What thermometer do you use?

[Clear Black]

I need to get a better one and was wondering what some of you all are using. Currently the one I use is a very small digital one that I have to physically hold down inside my pour pot and get a reading. It looked much bigger in the photos when I purchased it, but in reality its only about 4 inches in length. 

 

I also thought about using a handheld temp gun similar to this: 

 

http://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/H-5226/Tools/Temperature-Gun?pricode=WY836&gadtype=pla&id=H-5226&gclid=Cj0KEQiA5dK0BRCr49qDzILe74UBEiQA_6gA-jh_ZSbnxi1yQSpJgc-qwelkDLbiSqxCaIv7t2zvHAMaAjMv8P8HAQ&gclsrc=aw.ds

 

I just dont know if those give an accurate reading of the liquid wax. It seems to me these type would only be reading the surface temp, which could be way different than the temps near the bottom of pot.

 

thoughts?

[pcbrook]

For my presto pots I use an everyday candy thermometer but for my turkey fryer I have one of those really long metal ones.  I am not sure what it is called but it is not digital.  I had to do a google search to find one like that.  It is over a foot long!

[Candybee]

I have both a meat and candy thermometer. Never got around to buying a digital. After all these years making soap and candles I rarely use one anymore anyway. But a cheap one from you local Target or Wally's works just fine.

 

I do find that the metal ones last much longer than the glass ones thou. I eventually broke all the glass ones I bought from wax suppliers and stuck with the metal meat and candy ones.

[Clear Black]

Ya, Im really after a digital one. I had a glass candy one at first but just dont like them TBH. I then got my digital one, but like I said, its tiny. So tiny, the last batch I made it slipped outta my hands and ended up in my pour pot covered in wax. kinda ruined the LCD reader bringing me here asking for a better tip on a good one.

[kandlekrazy]

after breaking at least a dozen glass ones, my hubby bought me an infrared...love it, used it for 6 yrs and just bought a new one, because that's what we do? They have a digital read out.

[Clear Black]

after breaking at least a dozen glass ones, my hubby bought me an infrared...love it, used it for 6 yrs and just bought a new one, because that's what we do? They have a digital read out.

I want one, but am afraid the that infrared laser is reading either the sides of my pour pot or just the surface temp. Are they accurate? If I stir a little bit and then take a temp reading would that be an accurate temp of the liquid or just the surface reading? 

[Trappeur]

I use a digital my sister bought for me years ago.  Love it.....

 

Trappeur

[TallTayl]

My fave is the kind that has a probe on a leash. Cooks use them for stuff like roasts because the probe pokes into the roast in the oven or grill while the reader is outside the oven.

Taylor is one brand. It has alarms for min and max Temps and a timer in case i get distracted (which happens all the time )

Edited January 13, 2016 by TallTayl

[Chefmom]

I have used the kind that TallTayl mentioned with the leash, but I'm so old school.  I still use the kind passed out in culinary school, the ones Chefs carry in a pocket, but I have moved up to the digital versions instead of the ones that you calibrate with a wrench (stolen from hubbie).  I still check them periodically...old habits die hard and have never had one lose calibration, even tho they regularly are dropped on the floor and treated poorly.  The only one I've killed is one I dropped completely in the hot wax, but I rigged up one of my old chocolate dipping tools so that I can extend it more easily into the wax pouring kettle. 

[C Dizzle]

I had been using some cheapo alarm digital ones from Walmart for perhaps $15 each. While they are consistent in between themselves, sometimes I want to make batch after batch after batch, and I feel rushed having to clean them between each one. They are off a few degrees from each other too so I might be doing things 2 degrees off switching to others.

 

So, after several hours of research, I invested in this infrared thermometer:

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006K3M8BK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00

 

Full disclosure, I haven't used it yet as I've been studying the hades out of soaps, but will test it this weekend!

 

Here is why I chose this.

 

It's emissivity value is able to be changed to the hundredths place, and unlike most other ones that can change, I can move in increments of 0.01 rather than 0.10. Many can't change at all and are permanently set on 0.95 and while that might work fine for most people and likely is very consistent between uses, I was simply too curious and had to find out if what the emissivity of soy wax is. I'm pretty sure the value should be slightly higher or lower than 0.95 and plan to calibrate and test it extensively and publish my findings. I would imagine the emissivity value might even change with the type of wax, dye, and FO even. I could be wrong and it might just be 0.95 across the board and all this might be unnecessary, but it's worth it for me to test and pass this knowledge on. I couldn't find it anywhere, and I looked.

 

On other features, any infrared thermometer's temperature range is going to work for candle making and soap making and will only matter for other applications. The same holds true with it's distance to spot ratio, unless you need something different for other applications. Some of these have high/low temp alarms and while that's certainly desirable, the only option for this line was triple the price and I'm just going to use my old digital therms to alert me then start monitoring with the infrared. There also is NIST certified to insure it's calibrated properly, and while that sounds nice, it was a few hundred extra $$ for every model and I think with enough testing I can just calibrate it to my liking myself, but if I had the funds it sure would have been tempting.

 

I also found some significantly cheaper at Lowe's and I am sure they are cheaper other places too. I would imagine these would work well enough as well.

 

http://www.lowes.com/pd_73790-56005-IRT207_1z0wcn0__?productId=3136869&pl=1

 

A general consensus, at least from posts I've read, is that you don't have to be absolutely precisely accurate on temps for candles nearly as strongly as you need to be consistent and the thermometer should be directionally accurate so it's best to stick with one thermometer. So lets say your thermometer measures 185 as 183, well as long as you keep mixing and testing it when yours says its 185, you are hitting the same temp and should be fine.

[Clear Black]

I had been using some cheapo alarm digital ones from Walmart for perhaps $15 each. While they are consistent in between themselves, sometimes I want to make batch after batch after batch, and I feel rushed having to clean them between each one. They are off a few degrees from each other too so I might be doing things 2 degrees off switching to others.

 

So, after several hours of research, I invested in this infrared thermometer:

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006K3M8BK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00

 

Full disclosure, I haven't used it yet as I've been studying the hades out of soaps, but will test it this weekend!

 

Here is why I chose this.

 

It's emissivity value is able to be changed to the hundredths place, and unlike most other ones that can change, I can move in increments of 0.01 rather than 0.10. Many can't change at all and are permanently set on 0.95 and while that might work fine for most people and likely is very consistent between uses, I was simply too curious and had to find out if what the emissivity of soy wax is. I'm pretty sure the value should be slightly higher or lower than 0.95 and plan to calibrate and test it extensively and publish my findings. I would imagine the emissivity value might even change with the type of wax, dye, and FO even. I could be wrong and it might just be 0.95 across the board and all this might be unnecessary, but it's worth it for me to test and pass this knowledge on. I couldn't find it anywhere, and I looked.

 

On other features, any infrared thermometer's temperature range is going to work for candle making and soap making and will only matter for other applications. The same holds true with it's distance to spot ratio, unless you need something different for other applications. Some of these have high/low temp alarms and while that's certainly desirable, the only option for this line was triple the price and I'm just going to use my old digital therms to alert me then start monitoring with the infrared. There also is NIST certified to insure it's calibrated properly, and while that sounds nice, it was a few hundred extra $$ for every model and I think with enough testing I can just calibrate it to my liking myself, but if I had the funds it sure would have been tempting.

 

I also found some significantly cheaper at Lowe's and I am sure they are cheaper other places too. I would imagine these would work well enough as well.

 

http://www.lowes.com/pd_73790-56005-IRT207_1z0wcn0__?productId=3136869&pl=1

 

A general consensus, at least from posts I've read, is that you don't have to be absolutely precisely accurate on temps for candles nearly as strongly as you need to be consistent and the thermometer should be directionally accurate so it's best to stick with one thermometer. So lets say your thermometer measures 185 as 183, well as long as you keep mixing and testing it when yours says its 185, you are hitting the same temp and should be fine.C Di, this is EXACTLY

C Dizz, this is EXACTLY what i needed to hear. I was wanting to invest in this type thermometer but needed some feedback from you nice folks here. Please PLEASE come back to this thread and let me know how this particular model performed over this weekend when you test it out. It would mean a lot to me if I could invest in a nice thermometer having some feedback on it before I make the purchase. I am starting out in this hobby with limited resources and I could use any help I can get! 

[TallTayl]

You will never control every single variable in your process. A couple degrees won't matter.

I confess i don't take temps for candles any more. You just kind of learn your materials. The thermometer in my shop is used only for lotions where min & max temps and holding at temps for specific periods are crucial to making an emulsion.

[C Dizzle]

C Dizz, this is EXACTLY what i needed to hear. I was wanting to invest in this type thermometer but needed some feedback from you nice folks here. Please PLEASE come back to this thread and let me know how this particular model performed over this weekend when you test it out. It would mean a lot to me if I could invest in a nice thermometer having some feedback on it before I make the purchase. I am starting out in this hobby with limited resources and I could use any help I can get! 

 

I will let you know. I'm sure I am going to be happy with it regardless, but mainly because I get to do some tests on the emissivity of soy wax, but this model might be overkill for most. And the higher end ones are overkill for me

 

The model appeals to the inner geek/scientist part of me rather than being something I think is necessary for candle/soap making, and I will get FAR more use out of it than these activities!

Edited January 15, 2016 by C Dizzle

[gail164]

I use the same one as TallTayl uses. Taylor digital. Started out using the glass candy thermometers. The infrared sounds interesting though:)

[lovelyscents]

I know this is old but am having a hard time deciding on which to stick with.  I have a metal probe and an infrared which both are 10-20 degrees difference between the two.  The infrared also seems to read different temperatures depending on where I am aiming as if there are hot spots in the wax.  I feel like the infrared is bouncing off the presto and glass pyrex vs penetrating the liquid.  I also have read on it that it is not best for liquids.  I ended up just using my metal probe one last night as I felt maybe as long as I used the same equipment to eliminate as many variables as possible, that it would be more consistent??  I'm still hardcore testing but definitely want to measure temperature the correct way.  I hear overheating wax (before additives) can make the wax discolor or even affect it's outcome.  Please help!

 

ETA: I would love if the infrared worked the best as my metal probe seems to take ages to read...1 Mississippi 2 Mississippi, grrr.

Edited May 13, 2017 by lovelyscents

[kandlekrazy]

1 minute ago, lovelyscents said:

I know this is old but am having a hard time deciding on which to stick with.  I have a metal probe and an infrared which both are 10-20 degrees difference between the two.  The infrared also seems to read different temperatures depending on where I am aiming as if there are hot spots in the wax.  I feel like the infrared is bouncing off the presto and glass pyrex vs penetrating the liquid.  I also have read on it that it is not best for liquids.  I ended up just using my metal probe one last night as I felt maybe as long as I used the same equipment to eliminate as many variables as possible, that it would be more consistent??  I'm still hardcore testing but definitely want to measure temperature the correct way.  I hear overheating wax (before additives) can make the wax discolor or even affect it's outcome.  Please help!

 

I use pyrex glass and the infrared.  You need to really watch where you're pointing it.  To test it for accuracy, just boil water and test it, at the boiling point it should read darn close to 212 degrees.  Also be sure to stir your wax before reading with any type thermometer or you could hit a hot spot.

[lovelyscents]

6 minutes ago, kandlekrazy said:

 

I use pyrex glass and the infrared.  You need to really watch where you're pointing it.  To test it for accuracy, just boil water and test it, at the boiling point it should read darn close to 212 degrees.  Also be sure to stir your wax before reading with any type thermometer or you could hit a hot spot.

Thank you so much!  I wasn't stirring prior to reading as I always feel pinched for time with adding FO, trying to add at that perfect temperature.  I usually keep my pyrex on a warmer so the wax doesn't cool too drastically while adding FO, but I still do this step in a frenzy.  Therefore, maybe my infrared was also reflecting / bouncing off the hot plate warmer under the pyrex?  Do you think since I used the metal probe for tons of melts yesterday and try the infrared tonight, that I will confuse myself with my final result?  For example, I'm still testing like crazy (10 waxes yikes) and if some come out with light HT, I know I will beat myself up thinking it's because the temperature from the probe to the infrared may be the culprit.  Please assure me that temperature is important but not so much as to put me in this mind boggling state driving myself crazy?!

Edited May 13, 2017 by lovelyscents