Fireside

129 OOS until they get the liquid base in around 7/8/19 they say....so no trying that for candles right now 🙄.  Plus with the looks of your batches recently, I may move on to perfecting IGI blends.

On 6/24/2019 at 10:17 PM, jaybee said:

sorry..meant to say I have used the cbl 130....could only get a select few fo's to throw strong in it...but those few were killer strong

Which wicks?

Wow, what knowledge you have.  Would this mean majority of paraffin container wax blends microcrystaline and polymer?

9 hours ago, Lizzy said:

It's the best I can do for now until I get it into the pots. If I had to compare this to any waxes I have personally tried or tested I'd compare the consistency to 3020 or 3022 from Clarus. That's just how soft this is.Appearance I'd compare to 4630. Hope this helps and makes sense. LOL

This may be a silly question but what does microcrystaline and polymer blend mean?

On 6/9/2019 at 5:03 PM, Sebleo said:

 

Right?!  I see in the FAQ that the minimum order is $200 and there is a $5 file prep charge for quantities under 500. 

😨

Hmm wonder how pricey they are, looks like you have to request a quote to know for sure.

8 minutes ago, Ravens said:

I did test them, a few years back; was not impressed one bit, but that doesn't mean they will not work for you. 

Let us know how the Premier testing goes, if you don't mind  🙂 

Will do, so far not impressed neither.  Clean burn, no soot, mostly steady flame but the HT is not there.  We shall see with more tests.

1 hour ago, Ravens said:

Yes, I really do.  After years of testing, I decided to stick  with zinc wicks; HTPs are second favorite. 

My labels instruct customers to always trim the wick, but I eventually realized that once the candles leave your hands, you just cannot know if the customer will trim the wick.

There is only so much I can control 🙄

Have you tried Premiers?  I am testing those with 4786 paraffin currently.

He seems to make a video review on a wax in less than an hour, then offers candle kits via his website for $65 + shipping.  These kits include 4 pounds of that particular wax, 3 fragrance oils, a pouring pitcher, 12 tins, 12 wicks (the one that he thinks works best in that wax), thermometer, stirring spoon, warning stickers, wick glue dots, and wick holders.

30 minutes ago, CaptnKush said:

They are way over priced. 8oz straight jar $22  + shipping.

Was going to agree with that as well until I spotted free domestic shipping.

Does 6006 seem to be a softer greasy wax or more firm dry wax? 

I once blended 4627/KY parasoy votive wax (50/50) with HTP many years ago.  That candle had such a steady flame and no soot, you would think it was fake.  Yes the HTP made for an uneven melt pool.  However, I dont know if many customers would care about that or frequently stare over the candle the whole time they are burning it to notice.  It also seemed to catch up after awhile at least in my test so I didnt worry about one side of the glass taking all of the heat.  I guess I just wonder if going back to me blending 4627 with a decent soy at the same ratio as 6006 (70p/30s) that we could get a more consistent result.  I guess you do not sound like your wax lots vary much though so that is lucky

Funny you mention them as I just watched their interview on CS today, love their scent blend combinations.  I do think finding your niche in a huge market of candlemakers is difficult for most, lucky they knew exactly what they wanted to focus around from the very beginning.

How are things coming along?  Despite your other issues with the wicks, how is the throw you are getting?  I have seen 6006 come in very yellow batches and some more white.  Have you ever thought about making your own blend so you at least know what is changing batch to batch?  Maybe I should order some 6006 and we all test alongside one another. 

SENDING TONS OF HUGS AND PRAYERS YOUR WAY!

Sarah, I believe she has tumbled between 6006 and 4630 with the intentions to try CBL but CW is always OOS when she attempts to order.  I have only heard of HTPs and Zincs working the best with paraffin candles but I may be missing something as well.  Sorry I cannot have the magic answer...or wick!

No worries blacktie, many still use and love 4794 without issues as well.  I have not tested that one much due to reading so much about longevity not being there with that one.  However, we all get different results half the time so I should.  I hear 129 is using the 4794 base so I am assuming if I like 129 best, I would be satisfied enough with 4794.  What about KY 133/Problend 450/JS paraffin pillar votive tart wax by CJ Robinson?  I am thinking CJR and IGI are the most used when it comes to paraffin???

Are there 4786 users anymore or has this wax phased out of its days due to 4630 / 4627?  I feel the throw is reasonable if the oils are but not sure if it lasts, still testing against CW 141 and 129.  I like that it is creamy and on the firm side but not sure if firm enough on its own for heat and shipping.  However, many more wax makers nowadays swear the softer the wax, the better the throw.  Therefore, adding pillar wax to it seems the opposite of what many believe.  Also am not sure if I like the shine aspect using it alone yet.  I know EVERYONE has a different opinion on their wax of choice and throw is subjective on many accounts....but there does seem to be a trend of 4630 / 4627 being the most popular.  Plus CS discontinued it years ago for lack of sales so I just wondered if this is a dying wax or people who use it just are not known?...

On 2/19/2019 at 9:23 PM, Fireside said:

I am still stuck between CW 141 and 129.  The 141 is creamier but slightly dimples and may have a hard time achieving its best throw on some warmers due to its higher MP (as I started in a separate topic) whereas the 129 takes color easier as it is more transparent and has a lower MP...but may not last as long or be as forgiving on oils that 141 is.  Has anyone else debated between these two by chance?  I like CW due to prices, free shipping on their blends, and they carry some of my soap ingredients.  Having said that, I still would purchase IGI wax from somewhere else to have a quality, consistent wax.  The recent thread on 129 in the clamshells that looks and performs totally different has me a little put back.  Will continue to battle these two out against IGI.  Really do not like blending waxes which to me is just additives overload and extra work if one is superb on its own.  

@Sarah S you have ever tried 4627?  If so, do you feel 125 is comparable?  

On 11/10/2018 at 1:58 PM, Sarah S said:

IMO, CW has consistent wax blends that perform very well in their applications.

HTH!

You do not feel CW overloads 141 with too many additives?  I ask as it seems to slightly dimple in the finished tarts and because I came across a post on here years ago where many stopped using it due to inconsistency and problems with the wax.  Then I see someone recently have issues with the 129 so it makes me standoffish on ordering from CW for wax.  However, I do love their oils, they have some soap ingredients I use, and love the pricing of wax in addition to free shipping on their blends.

16 hours ago, NightLight said:

Sarah

Do you think this wax is IGI 4630?

I would try it but hate not knowing what the wax is, much like Flaming candle blends.

Same with other suppliers making up name for cosmetic ingredients. Makes me nuts.

I am no expert but I would assume it is similar to 4630 beings CW uses IGI wax as their base prior to making it their own blends.  For example: 129 is a 4794 base, 141 is a 4625 base and so on.

That photo of the rain clamshell looks exactly like the 4794/129 issues.  Do large store brands use the same wax blends we have available to us?

On 3/9/2019 at 4:17 AM, Trappeur said:

I have Mrs. Klaus cookies that Belinda sent me a sample a long time ago and put in wax I use 464 and for me VBN from WSP is stellar.   The scent just took over the room immediately and I fell in love with it.   Such a strong strong fragrance that it lingered long after the candle was put out. 

Both are wonderful for sure!  The Mrs. Claus cookies gave me the same results in the stellar throw department and lingers after shutting off the warmer also (paraffin melts).

On 3/15/2019 at 4:00 PM, Marleigha said:

Also their Cowboy FO is WOW!   And the picture they have posted for it is as well. 😜

On 10/22/2018 at 3:25 PM, Trappeur said:

Well, I just made up a bunch of melts in 4625 as I thought so many used that till I started to see so many like 4627?........Dang!   I thought I was doing good.   4625 sure is an opaque pillar wax!   All these years I have never swayed from 464 or c3 and here I go just like the rest of you all experimenting.. Now I let the melts sit for 2 days..I know should be a week, I'm thinking.   But can anyone tell me if I should blend something to it or leave it?    I think I got a little baggie of 4630.

 

Trappeur

Trapp,

How did the 4625 melts turn out?

Keystone has the actual Peak oils, FBuddy are dupes.  I try not to attach myself to Peak oils too much as Keystone is ALWAYS out of stock it seems.  As for the owner of Peak, what a unprofessional roller coaster it has been.