Beeswax or Soy for Flawed 4627 Wax?

[ChandlerWicks]

I think she was answering my question of which wick for 3" jar.

Jeanie353, I meant that I will see if I can duplicate my results. I don't feel that the results are 100% conclusive with only one test considering the nature of this defective wax. I hope I am making sense with that response. Let me know if you want further clarification.

[cynthia3030]

Yes, what wick did you come up with because I think I tried them all!? I find it's alot harder to achieve a fmp if I use vanilla, chocolate or other "heavy" oils and the fruitier/lighter ones seem to burn quicker (= easier to wick!) I also add c3 to my paraffin, I was hoping it helped with wicking...

Zelda, please see my post to ChandlerWick where I go into more details about the LX20 and LX22. I know you said you wanted to stick with the HTP series. I tried all of the HTP wicks with this container and nothing worked. I was about to start double wicking the HTP but tried the LX on a whim and I was pleasantly surprised with the results. I'm sure you've read other posts where chandlers just couldn't get HTPs to work with 4627 and at some point you just have to move on or lose your sanity in the process of trying to solve the impossible. If you try the LX with your 4627 wax, let me know how it works for you. Good luck and hang in there.

[cynthia3030]

I think you may have missed the post; "Thanks for the advice, Dave. It worked!"

Thank you, Dave, for your brillant suggestion to mix in the 4794. I tried it and it worked so well that I think I will continue using 4794 with 4627. You were right, I do like the 4627 better with the 4794 added. I've now got to concentrate on my throw. The way I see it, I may have to use more FO but that shouldn't be a problem since 4627 supposedly accepts 10-12 % FO. What do you think?

From a logical and scientific standpoint, how much FO do you think I can add to the 4627/4794 ratio? In other words, 85/15%, how much FO, 80/20% ratio, so how much FO? I know I will have to test, but perhaps you can get me started.

Again, thanks soooooo very much. I will always remember to use "petrolatum" as opposed to "too much oil" - LOL.

[cynthia3030]

I must admit that I am a little confused reading this thread. If anyone needs clarification, please let me know. I haven't figured out how to use this forum very well yet. I can't figure out how to reply to a specific post. When I try to reply wtih a quote, I am only able to reply to the preceeding post. For example, I haven't figured out how to reply to post #43 if the next post is #47. My very first post clearly dealt with candles and I posted in the business section of the board.

[justajesuschick]

I must admit that I am a little confused reading this thread. If anyone needs clarification, please let me know. I haven't figured out how to use this forum very well yet. I can't figure out how to reply to a specific post. When I try to reply wtih a quote, I am only able to reply to the preceeding post. For example, I haven't figured out how to reply to post #43 if the next post is #47. My very first post clearly dealt with candles and I posted in the business section of the board.

You just need to go to the bottom of that person's post and you should see REPLY and next to it REPLY with Quote. THAT is the one you want. Now on this forum, some comment above the quote, some below but at least it is clear who is responding to what and by whom. Multi-quote is the "+ at far right. That is how you see some quoting and responding to several people in one post. You will get the hang of it. It does help avoid confusion about who is talking to who or commenting on what.

[Old Crab]

The way I see it, I may have to use more FO but that shouldn't be a problem since 4627 supposedly accepts 10-12 % FO. What do you think?

From a logical and scientific standpoint, how much FO do you think I can add to the 4627/4794 ratio? In other words, 85/15%, how much FO, 80/20% ratio, so how much FO? I know I will have to test, but perhaps you can get me started.

More FO does not always mean more scent throw, sometimes it will make it worse or adversely affect the burning characteristic you are trying to achieve.

In my opinion with the 4627 / 4794 blend you shouldn't have to worry about how much FO you are using till you hit around 25-30%. That is, if you are using more than 1oz pp.

if you are using 1oz pp you shouldn't have any issues with however much your percentages are on the blend.

I do know that once you hit a 30% of 4794 the wax, still creamy, is definitely much firmer.

[emilyspoppy]

Thank you, Dave, for your brillant suggestion to mix in the 4794. I tried it and it worked so well that I think I will continue using 4794 with 4627. You were right, I do like the 4627 better with the 4794 added. I've now got to concentrate on my throw. The way I see it, I may have to use more FO but that shouldn't be a problem since 4627 supposedly accepts 10-12 % FO. What do you think?

From a logical and scientific standpoint, how much FO do you think I can add to the 4627/4794 ratio? In other words, 85/15%, how much FO, 80/20% ratio, so how much FO? I know I will have to test, but perhaps you can get me started.

Again, thanks soooooo very much. I will always remember to use "petrolatum" as opposed to "too much oil" - LOL.

Dear Cynthia;

MOST experienced chandlers will report that the best result for H/C throw will be achieved with one ounce (weight) of FO per pound of wax in wicked projects. (Controversy to follow?)

I think pretty much everyone you've posted with, know you are a nice person and an experienced chandler. I stumbled more than a few times when I first joined here and I was active on another board for years.

JMO/HTH

Happy Chandlering!

Dave

[jeanie353]

Jeanie353, I meant that I will see if I can duplicate my results. I don't feel that the results are 100% conclusive with only one test considering the nature of this defective wax. I hope I am making sense with that response. Let me know if you want further clarification.

That makes perfect sense. TY

[Zelda]

Hi Cynthia,

Some wick testing results with my jar (2.75" diameter x 4" tall) and mainly 4627 paraffin with a little c3 soy & 8% fo. I have 3 candles burning, all from the same pour, one wicked with a htp 93 and the others with an htp 83 & cd 10. Both the htp have a very weak flame, actually look like they could fizzle out and the cd-10 is nicely burning, with a much wider mp. When I referenced my notes going back, I noticed that the cds have burned hotter then the htp's and I'm hoping it may be the push I need to get over these sluggish wicks that I have been dealing with. My only worry is that further on down the wick may be too hot but we'll see. If the cd's don't work, onward to LX's (although they seem to have amazingly huge mushrooms when I've tested them).

Edited March 20, 2013 by Zelda

[cynthia3030]

Hi Cynthia,

Some wick testing results with my jar (2.75" diameter x 4" tall) and mainly 4627 paraffin with a little c3 soy & 8% fo. I have 3 candles burning, all from the same pour, one wicked with a htp 93 and the others with an htp 83 & cd 10. Both the htp have a very weak flame, actually look like they could fizzle out and the cd-10 is nicely burning, with a much wider mp. When I referenced my notes going back, I noticed that the cds have burned hotter then the htp's and I'm hoping it may be the push I need to get over these sluggish wicks that I have been dealing with. My only worry is that further on down the wick may be too hot but we'll see. If the cd's don't work, onward to LX's (although they seem to have amazingly huge mushrooms when I've tested them).

I did have some mushrooming with the LX wicks but it was not a lot and I had no wick drippings in my MP. Are you using more than 6% FO? The LX 20 and the LX 22 both were too large for the 3-inch container. The flames were too robust but the ST was really good. I melted that wax and will try using the LX 18 with that container. Glad you are making progress.