Wick Type / Size? - 8oz Travel Tin with GB464

[shawneehillscc]

Hello all,

Newbie here, both to candle-making and this forum, but a long-time reader who has gotten his fair share of enlightenment from using the SEARCH button!

Back in my high school years I started making candles and had a nice business going, selling some great products. Then I used mainly Peak FO and Cargill C3. Since it's been reformulated, I've never went back to it -- was attracted to the higher FO load of 464 / 444.

So now this brings me to my question. Based on y'alls opinion, insight, or experience, what size / type would you use for one of these 8oz aluminum travel tins with GB464?

I guess I'm curious about the size, and not so much the type. From what I've read and searched for here, everybody seems to be using either ECO, or CD / CDN wicks with 464. My problem has been in the sizing. I used to use ECO-10 from Lonestar, and switched to ECO-12 from Candle Science when I started using 464, as that's what their wick sizer "recommends". But that's what it recommends for a 3"-3.5" can, while recommending an ECO-10 for a 2.5"-3" can. So I'm wondering, since this is exactly 3", should I err on the side of their bigger suggestion, or the smaller?

I know, I know -- it all depends on testing, and what I've found is that the ECO-12 reaches FMP in all of my FO / 464 combinations in an hour and a half or less.

Would y'all recommend anything smaller than an ECO-10, or it's CD equivalent?

Thanks!

Al, from Shawnee Hills

[TallTayl]

Hi Al,

I tried the Candlescience recommendations once. The ECO12 in the 464 was way too big in the tins. THe flame was really tall and the entire tin was liquified in less than 30 minutes. To say it was hot was an understatement. I would wick way down in tins and watch them very carefully while burning.

I stopped playing with tins for a while - so I've not found a wick yet that I like in the tins with just 464. Sorry I can't be of more help.

[lovemylabs]

We just poured a few cases of GB464 in the 8 ounce tins and used the ECO 10s. We poured mostly light fragrances and these work pretty well for us with this combo. However, we poured Coconut and used the ECO 10 and we need to go up to an ECO 12.

[shawneehillscc]

Are you saying you poured a coconut fragrance, or added coconut oil?

I forgot to mention that I also add coconut oil -- no real reason, apart from the fact that I always used to with the C3 wax. You know, that tradition thing never dies. I use 3%, FWIW.

Is there a general loose rule about wicking up or down for certain types of scents? I know in the end it depends directly on the results you get, but I would imagine (ie, make a hugely uneducated guess) that the FO's that now have essential oils blended in would benefit from a smaller wick producing less heat.

With candles, there are so few things where there are concrete rules and observations -- I'm trying to find them!

[lovemylabs]

We poured Coconut FO. We don't add Coconut Oil...never have. And yes, depending on the fragrance oil, we may have to wick up or down. Most of the scents we use we can get by with ECO 10, but the heavier oils have to be wicked up to ECO 12.

[Stella1952]

I used CDN 8 & 10 in 6 oz. tins. I suspect I might test CDN 8, 10 & 12 in the 8 oz size.

I agree with TallTayl - watch tins carefully. They should not develop a FMP on the first test burn or they'll be hot as a chili pepper by the halfway mark. I don't pay much attention at all to suppliers' wick suggestions and only a little more to manufacturers', since they are testing in labs with paraffin, no dye, no FO. When in doubt, I go with slightly underwicking tins because of the heat buildup...

People talk a lot about having to "wick up" for "heavier" oils, but I have just not found that to be necessary with the FOs I have tested (1 oz./pp 'cause I'm too cheap to use more even if I can) with the wax I use (NatureWax C3, USA, liquid dye).

[shawneehillscc]

Just to do a test, I took an 8oz I'd made with 464, an ECO-12, and 9% load of Peak's Fruit Slices, and carefully extracted the wick out of it, replacing it with one of my old ECO-10's from Lonestar.

It burned much better, never reaching FMP on the first burn, and I was much more pleased with it.

It got to the point with the ECO-12 that no matter what scent I burned, it just let off a weak FO scent with a strong chemical smell -- either I have too much oil in there, or the wick is just plain burning it up.

Now, question time.

Am I correct in my reading and assumption that the CDN has a "natural" coating? I liked the ECO because I can market the candles and wicks as all natural (save the FO) since I use no dye. If the CDN is still natural, then that'll work great.

Also, where do you all get the CDN or CD from (your favorite place, or where you've had luck) and is there any real difference between the CDN and CD?

Thanks!

Al

[Stella1952]

Al, all wicking comes in raw form. The supplier orders it either from the distributor or the manufacturer. Many order the wicking in "wick assemblies." The wick assembly consists of several things: the wick type, the wax coating (low or high temp, vegetable or paraffin), the length and the particular wick tab (diameter at the bottom and neck height).

In the case of CD & CDN wicking, it all comes from Heinz Verhaegh in Germany. Heinz renamed their wicks to Stabilo and Stabilo KST years ago, but the correct nomenclature hasn't caught on with folks. The ONLY difference between the CD (Stabilo) and the CDN (Stabilo KST) is the wick treatment impregnated into the CDN wicking to resist oxidation in more acidic waxes (like veggie waxes). There is little difference in the size required, if any. I find the CDN is slightly more efficient than the CD. The trouble is that CDNs are damned hard to find in the US. Southwest carries a few sizes of CDNs - 8, 10, 12, 20. One can order them from US distributors (WicksUnlimited, WickIt, Precision Wicking ) but they all have a high minimum order which is beyond the needs of most home chandlers. You can request samples from them. I made an order from one of them because my most common product uses one size wick, so I could justify it, but I certainly would not have made that investment if I had not been well-familiar with the sizing of the wicks from many tests using sample packs (used to be offered by now-defunct JBN). Lonestar carries CD wicks and offers sample packs (not only of CDs but of all the wicks they carry).

because I can market the candles and wicks as all natural

There is absolutely NOTHING "all-natural" about soy wax. That is greenwashing hype. Read up about the company which manufactures your wax and how/where it is made, from seed to end product. The oil from which soy wax is obtained by refining at vegetable oil refineries all over the world (China refines most of it) by separating the oil from the mashed soybeans (from all over the world) using hexane, then super-hydrogenated. My suggestion is to just tell the unvarnished truth about the quality of your products and let buyers choose them on their merits and not on marketing BS designed to manipulate customers into an impression of the product that is patently false. Many chandlers fall for the marketing hype and should educate themselves about the realities of the vegetable oil commodities market before passing on the BS claims to their customers. Green is only good when it really IS green.

[Lorelei]

Regarding the wicks in the tins, I use Lonestar CD wicks and they have a larger 10mm neck height. Does anyone else use something less. I know it is safer but sure leaves lots of wax in the bottom of these small tins.

[rjdaines]

Bitter Creek South has then with 3mm neck and I believe Nature's Garden has them with 6mm.

Edited May 25, 2011 by rjdaines