wthomas57

2 hours ago, B72Atlanta said:

A few questions.  

When a fragrance is not working with Q210 what do you mean by this? I want to compare it to what I am obviously doing wrong.

 

Is anyone getting a smokey/ burnt smell from Q210?  With or without fragrance? 

 

 

On previous pages I kinda try to describe why many fragrances dont work for me. The combination of them with the wax creates this strange clumping at the base of the wick. It completely ruins the burn. And it doesn't matter what wick I use in them. I tried several with exact same results.

Also, some FOs had minimum HT and zero CT even at 10%.

Regarding smokey burnt smell... you may be getting it too hot. I dont get a bad smell when burning, but the wax does smoke when its melting

36 minutes ago, B72Atlanta said:

Q210-  What can I say?  Is anyone having any luck with a particular type of wick?  I am having an issues where the carbon buildup at the bottom toward the pool gets so bad it affects the scent.  The whole candle begins to smell smokey.  This is not good for a regular candle or a massage candle.  I have talked to NGI and they blame fragrance which is not true as I have tested over 30 fragrances from 4 different companies.  

As I have mentioned many times on here....

I have had the same results on most of my testers. They are correct... its a combo of the wax and the fragrance. I have some fragrances that work fine... most do not.

The problem is this wax is SO picky on what FOs work with it.

The zinc wicks are nice because they are the coolest burning and are consistent. The problem is if customers are bad about trimming you can get some bad mushrooming. That, in turn, can lead to hotter big flames. But, otherwise they burn the coolest, especially compared to cd, eco, htp, premier, etc.

LX are ok... but generally gave my much more soot than zinc and mushrooming as well. But depends on jar and scent. Zincs dont work for me over 3". Not hot enough generally, so in bigger sizes I either double wicked or went with hotter wick like a cd, premier, rrd, etc.

NST 2 is a basically a stearic acid treatment. Its supposed to help with heavier fragranced, or dyed, or densse waxes. However... personally I haven't used RRD without nst2 so I am not sure if it makes a lot of difference. One thing I do not like about RRD is that they have a lot of after glow and tend to smoke A LOT after being extinguished. The irony is.... nst2 treatment is supposed to help with that.... I have not experienced that benefit at all

I don't think you need to cure 2 weeks for parasoy. A few days really. But still longer than parrafin. 

I woudln't worry too much about frosting if you are using tins. But 6006 will get rid of frosting issues regardless. The benefit of mixing with 464 primarily would be lowering melt point a bit but other than that I dont think you would see much added benefit.  6006 works with most scents I have ever tried. And you can definitely use 6-8% with 6006. Do not need more than that.

12 minutes ago, TallTayl said:

Were a great group here. Give us a chance. We have a lot of fun chandling, sharing and learning together. Lots of very seasoned pros share and help others out. 

Agreed... we have friendly banter here as well. We are all on here for the same thing.... share, learn, and fun conversation

I will tell you that 3" diameter and larger gets tough to wick with 6006. Need a hotter wick, so zinc may not work for ya. That being said, tins get hot themselves and can really help the melt pool move along so that may bring zincs right back in as an option. You will definitely need to do some testing with this. I dont use any 3" tins myself. Sorry

I do not like ECO in 6006. Smokes and soots too much. Id try the following:

zinc, cd, htp, premier, lz. Ive never used cdn

31 minutes ago, ozzie said:

and people wonder why message boards are dying 

What do you mean? It was lighthearted and also a reasonable question. There is lots of good info all over this board.

And it was a legit question. People are going to be reluctant to give advise if they aren't 100% sure they know what you are referring to.

There are lots of parasoy blends and I wanted to make sure you were actually referring to 6006. I've never heard 6006 referred to as messy.

But either way, it was still lighthearted. Skin + thicker = better conversations. Just saying.

And yes, GENERALLY parrafin has better HT... GENERALLY. But I also have 6006 that throws better than other parasoys with more parrafin. There are lots of factors.

Which again... why I wanted to clarify it was actually 6006 you used before.

Anyone else notice the new eco waxes, at least Q210 and Q220, smoking when initially melting in melting pot.

Has nothing to do with temperature melting to as its on low setting and gradually melting slowly. Nowhere near

the max temp and constantly smoking/vaping. Its like a steam constantly coming off the melting wax.

I read someone else having this too but was curious if this is just normal. It does it literally every time

in any melting pot

Did you say 6006 was messy? Compared to what? Are you sure you sued 6006, lol?

I use 6006 and wouldn't call it messy. I mean its not rock hard but its nothing like 4627. Heck even 4630 is messier

What wax were you using? That wick seems huge to me (even for a wood wick). My wood wicks in the same jar are half that size using 6006

464 takes a long time to cure to get good GT. I feel the same about parasoys. 

On 9/17/2017 at 11:38 AM, Firefly said:

wthomas57,

 

I use mainly essential oils for all my candles so wondering how they will hold up with the new waxes as the advanced did very well with them.  Also I used to use HTP wicks for my cotton wick candles and I also use wood wicks so I'll be doing more testing. I've already been testing like crazy with wood wicks and the GB464 as that is what I've been using but the wood wicks I used to use form 3 different suppliers were discontinued so I had to start all over again with wicks.  I've just about got the GB464 figured out (after 3 weeks of solid testing) with wood wicks (with cotton wicks they stayed identical to what I used to use with Ecosoya Advanced).   I do have a few fragrance oils to use up so may stick to the GB464 for those if the new waxes give me woes.  Also just got 50 lbs more the GB464 to hold me over until I figure out the new Ecosoya formulations.

 

I agree I also read two reviews that said Q210 is like the old advanced and one review that said Q220 is like the Advanced. Found a you tube video as well and it mentioned that they used the same cotton wicks with the old ecosoya as they do with the Q210. 

 

In your testing do you end up using the same wicks with the Q210 as you do with the Q220?  I found with the old Advanced I'd use one wick and then with the Excel I had to go up a size. Wondering if that is the case with the Q210 and Q220.

I do not use essential oils much, so cant help ya there. But I know the new waxes struggle with certain oils... mostly heavy ones so far. I do not use 464 by itself as I do not like the finished look at it cures a while nor am I impressed with the HT. CT is fine though. I use a little 464 in a few blends occasionally.

I haven't used Q220 yet. I just got it in. Ill let you knwo what I think after I have time to test.

yep, if you aren't buying in large bulk or along with other bulk items... its barely practical

I think one thing for sure with this new wax is that is pickier on FOs than the predecessors. Kimmy mentioned one, I have ran into several, and so have others that simply do not work well. I have done EXTENSIVE testing already since day one that Q210 was available. I am about to start on 220 soon. Ive also seen mixed descriptions from vendors on these two waxes. Some say 210 is more like Advanced and others say 220 is closer to Advanced. And others say you cant compare them. Honestly, right now it seems like just a lot of speculation with a whole lot of testing or experience to back many of the claims up. On a similar note, when reading about both 210 and 220... I hardly see a different between the two. The only real difference i see is that 210 is supposedly dermatology approved.

Something I would be curious about on both 210 and 220 is how much blending with something else with (say 6006 or 4630) could you get away with while still a really clean burn. The BEST part about 210 is the clean burn and the recongealing in my opinion. The worst part is consistent wicking, compatible FOs, and the CT and HT. Some are so faint even at 10%. Maybe I am just used to the great throw of 6006, etc.

The ones i haven't dyed have not done that so for me, no, i havent haf thpse results. But lime i said.... its not pure white. Its an ivory color which i think looks nice anyway.  I probably through some people off with my picture,  but that is becausevi used dye to make an ivory tan color

i took it in low light. Its really a beige color. But yes a tough of dye, not much. I think it was 2 drops of ivory in 2 pounds. Its not nearly as brown as it looks like in this photo.

But, Q210 is definitely a creamy ivory color by itself.... definitely not white like parrafin and I wouldn't even call it off-white like 6006. 

The jar is a 12oz canning/mason jar. I currently have this scent available in other styles but have been doing most my testing for Q210 in these and small masons so far.

Little update.

I should have taken picture before I blew out flame as it lit up the pool better and you could see flame height. But either way, THIS is how a candle should look in my opinion and its been difficult to achieve with this wax. This time it burned for 6 hours just to see how bad it might get and it just kept going perfect. I trimmed the wick once early on at the top of the jar. Other than that... I never trimmed it again. Didn't have to. And melt pool was ALWAYS a perfect 1/4" the whole way down. Couldn't be more pleased. BUUUUUT, again... haven't been able to achieve the same thing with most scents and wick combos. This wax seems AWFULLY picky about which FOs work well in it. Regardless.. thought I would share what a successful one has looked like. This particular was brandied pear and ECO 6

Issue i am seeing a lot too is not good jar adhesion.  Its ok after first pour. But as the candle burns and hardens back up.... the sides look terrible.  Tops good but sides are awful. Blotchy,  bad adhesion,  looks old and cheap.

I also discovered hazelnut coffee doesn't work woryth a damn in q210.  Never seen that FO not perform

Oh well thats dumb. But good to know.  Thanks!

46 minutes ago, Trappeur said:

Did you order the jars or just the lids WThomas?  If the lids, what jar are you going to put them on as I'm interested.

 

Thanks!

 

Trappeur

Both.... like I said, bad habit. Lol

I plan to also try the lids on the 4" libbey bowls like Christina was talking about from Lonestar. Although, I need to order more of those sometime because they ones I did have are already out the door. Unless someone has a single one they want to part with.

FYI, I did go ahead and order a few to try since I was ordering some other items from them anyway. Ill let you know how I like the lids.

Ha, yes it is! Also its a pain having to deal with 10 different suppliers in general. Lol