ErronB

2 hours ago, Laila said:

Not sure. I tested with 6006 for about 4 months. I only got a slight hot throw once using a hemp 838. I used all different types of wicks and FOs. Any tips with the 6006? I still have some left. 

6006 has horrible inconsistency sometimes, I found that if you heat it to about 195, then add the FO at 190 and stir for a couple of minutes. Providing your thermometer is accurate then you should consistently have a good hot throw even 2 days later. Just don't use over about 8% FO load it doesn't need more. HTP / CD have always worked well for me in it. Or if you're using the 8oz jelly jars then the small Eco sizes like 1/2/4 can work good too. 

Pretty much any self-trimming wicks work in ProBlend 600, CD, Eco, LX, HTP. None of them really stood out to be the best for me.

As far as cure times go, it really depends on your process and the fragrance, but ideally you should give them at least a few days to a week because of the amount of soy in it.

How did you not have any luck with 6006? It has one of the strongest hot throws out of the parasoy blends.

17 hours ago, jmspgh said:

@ErronB...which northwoods coconut were you using?  Are you still using it and if so are the htp wicks still working the best?  I have been thinking about trying their"All Natural Coconut Candle Wax" (NW-58) and wanted to see if anyone with more experience than me had an opinion on it.  Thanks!

The NW-58 was the one I was using, but after testing a lot more fragrances it was just too dirty to burn on it's own without adding soy to it. Supposedly their new HPSP wicks are better for that wax but I haven't tested them yet so I wouldn't know. It didn't have a high enough melt point for me anyway, I use waxes that have a melt point of around 130 or more so that they can survive in the mail.

2 hours ago, Marisa11 said:

I didn’t see zinc wicks on your list. I use coconut apricot and have had success with Zinc, Paper core, CD, HTP, LX, and Premier 700 series. All in the smaller sizes.  Eco, RRD, and Hemp wicks burn way too hot for me. Wood wicks I only like for the ambiance they are too inconsistent  for me I just enjoy the crackling.  Cotton core and cottonwood I have but have not had a chance to test scented candles with them yet. Also the NEW big coconut wick everyone is losing their minds over are HSPS wicks that Northwood sells.  Apparently they have tested them in coconut waxes with great success.  They are pretty new so I have only seen A few peoples results.  How have your HT’s been?

I don't like the coconut apricot at all, I used it a while back. It pours great but the hot throw is very mediocre compared to a good parasoy, it's passable with wooden wicks but as you've already noticed they are incredibly inconsistent and can't be used on a professional level.

Zinc wasn't in my list because they are not self-trimming. The cottonwood wicks are 'interesting', but that's all I got to say about them. The first burn was always perfect for me, but even after trimming them the flames would be way too big after that. The way that they fray apart is really annoying, too.

3 hours ago, TallTayl said:

I expect a set here any day to try out.

 

one thing that has me a little skeptical is that it is announced as a perfect solution to “coconut wax”. My question is which? All of the retail available are quite different.  I have at least 5 on my shelf and none of them wick the same. 

I'm guessing they are for the very hot burning ones like their blend they sell, where the flame height is too high with any wick if you're trying to do a self-trimming burn in a 3" plus size container. I really liked the HT and look of their wax, was super easy to use, but wicking it for a clean burn was not doable for me unless I added soy and I refuse to do that for candles for sale.

49 minutes ago, mereander said:

I know it seems like a lot to pay for the sample pack BUT I’m really liking them so far. They seem to help HT. I get a better HT with HPSP than I do CD or Premier in Coco Apricot. I’ve also noticed that I get a full melt pool without the jar getting as hot too. 

What kind of wick type is it most like? Do they curl over like HTP / CD or is it tighter like CDN or more straight like LX / RRD?

Put the wax from one of your tealights in a wax melter, if it doesn't throw then you know it's the wax or your process. If it throws then you know it's just the wick. I've had tealights blow my hair back with hot throw before so they're not all wimpy, they can be nice.

The only natural ones I think are worth a crap are M-100, and the soy pillar blend from Northwoods but it's not been in stock for a while. The Golden Brands one is shockingly crap IMO, and the new Blended Waxes one CandleScience carry is also crap.

I can actually get a HT from C3 these days, 464 not so much. I don't know why but the last 2 lots I've had have NO HT at all.

C3 has a higher melting point so it's tougher to wick but it's good for shipping in hot weather unlike 464.

On 10/5/2020 at 4:49 AM, Lizzy said:

Yikes...that's a lot of $ for a sample pack
wonder what sets them apart from other "traditional braided design" cotton wicks? 

I don't know but I'm intrigued because they are supposedly made for waxes like paraffin and coconut where you're kind of stuck using the small size wicks to keep the flame size under control. Maybe they have a thicker smaller flame which is ideal, but I'm not really sold on their opinions due to how they wick their own candles, like they will use a Eco 10 in a 3" diameter with their super hot burning coconut wax, that is just wayyyyyy too big.

I've never seen these before... I was gonna get a sample pack but $60 is kinda tough to swallow if I end up hating them lol.

https://www.northwoodcandlesupply.com/collections/candle-wicks/products/sample-pack-hpsp-wicks-for-coconut-wax-candles

8 hours ago, Candybee said:

They have the best rice flower and shea which is a top seller for me. I had to bite the bullet and bought 4lbs that came to just under $200. Believe me it was hard pushing that enter button!😂

I think we're in the wrong business lol. I feel your pain, the worst part is it's always my own personal favorites that are the most expensive. Not ones I use for business, but I have to buy them to have a change otherwise my nose gets seriously burned out smelling the same stuff.

2 minutes ago, birdcharm said:

Can mica be clogging the wick?

It can, but a little bit is usually okay with wooden wicks. Regular wicks are another story, they are really touchy with that stuff. Not really worth it IMO.

1 hour ago, TallTayl said:

I buy my faves when on 30% off sales. 
 

bought kabocha when they offered 10# bulk. Pure green pumpkin smell. 

 

Their Oakmoss sandalwood is delicious. 

black salt cypress great in everything

 

dahlia lychee a wicker upper but delightful. 
 

black raspberry vanilla is best of all I have used in CP soap. 

I'll have to give some of those a go next sale. I went through some of their orchid mixes and flowery stuff a while back, they weren't perfumey or gross, they just weren't interesting at all.

Lol.. their pricing is almost as bad as the Wooden Wick co fragrances. That'll be the day when I spend like $70 per pound, I'd have to be in some serious love with it..

I have tried some WSP fragrances, the strength was good, just not a fan of the actual scents.

2 hours ago, ImSabrina said:

Hi,

 

I’m new to candle making. I used C3 soy wax, combined with a bit of fragrance and mica for color.

 

Despite the fact that I trimmed my wick for it to be close to the wax, it doesn’t stay lit. At this point I’m wondering if this is a wick or a wax issue... 

 

Any recommendations welcome! 🙂

 

Thank you,

Sabrina 

It's a wick issue, especially with the dual wood wicks. You can try leaving the wick in with the wax when you're melting it for a few minutes to prime it, but it won't burn the same even if it does stay lit.

Unfortunately the Wooden Wick Co had all all of the decent ones taken off of the market because they own the patent.

Anything 464 related has never ended well for me using a heat gun. I used to just pour when it's slushy and the tops came out decent

4 hours ago, SRez said:

Makes sense. We also have 444, 415 and 6006. Kinda went full tilt. Going to have experiment with those as well. Out of those others, what do you recommend to tackle next?

6006 has a higher melt point and much bigger scent throw than the other 2 under normal circumstances, it is a gigantic pain to learn to wick it in larger containers like 3", but it's definitely a wax you should learn to use because anything else you use after that down the road which has a high melt point will be a lot easier for you to understand it.

Just wait until you try to get a hot throw from 464 with fragrance, prepare for lots of stress, and screaming.

17 minutes ago, SRez said:

Good to know. Is it safe to say that most people change to another wax in the warmer/summer months to avoid that problem if they're shipping out? Like say to 444 or a parasoy? Or something else altogether? 

Everyone is different, if they're not catering towards tree huggers then they might switch to a high melt point parasoy like 6006, but that kind of defeats the purpose of going through all the hell getting a good throwing soy candle without using paraffin, or if they want to stick with soy then 444 is an option as well as using additives to harden the 464 wax like Universal Soy Additive, but I like C3 better for higher temps and I've had more luck with consistent batches. I only make high melt point candles now so I don't have to worry about any of that. Some people do ship 464 candles 'as is' but the amount of extra costs in packaging and there still being the higher risk of it turning to mush doesn't seem worth it to me.

7 hours ago, SRez said:

Ha! I'll tell ya what... We're actually enjoying watching this play out.  It's a cross between engineering and a chemistry / science experiment. 

 

We originally had 25, 3" Libbey tumblers with 464 (no fragrance yet) all wicked up and burning, testing for the 2 days.  We burned 4 hours the first day and 6 hours yesterday. 

 

We narrowed it down to 8 wicks last night and going to continue tonight with testing.   

 

The best so far, for us, out of the 8 are the CD 10 and 12, HTP 104 and 105 and Premier 765.  The 5 that I mentioned all seem to remain constant throughout. 

CD 8 seems a bit small but going to see what it does for the fun of it.  And ECO 10 and 12 almost died out during the first burn but seems fine on the second burn.  Not sure why.    

 

I want to say that the CD's probably take the lead as of now.  The CD's and HTP's burned pretty much the same amount of wax and the wicks look the same. 

 

The Premier wick though, looks the best.  No build up or mushrooming at all.  Let's see what tonight brings.  

 

Gonna keep on keepin' on. 

 

 

Premier didn't work out for me, I wanted it to, but I had a noticeably lower hot throw with a lot of fragrances. It might be different for you, though.

Just remember that 464 has a very low melt point, you can't ship it in hot weather, but if you're only going to be using it for delivering in person or in a store then it's fine.

8 hours ago, SRez said:

Hi there.  So what I mentioned about the CD18 the other day was way off.  I took @TallTayl   @ErronB and @birdcharm advice regarding testing and melt pools.  That link is here 

I retested with CD10, 12,14 and 16.  So far it looks like CD10 / CD12 is in the lead.  Bright flame, not too big / hot, not too small / dim.  The 14 and 16 look too hot / big flame bouncing around.  Also, this test is with unscented 464.  Once FO is added, I'm assuming that's a game changer too. 

 

Then I restarted testing again with all my wicks - ECO, Premier, HTP and Cotton Core. 

 

The Premier 780 and 765 look decent but not really close to the CD's.  The Premier's from what I see are burning more fuel than the others.

 

ECO looked strong in the beginning.  But by the 3 1/2 hour mark the ECO 8, 10, 12, 14 all went small and dim.  The 8 and 10 I was sure they were going to drown out.  It didn't yet.

 

However, the HTP 104 and 105 on the first run look pretty good. But not sure how they'll look on the next runs. 

 

But by going what I read on this forum, CD works best with 464.  So I am hopeful for them.  

 

I'm starting again tonight.  I ended at the 4 hour mark last night.  Going to go for another 4 hours tonight.  I'll keep you in the loop.

 

TLDR; CD18 and Premier 795 too big.  Try CD10 or 12 or maybe HTP 104, 105.  The Premiers ash up in the pool and makes it look dirty.   

 

Your observations are good. CD are pretty much my 'safe' wick with soy, they do mushroom most of the time which is really annoying and lean a bit, but they really hold their own to punishment if they are sized correctly. If you've done it right and people get careless with trimming the wick they can usually fix themselves after being lit again, it might take a bit but they can usually hang on after they've popped and smoked for a minute without disaster. Of course, different fragrances might work better with different wicks but I find probably 95% of the time CD ends up working out better (for me, anyways).

I used soy for a long time before venturing into other waxes about a year ago and went through learning a whole bunch of stuff over again from the likes of TallTayl, bfroberts, forrest and others. Without them I think I would have wasted double or triple the amount of supplies. I'd read some posts where they've recommended trying something and my immediate thought was 'wtf that's never gonna work' but after actually trying it you might see completely different results to what you think. Such a fun thing this whole candlemaking, right? lol.

Just now, SRez said:

That is interesting.  And what is misleading I guess, is just about every youtube video and candle article that I've read, from candle sites like CandleScience and some others all mention the almighty 1/4" to 1/2"  melt pool test. 

Granted that I'm new to this and have only been researching for the past month or so. 

I wonder if it's a play from the suppliers so that consumers like me buy more and more supplies to get it where they think they need to be. 😄  

CandleScience don't even know what they're talking about, they throw any safety out the window. The most common example is they always recommend CD18 wicks in 8oz tins for soy. Sure, you'll get that full melt pool, but try burning it further down near the bottom and see all the problems that stem from it. So basically all you are learning from them is: Burn your candle for 4 hours and if the melt pool doesn't reach the edges then wick up. Or if you have a really deep melt pool then wick down. There is SO MUCH MORE to everything, but if you question them they don't even really know themselves, they will feed you textbook noob responses to make it look like they're giving you decent troubleshooting advice which should be enough for anyone to make professional soy candles, it's complete and utter rubbish.

You'll learn a lot more by spending time researching your issues on this forum, some things you'll think make no sense, but give them a try anyway you might be surprised. 

15 minutes ago, strugglebrother said:

CSN7 wicks now popped up at CS again... 

 

CDN and CSN isn't the same wick.

 

I would grab so you have for another year and start testing in the meantime, otherwise you can always order from the UK (they also stock CSN11).

I guess I'll bite, which sizes should I grab to play with for glassglow palm in 3" containers?

I've spoken to candle scientists about their testing procedures, and they told me they don't ever fail candles because of wax hangup on the sides because there is nothing unsafe about it. They will even pass candles that tunnel with a huge wall of wax as long as the wick doesn't drown or flare up during the burn testing. 

This post reminds me of all the people I see on Reddit dumping $5 worth of essential oil into each soy candle they make just to get a semi good HT and having no idea how toxic some of them can be when burned.

But it's natural, right! Burning anything natural is fine!

14 minutes ago, lilo said:

I'm working with C-3 soy wax. On my burn test without FO, ECO 8 was the best that performed on my "9 oz" straight sided jars. Now I'm not sure if I should size up. The pictures below are with FO (Pineapple Sage from CS). Firts picture is 2nd burn after 4h. 2nd picture is 3rd burn after 4h. (I know, I forgot to take a picture after the 1st burn test). What do you guys think? It achieved full meltpool after the 4th burn with some residue on the sides. HT I'll say is normal for a candle of this size. Flame height was adequate and minimal to no mushrooming.

 

 

If it's cleaned itself up before the candle is done then that's good enough to me. The problem is if you wick up then you got more chance of mushrooming / smoke, sometimes it works out sometimes it doesn't. Always worth a try though just to cross off the 'what if' scenario.