radellaf

The only tins I've had luck with are CS Amber in GB 464. So, I can't say anything about 6006. However, CS Pumkin Souffle is one of my favorite scents. I used 3% in a 4" 3-wick pillar (1343,2% stearic) and it was probably the strongest smelling candle I've ever made. I used the same LX8 wicks as with other candles of that type, so I guess 3% isn't enough to cause different behavior. That was over a year ago so I don't know if there was a formula change. I have a fresh bottle of the fragrance, some 4627 and CB Xcel, and a few tins, but I doubt any results I got mixing those would mean much. I will be making some 1343+Ecosoya PB (90/10) pillars with the fragrance at 3-5% and hope I have luck with that.

What's worked for me is only two holes about 3/8" for a 2.5-3" paraffin (1343 or 1274) pillar. Poked maybe 4 times each, 3" deep, with the metal oven temp probe, and swirled around enough, esp. on the last two pokes, to make sure there's a good air pocket under it. So a poke through thick skin, poke through mush, then one or two pokes while it's still soft 3" down. Never had a problem. I use pins most of the time but it doesn't seem to matter. If I use wick, I just dip it in the wax once it melts (150f) wick mold, then pour at 180-190. 2-2.25" pillars similar but smaller holes and more frequent checks to see they haven't filled in. Lot of details that I'm sure don't need to be duplicated, but just trying to cover all the bases. Straight feather palm is much harder. Even with four well tended holes I get some pockets. Same with container "glass glow" palm. I often use a small blowtorch to trim up the top-of-mold end of a candle and have used that in containers to bust voids when they've just barely solidified. If you practice you can make good candle tops from wick pin wicks using the blowtorch on pillars and use them "upside down". My other trick is a small pastille of beeswax pushed in next to the wick in the hole. The yellow spot looks nice on blue pillars.

I used to have that problem and tried a bunch of additives (stearic, vybar, x crystals, polyboost) and what worked best for me was a little micro wax. Half a percent or so. The 190MP micro that I think is easier to get suppresses mottling more than lower MP micro, but still can work. A little stearic (1% by weight) usually brought back the mottling, and/or a little less micro. It all depended on the amount and type of FO, but 0.5% 170mp micro, 1% stearic, in 1274 or 1343 was the best formula I had. No sweating, generally no bulging, nice mottling look that could be adjusted by both FO load and tweaking the additives. Now I'm wondering if I should keep going that route or switch to 4045H, since CandleScience discontinued the 1274, 1343 isn't as consistently mottling, and 4045H has a slightly higher MP so would be less prone to bulge. It is more expensive, being 50lb to the case vs 60, and there's the ~$20 extra for shipping....

My mold is a 6" x 6.5" so probably about 5 lbs of wax. 1274 is .485 oz/in3 * 184 in3 = 5lbs 9oz. Nice 3-layer 3-wick with my 32oz pour pots. No idea how I'd wick it. Probably with the same LX-18 that I use with 3" single wick candles but that might be big. 4" 3-wick uses LX-10, which is on the small side even for a 2" candle (and 2.25" needs LX-14). So for all I know a 14 or 16 would be enough. LX-12 3-wick 4" is very hard to not get it melting through the side. You have to run a bunch of 1-hour burns to get it to tunnel, then it sometimes behaves. Imagine mis-wicking a 6" and having to remelt? I can drop a 4" back in the pour pot, but I'd need to break up the 6", or go use a large saucepan and the dutch oven. I'm with you there. Even with containers or soy, I just can't on principle want to work with something that needs more than 4-5%. No idea how much that specialty website that claims their tealights scent up a room use, but I'm not even trying to make anything that strong. I like some scent to a candle, but if I need to "knock my socks off" (CS's language) then I'll just burn some incense or use some other cold (maybe forced air) diffuser, or one of the many devices either electric or candle powered that heat a small dish of scent oil. But, here's hoping the polyboost is another option for making stuff like this:

Thanks for the quick reply. I look forward to trying it. In the meantime I got an answer that MottleMax = Polyboost 150, and the supplier is a little closer to NC so hope I saved a little in shipping for that plus a few lbs of stearic. I may not need the stearic + micro combination if the polyboost is better, but I figure it's still good for 7/8" tapers. I rarely put more than 3% fragrance, but without the micro (or candlechem translucent crystals), or more than 2% stearic (which kills mottle), I can't get 1274 to hold more than 1-2% of many fragrances. The 1% stearic with the micro is just to increase mottle. I made one with just micro and 5% fragrance and got lots of mottle but OMG scent overload Had to resist temptation to buy a 5" 3-wick mold... I'm doing fine with wick pins in 4" 3-wick candles in a sealed up 1-hole mold, but it's just tempting to keep going bigger. Might as well go all the way if I do, though. I picked up a 6" (or 7"?) 3-wick for a few bucks at a clearance sale and one day will give it a go. Have to be multilayer as I use 2lb pour-pots.

"Let It Shine" is the only thing that comes up on Google, do you know if they're the only USA supplier? Bitter Creek's "Mottle Max" has a very similar description, but the thread I looked up on here just discussed using it with mottling container wax. I have some of that (IGI 1288) from a CS clearance sale, but it's working great without additives. Well, other than that CS's Red Hot Cinnamon oil seems to completely kill mottling in pillars or containers, but the Dragon's Blood ones look and burn nice. Still trying to find a place to sell a $5 bag of stearic for less than $10 shipping... I have got some good info talking to actual people at CS, but the tech support line gave me nothing but the info off the label about 1274/1343 differences, and wouldn't cop to the reasons for the massive list of newly discontinued items other than "not selling enough". The critical issue is how well does it need to sell to carry it, and whether that's become more strict because of the economy, which is relevant to customers because it says something about whether any of the products might come back in a few years. But, no, they completely denied it. (Well, I hope the econ is back in a year or two, since I used to make a living at electronics engineering, and my experience and research into selling candles makes me think they'll never be a viable main profession for me.)

I'd recommend CSN wicks with 464. Between a selection of LX and CSN spools I feel pretty well covered for all the sizes and waxes I'm always trying out. I've tried CDN, ECO, HTP, RRD, etc but always come back to those two, except for SB in pure beeswax, and 12 ply for 1/2" tapers.

Thanks for the suggestion... or "Oh great, more wax additives to try" (I've got a small collection) If the descriptions I'm reading about Polyboost 130 (non mottle) and 150 are anywhere close to reality, then they sound like all any candlemaker could possibly need. Hard micro is pretty effective on non mottles, but even the softer micro at 1% does inhibit mottling a little. Of course, for a partial mottling look, sometimes you want something to do that, in small amounts. Do you ever go for the partial look?

Yeah, I was, that's lousy of them. At least a 1 or 2 pound bag of that lasts me a long time so I can get some next time I order something from CandleWic or Peak. It's like all they want to support is soy wax containers, which are my least favorite type of candle. I wonder what's going on, and suspect the economic depression has got them financially strapped to the point they're cutting whatever they can. Proof of that will be seeing what comes back to their catalog when the economy improves. On the good side, I have such an inventory of wicks, 1274, feather palm, paraffin container wax, molds, and FO that apart from stearic I don't think I'll be buying much of anything this year. Maybe a silicone or urethane mold or two.

I live 15 min from CS, so even shipping from TN would be a killer. Fortunately, the two test candles I made with the 1343, using my 1274 recipes, look and act just like 1274. 1% stearic, 0.5% 5715, 3% FO, 2.5" LX-16 is burning _perfectly_. The 2% stearic 2.25" one has only been lit an hour or so but so far so good, which is more than I could say for my past experience using the wax straight. I must have had a really bad slab that one time. I understand the mottling properties are essentially "not guaranteed" to be there, but all the batches should at least burn decently.

I use this formula, as I tend to start with some amount of wax an want to know how much FO to add to get a desired percentage: FO = P*Wax / (1-P) e.g. for 5% add (0.05*Wax)/0.95 Rework a bit if you want to compute based on total weight of wax+FO, but it's not that far off, and I usually weigh out wax first and then add however much FO. Units have to be the same, and it's a pain that additives are usually in grams and wax in pounds. I convert and do the math in grams because that's what my glassware is marked in (1ml is close to 1g, exact for water, a bit off for FO). TBS and TSP have no exact conversions, you just have to see what a TBS of whatever it is actually weighs using a precision scale if you want to get to percentage measurements. When making single 8oz candles with some additives where 1-2g is all that's needed, 'spoons just won't cut it.

I'm about to start experimenting with 1343 again since 1274 is no longer at CS. Both waxes can sag and the best fix for that I've found is adding about 0.5% of microcrystalline wax. I have two types and both work though the 190f mp micro inhibits mottling more than 5045 (IIRC). 0.25% does a little, but not as effective as .5 for preventing oil bleed at 5% FO. 1-2% stearic encourages mottling if the micro is inhibiting it a little too much. Hoping these experiences work well with 1343. I think last time I tried it I didn't use any stearic and had seeping, sagging, and general poor performance. Except when used with Vybar (.5 I think), which worked great... but no mottling o course. FWIW 1 TBS stearic is about 8 grams. So 3 PP is a hair over 5%.

I've emailed about them, as my experiments with 1343 trying to get it to behave like 1274 have been completely unsuccessful. I had mottling _nailed_ with 1274, 0.5% micro wax (prevent seeping and sagging), and 1% stearic (to increase mottle). Haven't tried 1343 in the same mix but really shouldn't have to. If either should be dropped, it's the 1343. Anyway, while waiting for an answer, any mottled candle fans here with some formulas that work well with 1343? Using it straight I got all sorts of shenanigans, like 2-2.5" pillars needing oversize LX-18 wicks just to burn right. (Lx-12-14 should have been enough).

I like the CSN wicks a lot and the 5 is a very small size compared to the holes on even CS's small wick tabs. I use a wire crimper, thinking the jewelry ones would not work since the wick tab tube diameter is larger than the bead tube sizes they cover. The crimp looks more factory-like but can't say it holds any better than the pliers, and it still can end up bending the whole tab. A trick is to double the wick before putting it in the tab. Just bend it and insert the bent part into the hole. That should be enough to keep CSN 5 in there. If not, try two bends. What's the wax/jar, I'm curious? With palm, I find I need CSN 7 for 2" mouthed small jars. Never tried CSN with paraffin.

Just heard back from the mold maker and: " Try warming the mold. Silcone is a great insulator and warming the mold can give the bubbles time to dissapate. We were casting some "clear" wax and had bubble problems and it helped a great deal. The downside is that it takes longer for the wax to set up." Not exactly sure how you warm "a great insulator" conveniently. Usually with aluminum I use a blowtorch. With glass, hot water. Could try a hair dryer? Anyway, I'll try it. Last run was 5% stearin 2%FO, heated to 240 and poured straight down (not along the side). That produced an excellent result with very few bubbles. Naturally, took 3 or so top offs vs 1 or 2 to compensate for the increased shrinkage.