Wick Suggestion - CS Libbey Straight Sided Glass Tumbler 12 oz

[CW5]

Hello!

 

I am a newbie registrant but I have been reading this forum for months.  Thanks to everyone who contributes since it makes a huge difference! I have tested CD's, ECO's, and HTP's in my libbey straight sided glass tumbler, 12 oz.  I have so many wick sizes that I can get rid of if anyone wants them.  Anyway, the closest I have come to a full melt pool with various scents after 4 hours and 464 soy wax is the CD 18 and the HTP 105 but still, there is a little hang up still.  I really don't want to double wick the jar (2 ECO 4's) so I am really trying to figure this out.  The thing about going up in wick size is that I am not comfortable with the flame lights.  Does anyone have any suggestions? I have heard about Premier wicks but not sure that is the way to go.  Thanks in advance!

[SRez]

Hi there, 

 

Same boat here.  Same jar, with the same 464 wax.  We did a 3 hour burn test (one hour per diameter inch) with 3 wicks from each company - ECO, CD, HTP, Premier and Cotton Core.  The best out of the 15 we tested was the CD 18 and the Premier 795.  We tested unscented.  We then made a new batch and added FO.  We're going to wait 72 hours (9/23/20) to burn test.  I'll let you know how that turns out.  Try the Premier 700's if you get a chance.  

[CW5]

Thanks for your reply! This is a tough jar to wick. Did you get full melt pool with the Premier 795?

[TallTayl]

Don’t worry about FMP on first burn. Continue to burn through at least the middle before deciding. 

[SRez]

Anytime.  It was a full 1/4" melt pool with both of those wicks.  I want to say that the CD 18 may be a tad better.  And by a tad... I mean a tad.  🙂 

 

But the only one that came the closest to the CD 18 was the Premier 795.  Keep in mind, these were unscented.  I'm going to test scented tomorrow. 

 

Of the Premiers, the 785, 795 and 799 all achieved a melt pool.  The 785 about 3/16" and the 799 a good 1/4".  However, the 799 wasted a bit more wax / fuel than the 795. 

 

So the best to me was the 795 which was almost, if not, equal to the CD 18.   

[CW5]

Gotcha.  Ok, looking forward to your results with the fragrance oil.  Thanks again!

[CW5]

SRez - Any chance you have an update on the premier vs CD wicks in the Libbey jar? Thanks!

[SRez]

10 hours ago, CW5 said:

SRez - Any chance you have an update on the premier vs CD wicks in the Libbey jar? Thanks!

Hi there.  So what I mentioned about the CD18 the other day was way off.  I took @TallTayl   @ErronB and @birdcharm advice regarding testing and melt pools.  That link is here 

I retested with CD10, 12,14 and 16.  So far it looks like CD10 / CD12 is in the lead.  Bright flame, not too big / hot, not too small / dim.  The 14 and 16 look too hot / big flame bouncing around.  Also, this test is with unscented 464.  Once FO is added, I'm assuming that's a game changer too. 

 

Then I restarted testing again with all my wicks - ECO, Premier, HTP and Cotton Core. 

 

The Premier 780 and 765 look decent but not really close to the CD's.  The Premier's from what I see are burning more fuel than the others.

 

ECO looked strong in the beginning.  But by the 3 1/2 hour mark the ECO 8, 10, 12, 14 all went small and dim.  The 8 and 10 I was sure they were going to drown out.  It didn't yet.

 

However, the HTP 104 and 105 on the first run look pretty good. But not sure how they'll look on the next runs. 

 

But by going what I read on this forum, CD works best with 464.  So I am hopeful for them.  

 

I'm starting again tonight.  I ended at the 4 hour mark last night.  Going to go for another 4 hours tonight.  I'll keep you in the loop.

 

TLDR; CD18 and Premier 795 too big.  Try CD10 or 12 or maybe HTP 104, 105.  The Premiers ash up in the pool and makes it look dirty.   

 

[CW5]

Thanks for the info. I have tried both the HTP 104 and 105.  The 105 does pretty good but I find that they flicker too much.  The CD 12 was just too small, even considering not having a full melt pool.  Let me know your thoughts after testing.

[ErronB]

8 hours ago, SRez said:

Hi there.  So what I mentioned about the CD18 the other day was way off.  I took @TallTayl   @ErronB and @birdcharm advice regarding testing and melt pools.  That link is here 

I retested with CD10, 12,14 and 16.  So far it looks like CD10 / CD12 is in the lead.  Bright flame, not too big / hot, not too small / dim.  The 14 and 16 look too hot / big flame bouncing around.  Also, this test is with unscented 464.  Once FO is added, I'm assuming that's a game changer too. 

 

Then I restarted testing again with all my wicks - ECO, Premier, HTP and Cotton Core. 

 

The Premier 780 and 765 look decent but not really close to the CD's.  The Premier's from what I see are burning more fuel than the others.

 

ECO looked strong in the beginning.  But by the 3 1/2 hour mark the ECO 8, 10, 12, 14 all went small and dim.  The 8 and 10 I was sure they were going to drown out.  It didn't yet.

 

However, the HTP 104 and 105 on the first run look pretty good. But not sure how they'll look on the next runs. 

 

But by going what I read on this forum, CD works best with 464.  So I am hopeful for them.  

 

I'm starting again tonight.  I ended at the 4 hour mark last night.  Going to go for another 4 hours tonight.  I'll keep you in the loop.

 

TLDR; CD18 and Premier 795 too big.  Try CD10 or 12 or maybe HTP 104, 105.  The Premiers ash up in the pool and makes it look dirty.   

 

 

Your observations are good. CD are pretty much my 'safe' wick with soy, they do mushroom most of the time which is really annoying and lean a bit, but they really hold their own to punishment if they are sized correctly. If you've done it right and people get careless with trimming the wick they can usually fix themselves after being lit again, it might take a bit but they can usually hang on after they've popped and smoked for a minute without disaster. Of course, different fragrances might work better with different wicks but I find probably 95% of the time CD ends up working out better (for me, anyways).

 

I used soy for a long time before venturing into other waxes about a year ago and went through learning a whole bunch of stuff over again from the likes of TallTayl, bfroberts, forrest and others. Without them I think I would have wasted double or triple the amount of supplies. I'd read some posts where they've recommended trying something and my immediate thought was 'wtf that's never gonna work' but after actually trying it you might see completely different results to what you think. Such a fun thing this whole candlemaking, right? lol.

 

 

 

 

 

[CW5]

Yes, CD's seem to work the best in soy with a good hot throw.  I haven't been impressed with the ECO's as they drown out and aren't as strong as the CD's.  I wish the CD's didn't mushroom so much but it is apparently due to how tightly they are braided.  I wish I would have joined this forum earlier as I have enough wicks to start a small store! Not really but close to it.

[SRez]

14 hours ago, ErronB said:

Such a fun thing this whole candlemaking, right? lol.

 

 

 

 

 

Ha! I'll tell ya what... We're actually enjoying watching this play out.  It's a cross between engineering and a chemistry / science experiment. 

 

We originally had 25, 3" Libbey tumblers with 464 (no fragrance yet) all wicked up and burning, testing for the 2 days.  We burned 4 hours the first day and 6 hours yesterday. 

 

We narrowed it down to 8 wicks last night and going to continue tonight with testing.   

 

The best so far, for us, out of the 8 are the CD 10 and 12, HTP 104 and 105 and Premier 765.  The 5 that I mentioned all seem to remain constant throughout. 

CD 8 seems a bit small but going to see what it does for the fun of it.  And ECO 10 and 12 almost died out during the first burn but seems fine on the second burn.  Not sure why.    

 

I want to say that the CD's probably take the lead as of now.  The CD's and HTP's burned pretty much the same amount of wax and the wicks look the same. 

 

The Premier wick though, looks the best.  No build up or mushrooming at all.  Let's see what tonight brings.  

 

Gonna keep on keepin' on. 

 

 

[TallTayl]

Super!
 

htp and cd have been pretty much the same wick.  while all comparisons are wax/fo dependent, Here’s a fun thread to confirm your testing.

https://www.craftserver.com/topic/111895-cd-vs-htp-vs-cdn-wicks/

please do test new shipments of wicks Like this if you choose to use them. With supply chain interruptions, a supplier noted that HTP may not be using exactly the same materials. Have not heard the same for CD, but it would not surprise me.

 

[CW5]

Yes, I have found that the HTP and the CD wicks are pretty much the same with my preference being the CD one.  Curious on how the Premier pans out.  Pictures would be great if you can. Oh, the joys of candle making.

[SRez]

4 hours ago, TallTayl said:

Super!
 

htp and cd have been pretty much the same wick.  while all comparisons are wax/fo dependent, Here’s a fun thread to confirm your testing.

https://www.craftserver.com/topic/111895-cd-vs-htp-vs-cdn-wicks/

please do test new shipments of wicks Like this if you choose to use them. With supply chain interruptions, a supplier noted that HTP may not be using exactly the same materials. Have not heard the same for CD, but it would not surprise me.

 

Good to know. Thanks for the link.  It was interesting to see how they pretty much mimicked each other.  Will also keep the possible different materials in mind when ordering.  Thanks again. 

[SRez]

3 hours ago, CW5 said:

Yes, I have found that the HTP and the CD wicks are pretty much the same with my preference being the CD one.  Curious on how the Premier pans out.  Pictures would be great if you can. Oh, the joys of candle making.

I'll send some pics tonight.  

[ErronB]

7 hours ago, SRez said:

Ha! I'll tell ya what... We're actually enjoying watching this play out.  It's a cross between engineering and a chemistry / science experiment. 

 

We originally had 25, 3" Libbey tumblers with 464 (no fragrance yet) all wicked up and burning, testing for the 2 days.  We burned 4 hours the first day and 6 hours yesterday. 

 

We narrowed it down to 8 wicks last night and going to continue tonight with testing.   

 

The best so far, for us, out of the 8 are the CD 10 and 12, HTP 104 and 105 and Premier 765.  The 5 that I mentioned all seem to remain constant throughout. 

CD 8 seems a bit small but going to see what it does for the fun of it.  And ECO 10 and 12 almost died out during the first burn but seems fine on the second burn.  Not sure why.    

 

I want to say that the CD's probably take the lead as of now.  The CD's and HTP's burned pretty much the same amount of wax and the wicks look the same. 

 

The Premier wick though, looks the best.  No build up or mushrooming at all.  Let's see what tonight brings.  

 

Gonna keep on keepin' on. 

 

 

 

Premier didn't work out for me, I wanted it to, but I had a noticeably lower hot throw with a lot of fragrances. It might be different for you, though.

 

Just remember that 464 has a very low melt point, you can't ship it in hot weather, but if you're only going to be using it for delivering in person or in a store then it's fine.

Edited September 25, 2020 by ErronB

[SRez]

46 minutes ago, ErronB said:

 

Premier didn't work out for me, I wanted it to, but I had a noticeably lower hot throw with a lot of fragrances. It might be different for you, though.

 

Just remember that 464 has a very low melt point, you can't ship it in hot weather, but if you're only going to be using it for delivering in person or in a store then it's fine.

Good to know. Is it safe to say that most people change to another wax in the warmer/summer months to avoid that problem if they're shipping out? Like say to 444 or a parasoy? Or something else altogether? 

[ErronB]

17 minutes ago, SRez said:

Good to know. Is it safe to say that most people change to another wax in the warmer/summer months to avoid that problem if they're shipping out? Like say to 444 or a parasoy? Or something else altogether? 

 

Everyone is different, if they're not catering towards tree huggers then they might switch to a high melt point parasoy like 6006, but that kind of defeats the purpose of going through all the hell getting a good throwing soy candle without using paraffin, or if they want to stick with soy then 444 is an option as well as using additives to harden the 464 wax like Universal Soy Additive, but I like C3 better for higher temps and I've had more luck with consistent batches. I only make high melt point candles now so I don't have to worry about any of that. Some people do ship 464 candles 'as is' but the amount of extra costs in packaging and there still being the higher risk of it turning to mush doesn't seem worth it to me.

 

[SRez]

53 minutes ago, ErronB said:

 

Everyone is different, if they're not catering towards tree huggers then they might switch to a high melt point parasoy like 6006, but that kind of defeats the purpose of going through all the hell getting a good throwing soy candle without using paraffin, or if they want to stick with soy then 444 is an option as well as using additives to harden the 464 wax like Universal Soy Additive, but I like C3 better for higher temps and I've had more luck with consistent batches. I only make high melt point candles now so I don't have to worry about any of that. Some people do ship 464 candles 'as is' but the amount of extra costs in packaging and there still being the higher risk of it turning to mush doesn't seem worth it to me.

 

Makes sense. We also have 444, 415 and 6006. Kinda went full tilt. Going to have experiment with those as well. Out of those others, what do you recommend to tackle next?

[SRez]

Hi all,

I attached a few pics of the 7 out of 25 candles that we thought were the best using unscented 464 in 12 oz, 3" diameter tumblers.  How do you think these look overall after 10 hours of burn time?  The first day was 4 hours and the second day was 6 hours. 

 

Both of the ECO's looked like they were about to go out on the first day at the 3 1/2 hour mark.  But stayed strong on the second day for 6 hours.  The CD's and HTP's were neck and neck... But the CD's looked a tad better.  

 

The one pic with the 7 lined up, have a line marked with sharpie towards the top of the glass where the wax started and a line below to show where it is now / how much wax has burned.  For the most part, they pretty much burned about the same amount of wax.  

 

I'm also concerned that there's not enough wax on the sides, except for the Premier 765.  Wondering if there's a possibility of these running hot as it reaches closer to the bottom.  

 

Also wondering your opinion on which wick looks the best as of now at this 10 hour burn mark.  

 

Thanks

 

 

[ErronB]

4 hours ago, SRez said:

Makes sense. We also have 444, 415 and 6006. Kinda went full tilt. Going to have experiment with those as well. Out of those others, what do you recommend to tackle next?

 

6006 has a higher melt point and much bigger scent throw than the other 2 under normal circumstances, it is a gigantic pain to learn to wick it in larger containers like 3", but it's definitely a wax you should learn to use because anything else you use after that down the road which has a high melt point will be a lot easier for you to understand it.

 

Just wait until you try to get a hot throw from 464 with fragrance, prepare for lots of stress, and screaming.

Edited September 26, 2020 by ErronB

[SRez]

1 hour ago, ErronB said:

 

Just wait until you try to get a hot throw from 464 with fragrance, prepare for lots of stress, and screaming.

Ha! Can't wait. Ain't nothing like a little challenge. 

[CW5]

My preference would be the CD 12.  The ECO's always drown out and the HTP are a little inferior to the CD's.  

[TallTayl]

In those above, I would lean toward cd12. Keep going! and keep taking notes. In the picture where All are burning closely, you may be getting slightly skewed results. There is extra heat between the burning candles that could be causing some to appear more overwicked than they would if burning singly in the same space. 
 

also depending on how long these were cured, you may need to shift your wick after a month or three on the shelf. 
 

if you don’t already have one, An inexpensive infrared thermometer is super handy while testing.  I shoot it at the rim of the glass to ensure I never get above 170*F to remain within the ASTM guidelines.

I’m Currently using etekcity brand in my shop and kitchen, but there are many affordable options online. 
 

the next lot of wax you can make a quick candle and compare to this lot to see if your wax is performing correctly, as expected. Once you know how your wax is designed, moving through the next testing phase, adding fragrance, will be much simpler. You will know quickly which FO need a wick up/down without guessing so much at where to start. If the next case of wax is different, you will know before making scented versions that do not perform correctly. 
 

the premier looks a little under wicked so far. By 10 hours I would not expect as much of a shelf of wax on that one side.  if it is burning nice otherwise, you might be able to twist the wick in the future to rotate the direction of the curl as it burns. some people have luck with twisting a self-trimming curling wick to clean the glass more evenly as the candle works it’s way down.
 

Another way some manage the uneven melt is to not center the wick. Offset it a bit to the opposite side of the curl. It does not look as pretty to some if the unlit wick is not perfectly centered.

 

ECO usually burn too hot for my waxes and containers.  I reserve those for super finicky FO. A little surprised they have been fizzling out.  Wondering to myself what is now in 464 that causes that.

 

Also a little surprised to hear it gets soft when shipping in warm weather. Could it be the additives now used to help hold ridiculous amounts of fragrance? Personally I would not want to mess with different waxes by season.  It is maddening. And expensive enough to get one wax fully tested and stocked. Though, learning a number of waxes can come in handy during shortages, so feel free to play 🤗

 

an aside, how disappointing the wax looks on the glass after burning.  Wax manufacturers focus on consumer complaints about wet spots prior to being sold, but ignore how it looks after a burn.  Is it because so many people in their candle market don’t know how it looks (ie, they do not test) or care once it leaves their work space?