My Candles Have Worse Adhesion After We Changed the Jar-Cleaning Product — Could Cleaning Residue Be Responsible?
Aktie
What do I test first? A free water-break and breath check on four jars cleaned four ways, then a four-arm poured test on one carton.
Should I change wax? Not yet. If the cleaner is the cause, a new wax changes nothing and re-opens wick, load and throw testing.
What does the test cost? ₹3,454.72 in CSI materials for the screen, including a 150 ml IPA spray. See the kit.
Could the new cleaning product be the cause? What to test first
A wet spot is commonly described as a patch where the wax has separated from the glass and left a thin air gap, which looks darker or "wet" through clear glass. Nothing liquid is there. For wax to stay attached, it has to set against bare glass; anything sitting between the two — a detergent film, the additives in a household glass cleaner, dried hard-water minerals, lint, skin oil — is commonly described as giving the wax a weaker surface to hold. Most of these films are invisible on a dry jar. So when adhesion gets worse in the same weeks that a new cleaning product arrives, the product is a fair suspect. It is not yet a proven one.
The reason it is not proven is that cleaning products rarely change alone. A new product often arrives with a new carton of jars, a new person on the cleaning bench, a different cloth, a shorter drying time because the new spray "evaporates faster", or simply with the weather turning. It is October: many workshops in north India start to see cooler glass and cooler rooms from now into the November–February season, and cold glass is a well-known adhesion suspect in its own right. If you change wax now, you may be fixing a problem the cleaner caused — or blaming the cleaner for a problem the season caused. A four-arm test on one carton separates them for a few hundred rupees.
The first test costs nothing. Take four jars from the carton you are about to pour. Clean one exactly as you clean now, with the new product. Clean one with the old product if any is left. Clean one with the new product and then a final wipe of isopropyl alcohol, and one with isopropyl alcohol only. Let all four dry completely. Then run a thin film of clean water over the inside of each and watch it. On clean glass, water is commonly seen to sheet evenly; where an oily or waxy film remains, it tends to break into beads or leave dry islands. This "water-break" check is a crude screen, not proof — but if only the new-product jar beads, you know which arm to watch. Do not pour into the water-break jars; they are sacrificial, because water left on glass is itself a residue.
| Cleaning method | What can stay on the glass | How it can show up | Cheapest check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dishwashing liquid, not rinsed thoroughly | A thin surfactant film | Patchy spots in no particular pattern; water beads on a dried test jar | Water-break jar; rinse twice and re-test |
| Household glass cleaner (spray) | Anti-streak additives, fragrance, colour, surfactants — the label rarely lists them | Spots over the whole wiped area, often in wipe-direction streaks | Compare against an IPA-only arm from the same carton |
| Hard tap-water rinse, air-dried | Mineral rings and spots | Visible white marks on the empty jar against a dark background | Hold the empty jar against black card |
| Paper towel or old cloth | Lint, fibres, cloth softener | Small scattered spots, sometimes a single fibre in the gap | Torch through the empty jar at an angle |
| Isopropyl alcohol, fully dried | Commonly described as evaporating without a film when the glass is dried fully | Should look like the cleanest arm — test it, do not assume it | Smell and look: no odour, no haze before pouring |
| Any product, poured while damp | Water or solvent still on the glass | Spots where the liquid pooled — base corners, shoulder | Fixed, measured drying time before pouring |
Step 1: what else changed in the same weeks?
Before you pour a single test jar, build a change log. It sounds bureaucratic; it takes ten minutes and it decides which test you run. Go back to the date the new cleaning product came into use and list everything else that changed within a few weeks either side: the jar carton or supplier lot, the wax bag, the oil bottle, the room the candles cool in, the time of year, who does the cleaning and how, how long jars dry, and whether jars are now cleaned in the morning and poured in the afternoon. What to record when comparing adhesion lists the fields worth keeping permanently; here you only need the month that matters.
| What could have changed | Before the switch | After the switch | Overlaps the cleaner change? | Which sibling post owns it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning product | Old product (name, bottle size) | New product (name, bottle size) | This is the change | This page |
| Cloth or towel | ____ | ____ | Y / N | Commercial jar cleaning |
| Drying time before pour | ____ min | ____ min | Y / N | This page, step 3 |
| Who cleans, gloves or bare hands | ____ | ____ | Y / N | Bare-hand handling |
| Jar carton / supplier lot | ____ | ____ | Y / N | Jar supplier change tests |
| Room / glass temperature at pour | ____ °C | ____ °C | Y / N | Cold glass |
| Wax bag, oil bottle | ____ | ____ | Y / N | Adhesion records |
| Cooling position, AC, season | ____ | ____ | Y / N | Winter-only patchy jars |
If the cleaner is the only line with a "Y", the four-arm test below is close to decisive. If two or three lines changed at once — new cleaner, new carton and colder mornings — the four-arm test still works, because it holds the carton, the room and the wax constant and moves only the cleaning step. What it cannot do is tell you about the other changes; for those, you test them one at a time afterwards, in the order the section's diagnosis method gives: cleanliness and handling, then glass and pour temperature, then cooling, then the jar and the wax.
Step 2: how a residue can weaken adhesion
Soy container waxes are commonly described as contracting slightly as they cool and crystallise. Whether that contraction pulls the wax off the glass depends partly on how firmly the wax has wetted and gripped the glass while it was liquid and setting. On clean, bare glass, molten wax spreads into full contact. A film in between — even one too thin to see — is commonly described as reducing that contact, so the wax holds less firmly in exactly those areas, and the normal small contraction of cooling can open a gap there first. That is why residue-driven spots often follow the pattern of how the jar was wiped: streaks in the wipe direction, a ring where a cloth was held, a patch where a spray landed heaviest.
Two other mechanisms look identical through the glass and are worth ruling out while you test. Liquid left on the glass — water from rinsing, or a solvent that has not fully evaporated — can do the same as a film until it dries, and it tends to pool in the base corners and under the shoulder. And a cleaner that leaves the glass slightly cooler as it evaporates can lower the glass temperature right before you pour; on a cool October morning that is not trivial. The four-arm test separates the film question from both: every arm gets the same, measured drying time and is poured at the same glass temperature, recorded on the sheet.
Step 3: the four-arm cleaning test
Here is the test, written for a maker pouring Lemongrass and Lime at 8% in Luxury Soy Wax CSI 464 into the 200 ml Salsa Glass Jar. The Salsa's fill weight is not published; this page uses an illustrative 160 g candle, so 12.8 g of oil and 147.2 g of wax — weigh one test pour of your own and replace the figure. If you use a different jar, wax or oil, keep yours: the point is that every arm gets the same ones. Control is what you do today, because that is what production is doing; each other arm differs from it in one cleaning variable only.
Three jars per arm is a screen, not a verdict. It is enough to see a large difference — the control arm spotty and the IPA arm clean — and not enough to approve a production change on a small one. If the screen points at the cleaner, run a decision round: the control process against the winning cleaning method, six jars each, from a fresh carton. That round is ₹2,871.12 in CSI materials (wax, oil, jars, wicks and stickers for 12 candles, the IPA already bought). Each extra jar per arm adds about ₹197.84 in materials at the small-pack rates — that is the price of confidence, and you can see it before you decide how many to pour.
The scoring sheet
Score each jar on its own line before you look at which arm it belongs to; ideally, someone who did not clean the jars reads the coded numbers and does the scoring. The scale below is an example house scale — there is no industry standard for wet spots, so whatever you choose is yours. Choose it once and keep it for every future test, so this round can be compared with the next.
| Jar | Arm (fill in after scoring) | Pour order | Wax °C at pour | Water-break result for the arm | Pour day | 48 h | 7 days | Where are the spots? (wipe streaks, base, shoulder, scattered) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | 1 | ___ | sheets / beads / islands | 0–4 | 0–4 | 0–4 | ____ | |
| 02 | 2 | ___ | ||||||
| 03 | 3 | ___ | ||||||
| … | … | |||||||
| 12 | 12 | ___ | ||||||
| Arm totals | A ___ · B ___ · C ___ · D ___ | Sum of 7-day scores per arm | Pattern notes |
Two columns matter more than they look. "Where" separates a cleaning film from other causes: wipe-direction streaks and cloth-shaped patches point at the cleaning step; a ring at the base points at cooling on a cold surface; one side of every jar points at a draught; scattered pinheads point at dust or lint. And the pour-order column guards against the commonest test error of all — the first jars poured got the hottest wax. If spots track pour order rather than arm, the cleaner is not your problem. Tiny scattered spots covers the pinhead pattern in depth.
Step 4: reading the result
Read the 7-day scores arm by arm, then jar by jar. A working rule you can adopt before you pour — write it on the sheet now, not after — is that an arm is "cleaner" than control only if its total is clearly lower and at least two of its three jars score better than the best control jar. That is an example house rule; set a tighter one if your brand sells on crystal-clear glass. Then match the pattern to its meaning below.
| Pattern at 7 days | What it suggests | What to do next |
|---|---|---|
| A (new product) spotty; C and D clean; B clean | The new product leaves a film your wax does not hold to | Stop using it on the inside of jars, or finish every jar with IPA; run the decision round |
| A spotty; C clean; D clean; no B | Same conclusion, without the history check | As above |
| A and C spotty; D clean | The film survives a single IPA wipe, or the cloth is the carrier | Switch to IPA only on a fresh cloth; test the cloth itself |
| All four arms spotty, similar totals | Not the cleaner | Go to glass and pour temperature next: cold glass, preheating |
| Spots track pour order, not arm | Pour temperature or wax cooling in the jug | Re-run with a warm jug and a rotating order |
| Only the base ring is spotty, every arm | Cold tray or surface | Cooling surface test — not a cleaning problem |
| All four clean | Something else changed, or the spots were seasonal | Re-check the change log; pour a production-sized batch with today's process and watch it |
What a cleaning change re-opens — and what it does not
A cleaning product touches only the glass surface, so it re-opens far less than a wax or jar change. Here is the retest matrix in the KEEP / CONFIRM / REPEAT / NEW vocabulary this series borrows from change control: KEEP means the earlier result still stands, CONFIRM a short side-by-side check, REPEAT a full retest, NEW a test you never needed before.
| Earlier result | Status | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Glass adhesion and wet-spot score | REPEAT | The cleaner sits exactly where adhesion happens |
| Top finish (smooth, rough, sinkholes) | CONFIRM | Check on the same test jars; a cleaner should not affect the top, so a change there points elsewhere |
| Wick choice, melt pool, flame | KEEP | Nothing in the wax, oil or wick changed — provided the jar is fully dry and residue-free before pouring |
| Hot and cold throw | KEEP | Same formula; a fragranced glass cleaner leaving odour is a reason to drop it, not to retest throw |
| Cure time | KEEP | Unchanged formula |
| Label and lid adhesion on the outside | NEW, if the new product touches the outside | Some cleaners can leave films that affect label glue — check one labelled jar |
| Drying time and fire safety of the cleaning bench | NEW | A solvent such as IPA is flammable — dry away from heat and flame before warming or pouring |
Notice what is absent: a wax retest. If the test convicts the cleaner, your wax was never the problem, and the jars you poured in it before the switch are the evidence. If the test clears the cleaner, the wax still is not convicted — temperature, cooling and the jar itself all sit before it on the ladder in the section-one diagnosis method. Testing cleaned against uncleaned jars before blaming your wax is the companion test when you suspect the wax and have never tested cleaning at all.
What the residue costs, and what the fix costs
Whether a cleaning fix is worth it is not in doubt for most makers, but the numbers are worth seeing, because they set how much testing is sensible. Start with the material cost of one candle in this example: 147.2 g of CSI 464 at the 5 kg rate (₹507.40 a kilo) is ₹74.69; 12.8 g of Lemongrass and Lime at the 1 kg rate (₹5.20 a gram) is ₹66.56; an Eco Thin C1 wick is ₹5.90 as the example wick line; and a Salsa jar from the 100-pack is ₹29.50. That is ₹176.65 a candle before labour, packaging, freight and GST.
| Situation | Candles poured | Spotted (example) | Saleable at full price | Material cost of batch | Cost per acceptable candle |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before the switch (example) | 100 | 4 | 96 | ₹17,664.93 | ₹184.01 |
| After the switch (example) | 100 | 18 | 82 | ₹17,664.93 | ₹215.43 |
| Difference | +14 | −14 | +₹31.42 |
In this example, the extra 14 spotted candles carry ₹2,473.09 of materials per 100 poured, and the cost of each full-price candle rises by ₹31.42 — before counting the labour you put into the rejects, the discount you give on them, or any label you buy to hide the spots. Calculating the cost of cosmetic rejects and counting discounts and complaints own that wider maths.
Now the fix. The quantity of isopropyl alcohol per jar is not published anywhere and depends entirely on your spray and wipe. Measure it: weigh the bottle, clean 20 jars, weigh it again. Isopropyl alcohol weighs roughly 0.79 g per ml (a general approximate figure), so at an example 2 ml a jar, 20 jars should use about 31.6 g. At that example rate, the 1 litre size (₹520.00) cleans about 500 jars at ₹1.04 a jar, and the 150 ml size (₹383.00) about 75 jars at ₹5.11 a jar. Add an example 15 seconds of extra wiping at an example labour rate of ₹120.00 an hour — ₹0.50 a jar, replace both with your own — and the IPA finish costs about ₹1.54 a jar. Against ₹2,473.09 of materials in extra rejects per 100 candles, it pays for itself after roughly 1606 jars in this example.
The priced test kit
The kit below covers the four-arm screen with listed, in-stock CSI packs. Grams use the CSI convention (oil = W × L) on the illustrative 160 g candle, with a 5% pour-loss working allowance. If you already hold the wax, oil, wicks or jars from your production lot, use them instead — testing with the same lot as production is better than buying fresh, because it removes a lot difference from the comparison.
| Item | Need | Buy | Price | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200 ml Salsa Glass Jar, golden lug cap | 12 + 4 water-break | 4 × pack of 5 | ₹802.40 | 4 spare jars for a repeat |
| Luxury Soy Wax CSI 464 | 1,854.7 g | 2 × 1 kg | ₹1,014.80 | Skip if you hold the production lot (better) |
| Lemongrass and Lime | 161.3 g | 1 × 100 g + 1 × 50 g + 1 × 15 g | ₹1,036.52 | Or your own oil — keep it identical across arms |
| Eco Candle Wicks Thin C1 | 12 + 2 spare | 1 × pack of 20 | ₹118.00 | Example wick line — wick size for this jar is not published; use your burn-tested wick |
| Wick stickers | 12 | 1 × sheet of 40 | ₹100.00 | — |
| Isopropyl Alcohol Spray | Arms C and D | 1 × 150 ml | ₹383.00 | Flammable — dry fully before warming or pouring |
| CSI total for the screen | ₹3,454.72 |
Not on the list, because CSI does not sell them: lint-free cloths, nitrile gloves, a drying rack and a printed grid for scoring. Use what you have and record it. A Pen Thermometer (₹354.00) measures the wax at pour; it does not measure the glass, and nothing on this page asks you to guess a glass temperature.
The decision rule
Apply it from the top and stop at the first line that is true.
| If this is true at 7 days | Buy | And change |
|---|---|---|
| Old product (B) as clean as IPA (D), new product (A) spotty | Nothing. | Go back to the old product; record it in your SOP |
| IPA arms (C, D) clean, A spotty, no old product left | Isopropyl Alcohol Spray 1 litre (₹520.00) after the decision round | IPA finish on every jar, fixed drying time, gloves |
| C spotty, D clean | Isopropyl Alcohol Spray 1 litre (₹520.00) | Drop the new product entirely; new cloths |
| All arms spotty | Nothing yet | Test glass temperature and cooling next — not wax |
| All arms clean | Nothing | Watch the next production batch; re-check the change log |
| Cleaning cleared, temperature and cooling cleared, jar cleared | 500 g or 1 kg bags of a second CSI wax for a side-by-side | Only now is the wax a fair suspect |
That last line is the only one that leads to a wax purchase, and it sits behind three other tests on purpose. Every CSI container wax page makes an adhesion claim — Chunks, CSI 464 and CSI 468 all say so — which means the claim cannot choose between them. Only your jar, your oil and your room can. The jar-preparation and pouring SOP shows where the cleaning step sits in a routine your team can repeat without thinking.
The CSI products in this test
| Size | Price | Per ml | Jars at an example 2 ml each |
|---|---|---|---|
| 150 ml | ₹383.00 | ₹2.55 | 75 |
| 1 litre | ₹520.00 | ₹0.52 | 500 |
| Pack | Price | Per jar |
|---|---|---|
| Pack of 5 | ₹200.60 | ₹40.12 |
| Pack of 50 | ₹1,475.00 | ₹29.50 |
| Pack of 100 | ₹2,950.00 | ₹29.50 |
| Pack | Price | Per kg | Candles at 147.2 g wax |
|---|---|---|---|
| 500 g | ₹260.00 | ₹520.00 | 3.40 |
| 1 kg | ₹507.40 | ₹507.40 | 6.79 |
| 5 kg | ₹2,537.00 | ₹507.40 | 33.97 |
| 10 kg | ₹5,074.00 | ₹507.40 | 67.93 |
| Pack | Price | Per gram | Candles at 12.8 g oil |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15 g | ₹116.52 | ₹7.77 | 1.17 |
| 50 g | ₹330.00 | ₹6.60 | 3.91 |
| 100 g | ₹590.00 | ₹5.90 | 7.81 |
| 500 g | ₹2,600.00 | ₹5.20 | 39.06 |
| 1 kg | ₹5,200.00 | ₹5.20 | 78.12 |
CANDLEMAKINGSUPPLIESINDIA supplies raw materials, not finished candles. The easy answer for a wax seller is "switch wax". This page tests your cleaning step first, prices it in jars and an IPA spray rather than a wax bag, and tells you plainly when the right purchase is nothing — including going back to the cleaner you used before.
Oil prices are CSI live pricing, pulled 24 September 2026, stock re-checked 7 October 2026. Chunks, CSI 464 and CSI 468 prices are CSI live pricing, re-checked 7 October 2026; Natural Soy Pearl was re-checked 1 October 2026. Glass jars and the Isopropyl Alcohol Spray are CSI live pricing, pulled 7 October 2026. Wicks, stickers and tools are re-checked 4 October 2026, including the Eco Thin C1 10-pack being out of stock. Every candle split, per-jar price, kit total and cost per acceptable candle on this page is computed and shown to two decimals so you can check it.
Jar counts per arm, photo checkpoints, glass-warming and cooling settings, labour minutes and the pour-loss allowance are labelled working practices or example settings, not standards — there is no industry acceptance figure for wet spots, and the house scale you score with is yours. The 160 g Salsa fill, the reject counts, millilitres per jar, wipe seconds and labour rate are illustrative examples you replace with your own. For help building a test kit, bulk quotes, GST invoicing, MSDS or IFRA documents, message us on WhatsApp at +91 7397976926.
Frequently asked questions
- How Do I Clean Candle Jars Commercially Without Leaving Residues That Interfere with Wax Adhesion?
- Should I Test Cleaned versus Uncleaned Jars Before Blaming My Candle Wax for Wet Spots?
- My Jar Feels Clean but the Wax Refuses to Adhere Consistently — Could Invisible Oil or Dust on the Glass Be Responsible?
- My Team Handles Jars with Bare Hands Before Pouring — Could Fingerprints and Skin Oils Create Local Adhesion Problems?
- My Wet Spots Appear in Places Where the Jar Was Handled — Should Jar-Handling Procedure Become Part of Production QC?
- Should New Candle Jars Be Cleaned Before Filling Even if They Arrive Looking Clean from the Supplier?
- How Do I Develop a Jar-Preparation and Pouring SOP That Consistently Improves Glass Adhesion Without Making Production Unnecessarily Complicated?
- My Clear Luxury Candle Jar Shows Ugly Patchy Adhesion Only During Winter — Should I Preheat the Glass, Change Pouring Temperature or Use Another Wax?
- Should Candle Jar Supplier Changes Trigger a Small Production Test Even if Dimensions Remain Identical?
Customer reviews: The six reviews at the top of this page are genuine, published Judge.me reviews left by CSI customers on the product pages named on each card — Eco Candle Wicks, Premium Candle Wicking Needle and Bamboo Wick Holder. They are general product reviews, not assessments of the guidance set out here. Names, star ratings, dates and products are as recorded by Judge.me and wording is unedited. "Verified buyer" appears only on the three reviews Judge.me recorded as verified — Monika Deep, Subhankar Roy and Sneha Tamang; the reviews from Ashwini, LJ and Lalitha Jagan are published but not recorded as verified, and carry no badge.
Figures used on this page: Oils — CSI live pricing, pulled 24 September 2026, stock re-checked 7 October 2026: Lemongrass and Lime Fragrance Oil ₹116.52 / 15 g, ₹330.00 / 50 g, ₹590.00 / 100 g, ₹2,600.00 / 500 g, ₹5,200.00 / 1 kg. Waxes: Luxury Soy Wax CSI 464 (CSI live pricing, re-checked 7 October 2026) ₹260.00 / 500 g, ₹507.40 / 1 kg, ₹2,537.00 / 5 kg, ₹5,074.00 / 10 kg. Glass jars and the Isopropyl Alcohol Spray, CSI live pricing, pulled 7 October 2026: Clear Glass Jar with Golden Lid (150 gram) ₹944.00 / 10, ₹1,888.00 / 20; Borosilicate Glass Jar 600 gram fill capacity with golden lid ₹200.00 / 1; 200 ml Salsa Glass Jar, golden lug cap ₹200.60 / 5, ₹1,475.00 / 50, ₹2,950.00 / 100; Yankee Glass Jar 130 ml with clear cap ₹47.20 / 1; Mini Glass Jars 40 ml, golden lid ₹129.80 / 5, ₹1,180.00 / 25, ₹1,180.00 / 50, ₹2,124.00 / 100; Mini Glass Jars 40 ml, black lid ₹129.80 / 5, ₹634.25 / 25, ₹1,180.00 / 50, ₹2,124.00 / 100; White Matte Glass Jar ₹354.00 / 5, ₹708.00 / 10; Black Matte Glass Jar ₹354.00 / 5, ₹708.00 / 10; Black Glossy Glass Jar ₹354.00 / 5, ₹708.00 / 10; White Matte Votive Jar 70 gram ₹159.30 / 5, ₹318.60 / 10; Amber Shiny Glass Jar with Black Lid ₹47.20 / 1, ₹236.00 / 5; 200 ml Salsa Amber Glass Jar with lug cap ₹310.00 / 5, ₹3,100.00 / 50, ₹6,200.00 / 100; Isopropyl Alcohol Spray ₹383.00 / 150 ml, ₹520.00 / 1 litre. The Clear 150 g pack of 20 and the Borosilicate 600 g jar are listed in limited stock; the Mini Golden 25 and 50 listings show the same price. Wicks, stickers and tools re-checked 4 October 2026: Eco Candle Wicks Thin C1 ₹118.00 / 20, ₹295.00 / 50, ₹590.00 / 100, ₹2,950.00 / 500, ₹5,900.00 / 1,000 (10-pack out of stock); Eco Thick C2 ₹94.40 / 10, ₹188.80 / 20; wick stickers ₹100.00 / 40; Pen Thermometer ₹354.00; Candle Making Weighing Scale ₹354.00; Wick Centering Device ₹118.00 / 5.
Non-price figures and assumptions: Load convention: fragrance load is a share of the finished candle (oil = W × L; wax = W × (1 − L)). Illustrative candle: 160 g in the 200 ml Salsa jar (fill not published — weigh a test pour) at 8%: 12.8 g oil + 147.2 g wax. Working practices: 3 jars per arm for a screen, 6 for a decision round, 5% pour loss, photo checkpoints at pour day, 48 hours and 7 days, a 0–4 house scale. Example figures: 4 and 18 spotted candles per 100, 2 ml of IPA per jar, 15 seconds of extra wiping, ₹120.00 an hour labour, 15 minutes drying. Isopropyl alcohol density about 0.79 g/ml is a general approximate figure. Per-candle cost uses the 5 kg wax rate, the 1 kg oil rate, the Salsa 100-pack rate and the Eco Thin C1 example wick at ₹5.90. What CSI's product pages state (quoted, not CSI test results): Luxury Soy Wax Chunks — fragrance load up to 13%, fragrance addition 80–90°C, pour 75–80°C in the spec table (the step list also shows 70–80°C), stir 2 minutes, cure at least 48 hours, ideally 1–2 weeks, and "excellent adhesion to glass and container surfaces"; Luxury Soy Wax CSI 464 — fragrance load up to 10%, an 80–90°C melt/pour working range, single-pour, "excellent glass adhesion"; Premium Coconut Soy Wax CSI 468 — melting point 50–53°C, pour 58–60°C, fragrance load up to 13%, "formulated for excellent glass adhesion"; Natural Soy Pearl — no temperature, fragrance ceiling or adhesion statement published; Clear Glass Jar with Golden Lid (150 gram) — fill approximately 150 g, "safe for hot pour up to 85°C", thick-walled clear glass (thickness in mm not published); Borosilicate 600 g jar — "ideal for 500–600 g wax fill" and a "smooth inner surface for … clean adhesion" claim. All three adhesion claims are the same claim, so they rank nothing. CSI publishes no adhesion, wet-spot, shrinkage or contraction data for any wax, oil, dye or jar, no glass thickness or internal diameter for any jar, no hot-pour limit except the Clear 150 g jar's 85°C, no wick size for any jar, and no industry acceptance threshold for wet spots exists — every acceptance line on this page is a labelled house standard. Wet-spot mechanisms (contraction as wax cools, cold glass, uneven cooling, residues on glass) are general candle-making knowledge, described as commonly reported, not measured by CSI. Material costs exclude labour, packaging, freight and GST. Diwali 2026 falls on Sunday 8 November.