464 Testing

[rjdaines]

I am doing my own testing of GW 464, the target container is either an 8 oz or 16 oz apothecary jar (Peaks). I tried an single HTP 1212 wick and it never developed a full melt pool (no FO, no color). Not wanting to wick up further I opted for a double. Chose HTP 105s (a guess). New test candle has yellow color and Beach Daisey FO (8%). It solidified very smooth and had a great cold throw. A 2-day cure was all I did as I can wick testing rather than HT testing. Here are the results of a 90 minutes initial burn. I know that the melting point of this wax is low and am thinking that I could wick down to HTP 104s, worth a try but I am not unhappy with the flame height, just the melt pool thickness. Curious as to what you all think.

[Lorelei]

The melt pool is too deep for my comfort, for sure wick down one or two. Honestly I'd probably wick down two to start out with. Pretty candle. Love the colors as it is burning. Beach Daisy is a great FO too.

[Stella1952]

FMP and a MP of that depth in 90 minutes is overwicked. You didn't mention the diameter of your container so it's hard to suggest a wick size, but guessing, I'd ty a single CD 12-16, depending on the diameter.

Edited April 14, 2011 by Stella1952

[rjdaines]

Container is 4" in diameter. I agree with the over wick, just had to start somewhere. One down would be the HTP 104s which are pretty close to the 105s, the next choice is HTP 93 which would agree with some data that I have seen. I will try that next.

The cooled melt pool of the 464 is still not as pretty as the CD Advanced but the thrown scent is wonderful.

Thanks for the input.

[SliverOfWax]

There's no reason to switch to CD wicks. There are plenty of HTP wicks to choose from.

You might not want to hear this, but when I used 4" containers, I triple wicked. A triple wicked 4" container is very esthetically pleasing, imo. If you want to try, start with 3 HTP 52s and see what you get. They burned beautifully and customers loved the fact that they looked well made, unlike a single wicked Yank or some other such brand that has mixed reviews, at best.

[rjdaines]

There's no reason to switch to CD wicks. There are plenty of HTP wicks to choose from.

You might not want to hear this, but when I used 4" containers, I triple wicked. A triple wicked 4" container is very esthetically pleasing, imo. If you want to try, start with 3 HTP 52s and see what you get. They burned beautifully and customers loved the fact that they looked well made, unlike a single wicked Yank or some other such brand that has mixed reviews, at best.

I agree and had always planned to triple wick a straight-walled container but because of the taper towards the mouth I'm only working with about 3". I think 3 wicks would look a little crowded, however, I will certainly keep it in mind if the two HTP 93s don't work out.

Thanks for the advice.

[SliverOfWax]

Yes, I see what you mean. Crowded, yes.

I've used HTP wicks for eons (I'm in the process of slowly switching to LX). There have been times I was astonished at the difference between HTP 104 and HTP 105. Then there's that huge jump to 1212. CandleScience has 123 (I think that's the number).

I think the biggest factor in wick selection is to stick with ONE SUPPLIER! HTP 1212 from two different suppliers are not created equally.

[rjdaines]

Yes, I see what you mean. Crowded, yes.

I've used HTP wicks for eons (I'm in the process of slowly switching to LX). There have been times I was astonished at the difference between HTP 104 and HTP 105. Then there's that huge jump to 1212. CandleScience has 123 (I think that's the number).

I think the biggest factor in wick selection is to stick with ONE SUPPLIER! HTP 1212 from two different suppliers are not created equally.

I think you are referring to the HTP 126. In terms of wicking history, I started with the LX series for soy and did not like my results. By the time I got a full melt pool with one the mushrooming was awful. I've been very happy with the HTP wicks but should true the CD/CDN wicks some time. At some point one gets tired of test and wants to get to making. I just poured the new tester with the HTP 93 wicks and remelted the first one. I'll report back in a couple of days.

[SliverOfWax]

Yeah, that's it. I haven't used the 126. Candlewic doesn't carry it and I get my wicks from Candlewic unless I must have something they don't have. I did order 5 HTP 126's from CandleScience but haven't tried them yet. I also got 5 HTP 1312 from CandleScience (another size Candlewic doesn't carry) and found them to be almost identical to Candlewic's HTP 1212. I only tried them on one scent that I make a lot of just to see if there was any difference. There really wasn't that I could tell.

To be honest, I was just fooling around when I ordered the CandleScience wicks. I really didn't expect them to be what I needed. The joke's on me! lol

I like CD wicks a lot. I'm also very happy with the few LX wicks I've tested. Once my HTPs are gone, I won't use HTP again. At least that's my plan, but you know how the best laid plans go.

[rjdaines]

Here is the latest test result with GW 464 in a 4" diameter container (8 oz) blue dye (2 drops) and 8% FO, with two HTP 93 wicks (2 sizes down from the yellow candle pictured above. The photos show 2 different angles of a 2 hour burn. The melt pool is 99% full but wicks are very sensitive to being drowned if the melt pool shifts (moving the candle). I wish the flame height was a little higher but this candle should last for a long time with this burn. I could try the HTP 104 wicks which are 1 size up.

Your thoughts and comments are appreciated.

Edited April 15, 2011 by rjdaines

[LeahRB]

That melt pool looks too deep for a 2 hour burn. I would go down to either a HTP 83 or 73.

Edited April 16, 2011 by LeahRB

[rjdaines]

That melt pool looks too deep for a 2 hour burn. I would go down to either a HTP 83 or 73.

The melt pool was half an inch deep. I can try an 83 but the flame on these 93s was not large by any means, a little weak actually. I'm thinking a cooler wick if there is such a thing.

[LeahRB]

In my observations, when my mp gets too deep, my flames tend to get smaller.. Wicking down may help your flame.

[IwantItgreen]

I've done very little double wicking, but from reading on this board I've learned that when double wicking to place the bottom wick tabs to almost touching. Also the direction of curl in the wick can be determined by which way the weave (>>>>) on the wick goes. If you look carefully at a cotton wick you'll see on one side the woven threads go >>>> and on the other side they go <<<<. These determine which way the wick curls. I can never remember which, I have to look at a burned wick first. Maybe someone here know right off hand.

[LeahRB]

I think the wick curls to the side with the weave going up ^ ... I put my wicks closer together, too.

Edited April 16, 2011 by LeahRB

[Kigers24]

I think the wick curls to the side with the weave going up ^ ... I put my wicks closer together, too.

That is correct....I place mine with the metal tabs just touching and so they curl to the outside. I have only tested a few FO's in the 16 oz. apothecary with 464 and double wicked with CD 5's and they did well. Also singled wicked with a CD 20 which also did well. No color and 1 1/4 oz. FO pp wax. CD wicks do well for me with this wax.

I tested a few with comparable sized HTP wicks and the CD just did better.

[rjdaines]

That is correct....I place mine with the metal tabs just touching and so they curl to the outside. I have only tested a few FO's in the 16 oz. apothecary with 464 and double wicked with CD 5's and they did well. Also singled wicked with a CD 20 which also did well. No color and 1 1/4 oz. FO pp wax. CD wicks do well for me with this wax.

I tested a few with comparable sized HTP wicks and the CD just did better.

Great advise thanks to all, it just so happens that I have some CD wicks on order. CD 5 was going to be one of my first tries, I'm glad to see you reference that wick, I will also try the single CD 20.

One other question, in what time frame and depth should I be looking for a FMP in a 4" container? I was thinking 2 to 3 hours and about 1/4" - 1/2".

[Kigers24]

For a 4" container I go for a 1/4" FMP in about 4 hours but never on the first or second burn....I like a little hang up at first and let it pull down once the flame drops down in the jar.

A 1/2" FMP in 2 or 3 hours is too deep...burning too hot. I only get a 1/2" FMP or a little more when I do a power burn test (6-8 hrs.).

If you are testing a heavy FO...start w/a CD 22 if single wicking.....otherwise a CD 20

[rjdaines]

I tried some RRD 37 wicks I had in a sample pack, instant mushrooming. Will remelt and use CD wicks when they arrive.

[Beli]

Have you tried CSN"s? According to CS wick guide(Course this is just a guide):

Golden Brands 464/3.5-4 Inch Diameter

Best: CSN 262nd Best: ECO 16Acceptable: LX-30

Golden Brands 464/4+ Inch Diameter

Best: ECO 10 Double Wicked2nd Best: LX-22 Double WickedAcceptable: CSN 14 Double Wicked

Edited April 17, 2011 by Beli

[rjdaines]

Have you tried CSN"s? According to CS wick guide(Course this is just a guide):

Golden Brands 464/3.5-4 Inch Diameter

Best: CSN 262nd Best: ECO 16Acceptable: LX-30

Golden Brands 464/4+ Inch Diameter

Best: ECO 10 Double Wicked2nd Best: LX-22 Double WickedAcceptable: CSN 14 Double Wicked

I have not had much luck with the CS wick guide but that was with the CB Advanced wax. I have yet to try the ECO wicks. CS is pretty far away from me so shipping costs are higher than from Peaks. I get the impression that the CSN wicks are unique to CS so I'd rather not use a retailers proprietary wick in case one day t goes away. However, I may have to get a sample pack and try.

Thanks for the input.

[Beli]

Right.. I think they are(CSN's).. but I have to do some double checking, however Eco candles are available Bittercreek (they might have them in their TX store.. I know they have different sizes here in their WI store)

I believe Candlewic also sells them as well(Eco's) As well as 464 I think, those are the two that I know, I'm sure there's a couple more but the names are escaping me at the moment. However, Candlewic is in Pa.

Edited April 17, 2011 by Beli

[rjdaines]

Still waiting for those CD wicks to arrive but in the mean time I have been burning the those test candles in the above pictures. One observation, neither candle has made a melt pool as deep as the original burn regardless of burn time. Both are "struggling" to melt completely to the edges and the depth averages about 1/4". I am guessing the is has to do with the shape of the container. Both candles are in the same location and the room temp is the same. These things defy logic at times. :smiley2:

[rjdaines]

Here is the latest test results but now trying CD wicks as suggested by members of this forum. CD6 and CD5 double wicks are used in 4" containers with GW464 wax. Two drops of liquid color are used along with 8% FO. Cure time is 48hrs, first burn time was 3 hrs. CD5 had a ROC of 0.22 oz/hr (combined wicks) and the CD6 had a ROC of 0.25. So on a per wick basis, lower than the published ROCs. FMP was achieved in 3 hrs with the CD5 at ~1/4" in depth and the CD6 at ~1/2" in depth. See attached photo.

Test burns will continue but the CD5 looks like a winner so far. These wicks came from Lonestar and the CD5s were short retabs which work fine in the 8 oz containers but I will need longer ones for the 16 oz jars. Anyone know of a source for 6" pretabbed CD5 wicks?

Photo shows CD6 left and CD5 right.

Edited April 24, 2011 by rjdaines

[FarmerJill]

Anyone know of a source for 6" pretabbed CD5 wicks?

Bitter Creek North has 'em.