lovelyscents

1 hour ago, ShelleyF said:

Hi I haven't been on lately so I'm just seeing this. I haven't had any trouble with fragrances. It does age well. Stays looking perfect and the throws get stronger. They are already strong but they intensify even more. 

I appreciate your response! Is there anything you do to get rid of the dimples or does it not bother you?

On 5/28/2022 at 8:04 AM, LilFirecracker said:

 

On 5/28/2022 at 8:04 AM, LilFirecracker said:

 

 If it helps, I'm testing different percentages of blends that include 4786 & 4633 - with and without CO, using 5-10% as part of the total percentage. 

You don't find this blend too soft for melts? I guess if you are using cups for packaging, it could work nicely. I know even though 4786 comes in a hard slab form, it seems to be gummy and melt faster than a typical tart wax, especially if blended with a softer container wax...in my experience. I have found 4786 to lose its scent throw a bit after a long shelf life compared to some harder paraffin wax blends. Do you find this to be true? Maybe it's my oils aging more than the wax itself being the problem.

Also, I apologize for reading your post too quickly and commenting regarding candles when you specifically said melts lol.

On 6/1/2022 at 12:43 PM, ShelleyF said:

I use KY133 and it is matte. It has a great hot and cold throw bit is expensive. 

@ShelleyF

Do you find this wax to be picky with fragrances, like inconsistent? Does it age well?

I have been searching for more of a matte creamy look for years and have only found that increasing the soy content or adding a small % of a matte tart wax helps for candles. It's a bummer how hard it is to find a paraffin dominant blend that adheres nicely, matte creamy, and is not greasy that melts too easily in the heat. 

On 10/22/2021 at 9:34 AM, NightLight said:

I just tried 4786. For opaque containers it’s great. It’s a harder wax, easy to pour. Adheres nicely to containers first go, in colder weather it will shrink after you burn it and pop form the glass. Quite good worth trying.

Are you still loving the 4786?  I seen the video that someone posted on craftserver's FB of the 4786 and the flame seems to be very high if the wick is not trimmed super short.  I wonder if this is why Cajun recommends blending it with a softer container wax.

7 hours ago, ErronB said:

I jinxed myself, all the praise I gave it then we get a new batch a couple weeks ago and when you pour it, it looks like zombie brains on top when it sets. Of course, you can fix this by adding a bunch of a different wax but then you don’t get the same HT. 
 

The first burn does have a higher flame for me, but not after that. I used HTP / LX in it, I don’t trim my candles so I don’t have much experience with zinc wicks, plus I don’t like how they act with plasma lighters which are becoming more common these days.

Yep, I have seen that complaint many many times.  I am not sure how the manufacturer and / or supplier can send out wax like this and then expects us to become the scientists and troubleshooters.  We have less time to "fix" it once we establish a customer base. 

I seem to be losing my motivation and excitement for the whole thing more times than not and its saddening.  I am getting to a point where blending coconut 1 and some beeswax sounds more promising for consistency lately.  Well, I hear mottling wax is pretty consistent also.  I have to say I am shocked 4627 would be messed up, it seems like such a basic petrolatum blend.

On 11/12/2021 at 9:04 PM, Sarah S said:

I tested the CBL129 and I loved the throw. It was easy to wick too. I am just way to lazy to deal with a repour. 🤣

For a single pour with consistent great results, I go with CBL125 every time.

I actually just bought a slab of 4630 and a box of 4627 to see how they compare to CW's waxes. 

Penny for your thoughts 😂

On 10/22/2021 at 9:40 AM, ErronB said:

I know I’ve seen a couple people over the years post some stuff on here where they got some really messed up batches, and to be quite honest I don’t like their orher waxes anymore, I’m assuming it’s because they’re using IGI stuff in the blend so no wonder they’re ‘off’, but the 129 I’ve gone through god knows how many cases and I’ve honestly never had a problem with it. I hate how bad it shrinks and dips, and it’s a very hard wax like palm, but the hot throw….. holy Jesus. It’s slammin.

I meant to ask you which wicks you prefer in it?  Zinc?  Do you tend to get high flames or excessive soot if not constantly trimmed?

5 minutes ago, Candybee said:

 

Don't have any ideas why you are getting a poor HT and great CT. I get the exact opposite. Hot throw is excellent and cold throw is good but a bit more subtle. I use 5% FO load, heat wax to 210, and add FO just after I stir in my color chip. I want to make sure the color chip is fully incorporated prior to adding FO. But my pour pot I keep on a hot plate at 300 degrees to be sure to keep the wax hot so I still pour at just over 200-210 degrees. Also, I always let the candles cure for a week.

 

Just about any FO I try I get a good HT. I also use the smaller size wick that burns well in the CSN series. I use a size CSN 9 for my 12oz SS jars.

 

One other thing you could try. Never burn a candle the same day you made them or even the next day. I find I tend to get candlenose. Also, sometimes if you have been sitting in the same room with a candle for a while, get up and go outside for a few minutes. Come back inside and you should be able to smell it. Again, candlenose at work here.

 

Currently I get my glass glow at C&S but my last purchase was from Lonestar when C&S ran out of stock. 

You are likely using quality oils as well.  Where do you like to purchase from?

I will give Ecos a shot

1 minute ago, TallTayl said:

I’m sorry I don’t. Never liked RRD so I stopped testing them.

Shucks

On 10/21/2021 at 2:13 PM, TallTayl said:

The biggest down side to palm is lower CT than other waxes.  HT can beat the pants off any other wax when you figure out your wicking, but if people go by strength of CT alone when choosing a candle, then it is a little bit of a battle. I’m sure with scent in the lid we can make up for the CT.

Do you know a good starting point for rrd or eco in a 9oz straight jar or 12oz mason?

19 hours ago, AliCat said:

Customer care got back to me after sending her the pictures of the candles coming out mottled. Here's her response:

 

Thank you again for your order and the provided pictures. I checked our records and cycle counts again, and the wax that you received is the IGI 4625. This wax (IGI 4625) is sent from our manufacturer label as IGI 4625. I apologize if the results are not as expected. If you continue to order the IGI 4625, this is the result you should receive. Please let me know if you have additional questions. We look forward to doing more business with you in the future. 

 

Sorry, but don't believe it 🤷‍♀️

Just now, lovelyscents said:

 

No, IGI didn't change the formula for 4625.  They told me the same excuse when I demanded a refund for the wrong wax.  It is too much of a coincidence that multiple customers receive the "off batch" as they call it only from them and different times of the year, but it's fine from all other suppliers.

On 10/26/2021 at 5:11 PM, AliCat said:

Virginia Candle Supply IGI 4625 wax update:

I got in touch with a customer care specialist from Virginia Candle Supply, and this is what she said:

 

"Thank you for your order. We apologize for the delays in getting a response back to you. According to our records and cycle counts, the wax that you received is the 4625 (the wax that is provided from our manufacture). We apologize if the results are not the same as what you have experienced in the past. Please let me know if you have additional questions."

 

Now I'm curious if IGI is actually changing the formula of the IGI 4625?! I pray that they don't! Honestly I believe that some of their inventory was just labeled incorrectly. I sent her pictures of the Lone Star IGI 4625 and the funky IGI 4625 that I received from VCS. I told her they should maybe look into this issue so it doesn't happen to any future customers. I'll keep ya'll updated! 

No, IGI didn't change the formula for 4625.  They told me the same excuse when I demanded a refund for the wrong wax.  It is too much of a coincidence that multiple customers receive the "off batch" as they call it only from them but it's fine from all other suppliers.

2 hours ago, Lizzy said:

Bill told me a few years ago that 4794 is used as a base for CBL 129  Makes great candles and the second pour is worth it IMO. It does ripple most of the time for tarts/melts in my experience. I emailed with Bill about this and he suggested adding more oil (FO) which I haven't tried. Apparently when a batch ripples it's on IGI's end with too much of an additive. 

I've heard it was a 4794 base also.

10 hours ago, TallTayl said:

Sounds like 4786

That's what I was thinking.

I know Country Lane is CW.  Does anyone know if the palm wax from them in Hobby Lobby is their container or votive?  It says a MP of 135 that is suitable for both container and molded candles, but just making sure.

On 10/22/2021 at 9:40 AM, ErronB said:

I know I’ve seen a couple people over the years post some stuff on here where they got some really messed up batches, and to be quite honest I don’t like their orher waxes anymore, I’m assuming it’s because they’re using IGI stuff in the blend so no wonder they’re ‘off’, but the 129 I’ve gone through god knows how many cases and I’ve honestly never had a problem with it. I hate how bad it shrinks and dips, and it’s a very hard wax like palm, but the hot throw….. holy Jesus. It’s slammin.

I thought the 129 is also using IGI base?

1 hour ago, ErronB said:

It’s the only wax I’ve used that has never failed to give me a hot throw. 4627 is giving me bad issues right now in batches which I’m not surprised, so gonna stick to 129 for now.

IGI 🙈

2 hours ago, TallTayl said:

The biggest down side to palm is lower CT than other waxes.  HT can beat the pants off any other wax when you figure out your wicking, but if people go by strength of CT alone when choosing a candle, then it is a little bit of a battle. I’m sure with scent in the lid we can make up for the CT.

I was just mentioning the lack of CT to another member, so it's funny you said this lol.

On 6/16/2021 at 4:36 PM, ErronB said:

The strongest HT I've had is from CBL-129, that stuff is a beast, but needs a repour and is in a hard slab like 4625.

I've heard great things about 129 as well except the ongoing ripples.  However, you need to repour with it anyhow which covers it.

Good to know.  Thank you!  Are there certain types of fragrances that only do well in it, like soy?

@strugglebrother please do tell and feel free to chime in.  😊

8 hours ago, TallTayl said:

The v series wicks see to be a nice option if you can get them. 
https://candle-shack.co.uk/products/v-series-wick

Are these only available from the UK?

8 hours ago, TallTayl said:

 

I’ve used cottonwood somewhat successfully, and have burned some made successfully with eco.

Cottonwood seems to be discontinued from Northwood and Northstar, shucks!

I do have some Ecos here I can try.  Wick testing palm isn't the easiest with how hard the wax is but I'm willing to consider giving it another try.  I'll have to get the hubby's drill out haha.

8 hours ago, TallTayl said:

 

wood wicks can work, though be super careful with sizing. I overwicked one and it caught fire. Scared me to death when the jar exploded and left the table scorched. 

Oh wow, yes don't want that.  Do you think it's due to the hardness of the wax?  Like maybe the wood struggles to burn it?