dustinryan2010

On 11/19/2017 at 12:18 AM, moonshine said:

CDN work very well in soy 

if your looking to find them southwest candle supply carries the most sizes and are very consistent in having them available 

Did this change? Been looking online and seems Candle Cocoon now offers a wider range of sizes. 30.00 for a sample kit though? Jeeze!

6 hours ago, ErronB said:

 

Depends how fussy you are with waxes. It still has the awkward melt point of about 130 but it doesn't burn as hot and dirty. And doesn't really need a cure with most fragrances that I've tested.

Awesome thanks for the feedback! Since it’s higher soy content, should I expect to be using larger wicks than I currently do with 6006? Hoping so

5 hours ago, bfroberts said:

It has more soy.  Burns better, cleaner, and has a creamier appearance. A little pickier about FO, but overall I think it is a superior wax.

Say less lol. Just ordered 10 pounds to play with hehe

On 11/24/2019 at 5:07 PM, Sarah S said:

Well, if you like pre-blended waxes and you don't have a hate on for paraffin, I highly recommend Candlewic's waxes. The CBL 125 is easy to pour, looks great, and throws like a champ. The CBL 129 requires a second pour, but has a lovely white appearance and zero wet spots. Oh yeah, and throws like a champ. 😁

Their parasoy, CBL 130 is also a beautiful one-pour wax with zero wet spots. For a parasoy, it throws very well.

I don't get any kickback from Candlewic. 😉😄 I just really love their waxes!

 

Maybe if the Problend isn't working for you, it's time to try another blend? IGI's 4630 is a good wax too, and most oils throw very well in it. Maybe stick with that one for a bit, and try some different wicks and FOs. For a while I thought all my candles were sooty gross messes, and I was getting frustrated. The new I tested a couple fragrances outside my norm, and suddenly the candles were gorgeous. Turns out I love vanillas, ambers, spices, and resins - all the trickiest FOs to wick. 😅😅

Sorry to revive this old thread but I see you speak of CBL waxes the most so figured it would be smart to ask ya 😉 I’m currently using 6006 but not in love with it and considering trying CBL130. Would you say there’s enough of a difference between the two to warrant me spending the money to give it a shot? And if so, in your opinion what are those differences? Bad? Good? Thank you in advance 🙏🏻😊

On 5/4/2020 at 11:16 AM, bfroberts said:

I’ve been happy with CBL 125 & CBL 130. The 129 has an excellent throw and is easy to wick, but it requires repours and it’s had a bad inconsistency issue lately.  4627 & 4630 also have great throw.  
They are all good in their own way, but they all come with their own quirks too. 

I’m considering ordering CBL 130! What are the differences between it and 6006? I wanna give it a shot but don’t wanna waste 50 bucks if it’s pretty much identical to 6006

On 6/7/2020 at 8:42 AM, syntheaahh said:

hello everybody! How are you?

I just want to ask, how long is the testing phase? The reason I ask is because, a lot of people on facebook groups test their candles twice or only started learning the craft for a month and started selling. 

 

Also, is it really safe to add glitters, dried botanicals or like sprinkles to the candles? I see them a lot on fb groups. 

Welcome to the side of enlightenment 😂🙏🏻

4 hours ago, ErronB said:

 

I like all of them lol. The parasoy really surprised me, HT was banging the next day with 6% FO. 

Do you feel like it differs from 6006 enough for me to give it a shot?

5 hours ago, ErronB said:

I've used both quite a bit, and while 4627 has a better HT it didn't seem as clean burning as 4630 in my opinion. I ditched all my IGI waxes to use CBL stuff now, I'm much happier with the performance.

Which CBL waxes do you prefer 

11 hours ago, Paintguru said:

Interestingly enough, I just got a new batch of 4630 and while the "look" was the same, I had to rewick.  I blend it with 464 and couldn't figure out why my melt pools were no longer as large as they were before.  Then I remembered I started in on a new batch of 4630.  My guess it is about 1/2 a wick different, but still, now I've learned I need to check this every time I get a new batch.  

As I’m right in the middle of testing 4630 from a 4 month old wax batch 🤦🏻‍♂️  

1 hour ago, ErronB said:

They are good for certain circumstances, I’ve known several people to double wick them in apothecary jars for years without problems. I just can’t deal with the whole trimmed thing I have to use self trimming wicks.

What wicks do you find self trim the best? I’m using 6006 and 4630. HTP’s seem to be the best but really gotta offset the wick cause of the curl. LX’s did not self trim for me at all it seems

7 hours ago, ErronB said:

I don't understand how a zinc wick can burn untrimmed from top to bottom because it has a solid core.

Yeah that’s why I had to ask, I don’t remember my zincs self trimming even the slightest bit. Seems like a lot of people use them. I guess they’re just betting and hoping customers will trim 

17 minutes ago, TallTayl said:

Wow. Bonkers.

soy is polymorphic all on its own, no palm required. It’s why it requires additives to look and perform acceptably. the only plain old soys I have used include 415 and Midwest soy. 415 used to be good. It ranked when operations moved. Midwest is nice, but needs additives. 
 

Palm wax is super stable in glass once it has cooled, which is why I use it with so many other waxes. 
 

c1 contains palm, 20% actually. Never heard anything about palm in 464. 
 

in Australia, is it possible someone was selling a different formula than what is sold in the Us as 464? 

I really have no idea! I’m in the US so it stumps me what he could be even talking about. He insists that because it was tested by an RSPO lab, that it must have palm wax in it. I just don’t get his reasoning. If it did have

palm why wouldn’t they just disclose it? I’m pretty certain Golden Brands even carries their own line of palm dont they? 

11 minutes ago, ErronB said:

464 definitely doesn't have palm in it, if it did then you might be able to get a slightly decent HT from that piece of crap wax lol.

 

I've honestly never understood how it is such a popular wax, other soys are better and just as easy to wick.

Haha I literally had the same thought about it probably being better if it DID have palm lol

Is this guy just spewing off? I’ve never in my life heard of 464 containing anything other than soy? Am I crazy? Is he crazy? 😂🤦🏻‍♂️

1 hour ago, bfroberts said:

I can get zero mushrooming with zincs with multi-wick containers, but it's harder with single wicked containers.  Sometimes they will be perfect, but more often than not there will be a bit of mushrooming.  Personally, I don't mind a bit of mushrooming if the wick will just break off at the appropriate spot when you touch it.  This can be achieved pretty regularly.  But if it's a big honking mushroom that holds tight and actually has to be cut off, I consider that a failure.  IME, they work better in paraffin than parasoy, and if you've got that gloppy, sticky 6006, pretty much everything mushrooms in it.

I’m so eager for my damn 4630 candles to cure so I can start messing with them. I hate 6006 and I’ve got 50 pounds unopened 🤦🏻‍♂️

To those using zinc wicks, do you guys have candles that will pass a completely untrimmed test burn? Or are you having to (and hoping your customers will too) trim your wicks after every burn? 

So a candle made with the sh** low temp “Alex” method? Lol 

On 5/20/2020 at 9:37 AM, TallTayl said:

I have a couple ideas that have solved similar problems in that jar (with different waxes) in my shop.

 

1) wicks. For in between when cd is not quite right, CSN is my next choice, followed by CDN.  They burn just different enough to improve over the CD.  Rarely do HTP or lx work well for me. 
 

2) if it is slightly too hot at the bottom, either
a) pour a harder to burn wax for the last 1/2-3/4 inch or so. When the candle gets toward the bottom, the harder wax, like 444, 464, C3,C1, etc. can take the extra heat from the flame and convection. It will usually end up a clean, safe candle. if you scent that hard layer it will throw well also.
 

b) if the difference in wax is apparent rough a clear jar, (makes a visible line that you find unattractive) make a tea light size puck or short votive of a harder wax and thread your wick through it when you set your wick into the jar. pour your 6006 around it to conceal it. Same principle as (a) in that the harder wax will slow the burn down at the crucial point. It is more work, but also provides a stiffer joint between the metal wick tab and the floppy flat wicks to help keep them standing tall without a lean for the candle’s life. 
 

I find smaller jars harder to wick than larger. Things heat up quickly and make an otherwise perfect candle a nightmare. 

I think I need to pick up some CDN and CSN’s. And yes smaller jars have been a nightmare. I purchased some larger jars. They’re in the middle of the 2 week cure. Wish me luck! Haha 

1 hour ago, bfroberts said:

@dustinryan2010 In the past, I’ve had great luck with LX 16-ish, Eco 4-6, HTP 73-ish, zinc...something in the 44’s, so ordinarily I’d say you are wicking too small.  
 

BUT......
 

About a year ago I bought a couple of cases of 6006 that just didn’t burn well.  It seemed like it was more viscous, like all of a sudden the wicks I had been using could no longer draw up the wax.  I did a lot of extensive testing and Eco wicks were the best.  They burn hotter, and they were the only wicks that didn’t seem to struggle so badly, but I couldn’t find a good fit for all my containers.  It was a testing nightmare.  Eventually I just found a better wax.

 

I mention all that because if you really can’t wick that jar with any of the suggested wicks, you may have some of that junky 6006.  I haven’t heard of anyone else noticing a change in 6006, and when I asked a supplier they weren’t aware of any change.  But I know what I know. Something was off with that wax.  

See I felt the same way, I thought there’s no way this can be right. I mean granted I do wick to leave a good solid wax ring around the jar for the first few burns, which Then turns into a wall, which eventually melts down into the pool. But a wick for votives? Crazy. Something must definitely be off because if I put an eco 6 in one of these candles I would have a sooty fire ball! I plan to mess with a larger vessel and eco wicks, gonna see what I can concoct. I’ve thought about trying some other waxes as well. I experimented with 4627 briefly but remember it being pretty sooty. I think I read you comment somewhere before that you preferred one of the CBL’s for single wicked containers, which one was it again? I can’t seem to remember now 

15 hours ago, bfroberts said:

This jar shouldn’t be tough.  What problems are you having with other wick types....HTP, LX, Eco?

A lot of mushrooming and a little soot with LX, Eco burned too hot But threw so well! and HTP’s as well, 52 or 62 could’ve worked but couldn’t coax a decent flame out of them. Puny little flame Looked ridiculous. Zincs, mushroom heaven, 100% need for trimming or you’re gonna have a flame from hell.  The smallest size of most lines of wicks just still seems to be too much almost. It’s like mushrooming is inevitable and makes me feel like I’m over wicked. Trimmed burns are great, Untrimmed results in a big bouncy erratic smokey flame with a little mushrooming And I only use 6% and always cure no less than 2-3 weeks. I’m trying to find a wick that I can feel confident enough to sell knowing a lot of customers won’t be trimming. I’m satisfied with my controlled trimmed burns, but I get nervous about what could happen if they weren’t to be trimming like they should be. I cannot with down any further without getting into tea light territory. It’s crazy how soft and easy to burn this damn wax is! I guess I’m going to have to accept that a candle that doesn’t require trimming just isn’t always possible. 

8 hours ago, ErronB said:

 

I'm either gonna have to drop the fragrance load a bit back to 6 or 7, or find a CD2 wick. It's getting a bit smoky towards the bottom. Not that it's unusual for a candle to do that, I just like it to be best as it can be.

Scratch that.. a few scents are now smoking and getting a little hotter than I’d like with CD3. The beginning of the candles have been burning beautifully but they’re showing their butt’s now that we’re in the lower half of the candle. Bittercreek is the only company that carries 6 inch CD 2’s. The cheapest form of shipping they offer, is 22.00... they only ship UPS and FedEx? No USPS? Either way, screw that.  I’m truly beginning to think that these flint/straight side/jelly jars are just way too small of a vessel for 6006. Ive tried HTP, Zinc, LX, Eco, CD. Zinc came the closest, but I don’t like that you MUST trim them. Many customers don’t and won’t, no matter how much you stress the importance. I’m unsure what to do now. I don’t wanna waste 40.00 on CD2’s that will inevitably be too much as well. I just ordered 60 pounds of 6006 so I don’t wanna change waxes. I have a larger diameter container here that’s closer to 3 inches. I’m going to see what I can do with it before I bail on 6006. Sad day.

5 hours ago, ErronB said:

 

I'm either gonna have to drop the fragrance load a bit back to 6 or 7, or find a CD2 wick. It's getting a bit smoky towards the bottom. Not that it's unusual for a candle to do that, I just like it to be best as it can be.

I haven’t experienced that yet, I use 6% fragrance load for all scents 

7 hours ago, ErronB said:

Funny I'm testing the exact same wick in a 6006 jar too, except mine is a bit smaller diameter, it's a flint jar like B&BW. 

 

I see people all the time using way bigger CD wicks and now it makes sense. They must be trimming them after every burn and not burning for long periods of time, there's just no other way they can work. I just started the CD3 off at 1/2 inch before lighting and looks good so far, I'm just over half way down. 8% FO load, 1 drop of dye.

I’m using the same jar pretty much! I’ve read so many times how people hate CD’s with 6006 so I stayed away for a long time but I really think I like them! They must be overwicking. After the first few burns, I rarely find a need to trim the wick. Less maintenance is the best 

49 minutes ago, bfroberts said:

Sounds like you’ve covered the bases. The only thing I can add is to make sure it’s fully cured because the burn can change as the candle ages. I’ve found that if it’s slightly overwicked initially, it usually settles into being just right after 2-3 weeks.  
Also, you can always try a different wick series if you feel like you need an in-between size. 

Yeah these guys sat on a shelf 3.5 weeks before I began burning. I have a question, just something I noticed.. my candles seem to have better HT after the first few burns, any idea as to why? At this mid point, my candles become very strong and start to throw well. I wish they Threw this well from the first burn 

20 minutes ago, Forrest said:

What I would do is to continue testing until the very end, if at that point you still have a lot of wax on the sides I would wick up. But others here know more than I do when it comes to jars.

After the halfway point in the jar, my candles will (usually), finally come to a complete edge to edge melt pool and it’s an even steady burn from there on out. There’s just one or two burns towards the middle where the clings catching up, where the flame does look to be struggling a little. But it always catches up have yet to have one drown. I think I’m being too paranoid haha