly changing over to another wax like maybe 444? I'm testing in the 16oz mason. Oh, I forgot to ask. In 464 in the 16oz canning I use a cd10...I'm wondering what wick I should start off with? Is 444 a little harder to wick than 464? Trappeur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 444 is harder than 415 for sure. My lots are closer in wicking to C3 than 415 or 464. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Just ordered two new cases from candlewic. Fingers crossed they are similar enough to what all I have and am testing. 🤞🏻 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trappeur Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, TallTayl said: 444 is harder than 415 for sure. My lots are closer in wicking to C3 than 415 or 464. Ok, well that gives me a suggestion starting point. I'll start off with the cd 10. Trappeur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonshine Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 21 minutes ago, Trappeur said: Hey Moonshine....I know you use 415.....are you thinking of possibly changing over to another wax like maybe 444? I'm testing in the 16oz mason. Oh, I forgot to ask. In 464 in the 16oz canning I use a cd10...I'm wondering what wick I should start off with? Is 444 a little harder to wick than 464? Trappeur Yes I'm making the switch to 444 I'm done trying to get 415 to work again 444 has 2% soy based additive already added in it and I always added USA in the 415- so I'm baffled I can't get my old stuff to throw and burn with basically the same manufacturer of wax adding my own soy based additive and the 444 has been performing very well with much better throw 🤷♀️ Must be a different soy based additive is all I can think of 16 ounce masons with this wax I'm in a toss up of eco 10 and cd 10 or 12 depending on fragrance I have been a CD user for years so I'm still struggling with learning to "like" eco but they are actually doing a little better as far as overall burn and throw....for some reason CD lately are really curling into the melt pool and at the end of the burn look like they tripled in size - they are the same wicks I've always used sealed in a freezer bag so I have to conclude soy just isn't playing well with CD like they used to....maybe from the changes idk 🤷♀️ You will find 444 to be much much firmer than 464 so plan on wicking up from what you do with 464 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonshine Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 33 minutes ago, TallTayl said: Just ordered two new cases from candlewic. Fingers crossed they are similar enough to what all I have and am testing. 🤞🏻 Me too I will wait and see how yours go first before ordering more 🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 40 minutes ago, moonshine said: Me too I will wait and see how yours go first before ordering more 🤣 Happy to take one for the team. @Trappeur one thing I discovered in side by side with cd versus eco in 444, the eco seem to consume wax better than the cd. Cd tend to, in my wax and containers, get to a point where the heat of the flame melts more wax than the wick can draw up, leading to deep mp Versus the ing steady. Wicking down destroys the HT, as it needs enough energy to throw that wax and scent into the air. i am eating my shirt right now since I loathed eco wicks before. Now they are doing the job. 💃🏻🤷🏻♀️ 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kandlekrazy Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 This is funny, I too hated ECO wicks when I tried them in C3 way back and recently started to retest them. I also did not like LX wicks and I'm using those now too. I think all newbies need to know that going back in the archives may not be a good idea with these wax changes. More current posts may give you a better idea of which wick and size to start testing with. These wax changes have everyone in a tizzy! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olives Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, kandlekrazy said: I think all newbies need to know that going back in the archives may not be a good idea with these wax changes. More current posts may give you a better idea of which wick and size to start testing with. These wax changes have everyone in a tizzy! I completely agree! Things have changed so much that so much of the old advice no longer applies...it's really crazy. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trappeur Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 26 minutes ago, TallTayl said: Happy to take one for the team. @Trappeur one thing I discovered in side by side with cd versus eco in 444, the eco seem to consume wax better than the cd. Cd tend to, in my wax and containers, get to a point where the heat of the flame melts more wax than the wick can draw up, leading to deep mp Versus the ing steady. Wicking down destroys the HT, as it needs enough energy to throw that wax and scent into the air. i am eating my shirt right now since I loathed eco wicks before. Now they are doing the job. 💃🏻🤷🏻♀️ Thanks TT....hmmmm Eco wicks? Well, I'm on a mission now. I know I have some eco's stashed away I'll have to get out. Can you make a suggestion or someone else of where I should have a starting point for 16oz canning jars and 8oz tins if you don't care with eco's. Trappeur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallTayl Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 8 oz tins I use eco10 for most right now in my wax lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olives Posted January 31, 2018 Author Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just back with an update...I'm doing a test burn as I type this with my 444/coconut wax blend which I poured at about 120, using the same sized wicks that I was testing before. The tops did not look as nice and smooth as they did with the hotter pour, but there's NO tunneling this time. Looks like a lower-temp pour is the key with 444. Thanks for all of your input! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.