ChandlerJane

I am actually. I had logged in from work and from home and since I didn't remember my password since I set up the account years ago, I simply set up a new one.

Top posted some threads on this with regards to the other types of palm waxes.

Wick or Top?

Are you kidding me? It's EXACTLY the same fragrance, and EXACTLY the same strength. We've tested them both. Her fragrance oils are not any stronger than any of the other good, reputable suppliers out there, contrary to her claims. And, while there are some other suppliers who don't list the notes, once asked, they should be willing/able to provide them to a customer, if for no other reason than for marketing purposes. Her unwillingness to do so says alot.

This is a straight buttery vanilla. There ARE no other notes, and, Very Vanilla from Candle Science is the EXACT same fragrance, for MUCH less money. Any supplier that is unwilling to give you the notes in their fragrances shouldn't be dealt with. If they are worried about duplicating a fragrance, then they probably shouldn't be selling sample sizes either, as they are MUCH more likely to get their fragrances duplicated that way.

All things being equal (same jars, same fragrances, same fragrance loads, same waxes) and assuming that you are wicking properly and similarly (in other words, we won't be comparing the scent throw of an Eco 1 to that of a 62z), in your opinions and in your testing, does the TYPE of wick you use affect how much throw a candle produces? Do zincs throw better than LX's, etc?

I can't stand the lack of throw in soy candles. I'm know I'm making a generalization but, my J50 kicks butt, and I will not be going to soy any time soon.

Candlewic doesn't seem to get as much attention as some of the other more popular suppliers (BCN, CS, Peaks, Bert's, etc). Is that for any particular reason? Never ordered oils from them. I'd like to formulate a list of their STRONGEST THROWERS. And also a list of your favorite scents of theirs. Not necesarily will the fragrances belong to both lists. For example, you might LOVE their Mango Peach Salsa, but might comment that it's not a super strong thrower. And vice versa. You might not love their Clean Cotton but might comment that it's a SUPER strong thrower. Would love to get some feedback.

Wrong forum. The Fragrance forum is a wealth of information for questions like this. In fact, just looking at that forum would answer this question but, Candle Science, Bert's, BCN, to name just a couple of very reputable suppliers, with very high quality oils.

PM sent.

I guess, however, we have committed to more than 5,000 jars, so giving up on them isn't an option. Furthermore, it's not in my nature to give up, even if I had not financially committed to the extent that I have. I know it can be done. Two others in this very thread have successfully done so. I will do so as well.

LOL. Thanks for the formula. My straight sided tumbler is 3.375" in diameter. 4.25-4.35" in height. I've never once run into what you have described with our current wax, wick, fo combination. My candles burn beautifully with no flickering, drowning wicks or smoke/soot. We use double Eco-1's in that jar, and in two of our tougher oils, we wick up to Eco-2's. From what I understand, there are now Eco-1.5's available, so we will be testing those in the two oils that we currently wick with Eco-2's.

Steve, if I'm reading your post correctly you think that a jar like this, which is notoriously difficult to wick, shouldn't even be bothered with, and, that is a bit of a defeatist attitude. Because it's difficult doesn't mean that it can't be done. Furthermore, these are all theories. None of us can "prove" any of our viewpoints one way or the other. There are, however, certain "facts" which can't be denied. 1-a flame (fire) requires oxygen to burn. No oxygen means no flame/fire. 2-two flames require more oxygen to burn than one flame does. 3-when combustion occurs, oxygen is consumed Given the above, it's reasonable to assume that, in a container like this apothecary, which has a neck, with a top that is smaller in diameter than the rest of the jar, and oxygen supplies are limited, that it's a lack of oxygen leading to wicks that no longer combust efficiently/fully. Further proof of this is, again, the SAME exact combinations work perfectly in a shorter, straight sided jar. Further proof still is the fact that in the top third of the jar, where presumably, oxygen supplies are greater, this problem is not encountered.

Chuck, wouldn't the fact that the same wax, wick, fo combination works in ANOTHER jar lead you to believe that it has nothing to do with the efficiency of the wicks (independent of the jar) and more to do with the jar configuration? That's my point here. These wicks worked perfectly in straight sided tumblers. They don't work at all in the apothecary. The ONLY variable is the jar, and the fact they are competing for the same oxygen supply in the jar.

So what do you suggest then?