Well, I lit my other candle from the same batch, different FO, and it is burning like a champ. Now I'm really confused. The two candles were made at the same time with the same wax and stored in the same place. One burns just like it did last fall and the other one looks very underwicked. I had 6006 from two different orders and one may have been made with the old wax and the other with the new. The new wax was a little darker and firmer, perhaps IGI added something different to it.

14 hours ago, ErronB said:

I can smell a huge difference with the same FO in different waxes, but from 6006 to 4627 the only difference I notice is the potency of the top notes. 6006 smells more rounded because of that bit of soy, but 4627 likes to just give you the 'take no prisoners' top end IMO.

 

I would bet that it's probably the whole 'triple wicking' thing throwing it off more, though. To me some scents smell completely different when blasted with multiple wicks, and not always for the better lol.

 

I'm no expert though, I only have about a year and a half experience with paraffin / parasoy blends, I'm sure some others will give their thoughts.

Thanks, I think you are spot on, it wasn't so much the scent as the way it was presented

1 hour ago, TallTayl said:

that explains how different all of our results are with IGI as part of blends.

 

@pughausand I compare notes and have remarkably different candles using the same ingredients.  Those IGI polymers must have a wicked aging curve.

 

some 4630 i received was rubbery. Some was smooshable.

 

Sounds like I need to look for a paraffin that isn't IGI 

I’m wick testing my first attempt at a triple wick candle and I’m using Nature’s Garden’s Vanilla Champagne in 4627. It just doesn’t smell like I remember it when I used 6006. I’m thinking I may need to go back to 6006 for this FO. I have a little soy candle that Trappeur made, but I just can’t bring myself to burn it. Would the sent be that much different between 4627 and 6006?   

12 hours ago, BusyBee said:

Hey!  Can we charge more money for aging our candles like fine wine or aged steak?  😉

 

The thing that bothered me most about 6006 is melt pool shape.  I am getting concave shape melt pool with 6006, and middle of melt pool near the wick gets really deep but outer edge still stays shallow.  Is that only me or do you notice similar melt pool with your 6006?  All other waxes I have tried create flat melt pool except 6006.

 

I used to worry about that, but if you wick it right you get a nice wall of wax on the sides that will melt eventually. That wax helps your HT. It used to drive me crazy because by the time I got a FMP the wax had melted to the bottom.

3 hours ago, NightLight said:

Hi Forrest,

Now that you have experience you should make your own parasoy. I know its a pain, but you will be a the mercy of variables in 6006.

You will have to retest but it wont be as brutal now that you know what to do from experience.

 

Hahaha I hate all the waxes.

 

I've switched to 4627, but I have a good supply of 6006 I need to use up. I may use it make a bunch of tins with no wicks. I can store them for a year or two and add the wicks later.

3 hours ago, BusyBee said:

464 burns almost same after 2 years.  

 

Somehow I don't like 6006.  Original developer of 6006 Dussek Campbell sold that formula to IGI long time ago.  No wonder why they sold it.

Yes, but I believe it has the best HT you can get, if you're willing to wait that long. I have some 464 that I'm thinking about making some candles without wicks. I'll use my apple corer and ice pick to add wicks in a couple of years

4 hours ago, ErronB said:

It's definitely a possibility, I'd give it a shot. If that doesn't work then there has to be something off with the wax because 4627 is one of the biggest throwing waxes I ever used, only 2nd to CBL-129 in my opinion, that stuff literally blows my house to pieces.

I know, and I made some tins with the same FO but a previous batch of 4627 and they had great HT. I'll try remelting and adding some FO.

On 11/27/2020 at 7:58 PM, ErronB said:

I'd be writing for hours if I explained everything I have discovered by testing all that. But I'll tell you right now with the recent batches of IGI paraffin type waxes if you don't add it hot you're going to have problems unless the FO just happens to be one which will throw in anything at any temp. I don't know exactly what they've been doing to the waxes lately but they are more stubborn. It's not too hot, give it a try, and if you don't get a good throw after that then I'd look into other things like how long you're stirring in the FO, and the wicks you're using. Wicking is a whole nother story, but you should rule any problems out of your process first before getting to that. 

I made is melts with 4627 that are seriously under-performing, could it be that my wax wasn't hot enough? I've been thinking about remelting and adding some more FO to bring it to 10%.

25 minutes ago, karinz40 said:

I really like the LX.  The Zinc  mushrooms a little to much for me.  But both have a steady burn and nice HT

I have found that the zincs don't mushroom if they are a perfect fit, most of the time they aren't

Summer before last I made my Christmas candles with 6006 so that they could have six months to cure. Last Christmas this candle burned perfectly in in the same environment as this candle is burning today. The only variable is a year’s extra cure time. On the plus side the HT is excellent. The FO is Falling Leaves. Also the candle has turned a little brown. I found another candle from the same batch, but a different FO, it will be interesting to see if the same thing happens.  

17 hours ago, karinz40 said:

But this is  4630.  I have been testing all summer onseveral scents and never had a cavity.  i checked them.

Maybe wick to small?

All of my perfectly wicked candles from the summer are tunneling now, and my house isn't that much cooler yet. 

1 hour ago, TallTayl said:

Alcohol on hands, like sanitizer will defo smear. Lotion did too. Along with anything to dust or clean. 

Shows how much my kids clean😂 I think Mod Podge would work because it is water based. I quit inking the tureens because they didn't burn the candles, they just used them for decoration.

2 hours ago, TallTayl said:

Way to make lemonade from 4627 lemons.
 

Alcohol inks are wonderful, they just need to be sealed.  I used to ink tins but then noticed the inks smearing and rubbing off. Mod podge might work. Or spray clear poly.

I never had a problem with smearing, but if you have any thing on your hands with alcohol on it it might smear.  I gave some to my daughters several years ago and they still look great. I think if tou were selling them you would have to seal them or put a disclaimer on them.

I bought some glass containers to do some triple wicking, I thought they would look alright, but I’m using 4627, and it is just not a pretty wax. So it was either go to 4600 or do something about the containers. I searched YouTube and found a process using alcohol ink and plastic wrap, that didn’t work for me. I had this stamp thing that you stick a piece of felt on, so I decided to try that. I cut a piece of felt, stuck it on, and put some drops of a few different alcohol inks on it and started applying it with a rolling motion. It worked great and it is quick, I could easily do two cases in a half hour. It was so quick and easy that it got me thinking that this would work well for commercial applications. Including time and materials, this wouldn’t add much cost to a container, but it would only work on straight sided, round containers. This is my first try, I’m sure I’ll get better at it.

14 minutes ago, Belinda said:

Lone Star has a diagram that you can print out and it shows where to place two and three wicks. Maybe that would help you. I'd like to triple wick one myself but I've just started double wicking a few. 

Thanks, I'll check it out

A while back I decided I needed to try some 3 wick candles, but when I looked for the containers none of my suppliers had what I wanted. Fortunately my preferred supplier has just added exactly what I am looking for. Having never done this before I have two questions, the first is where should I place my wicks? The second question is how do I get my wicks in the right place? For an amateur, like myself, it is important to limit the number of test candles required to get it right. The container is a straight sided glass container 4.5 Inches wide by 3 inches deep. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

6 hours ago, Cosmic candle creations said:

Hi Forrest!

 

What type of wick do you use with the 6006? I've just ordered a zinc sample pack. What are your thoughts on zinc? Also do you have any feedback on using mica? I'm second guessing myself now..

I use zinc, CD, WI, LX, and HTP.. I am of the opinion that size is more important than type. As for zincs, if the size is right they do well, I would give them a try.

I can't really say much after just four hours, I wouldn't jump the gun until I got a couple of more burns in, things may be different once the beans melt into the wax. Unfortunately ECO is about the only wick I haven't tried in my 6006.

My wife has gotten into cookie decorating and wanted to put some of her cookies for sale online. I had just purchased a set of studio lights on Amazon, the MOUNTDOG Softbox Lighting Kit, so we set them up and she took pictures with her IPhone. Those pictures were much better than shots I took with my Nikon on a tripod before I got the lights. My lights cost $70, but they have them as low as $40. Having the studio lights allows you to control the amount and direction of the light. Having two lights gives you a lot of flexibility. If you are shooting your product indoors I highly recommend you get a set.  

Could it have anything to do with the temperature? My waxes all get harder starting this time of year. If you like a softer wax 4627 is a good choice.

20 hours ago, Kerven said:

Flame height, flame stability (does it flicker and dance a lot?), carbon production (smoke, soot, mushrooms, etc.), proper curling (if applicable), not curling too close towards glass (if applicable), speed of melt pool formation, depth of melt pool (is it deep enough that the wick moves?), outside surface temperature (is it within a safe temperature to handle?). Safety comes first. After safety checks, it's more about the performance, aesthetics, and throw.

 

Do you mean ingredients as in additives? If so, test with none, then gradually work up until you're satisfied. If results don't improve as you gradually increase the amount, that ingredient might not be appropriate or compatible.

If you mean ingredients such as the wax itself, I guess we determine "optimal result" based on what we aim to achieve with it. A strong throw, a cool burn, vibrant color retention, tolerance to shipping heat, great adhesion, no shrinkage, no frosting, no cauliflower tops, melt pools with sloping sides, no residue on the glass...

Well this made my day. I may be amateur, but I'm testing like a pro.,

I usually hope for a FMP near the end of my third 3 hour burn, but most people would think my candles are under wicked

I have two, one I inherited from my dad, and the little one I got from Amazon. It is an Homidic and works great most of the time.

I used to use 6006 because I like to argue with myself, but then I realized that millions of dinosaurs were killed in the production of my paraffin wax, so I'm switching to pure soy,