Hello Everyone, it's me again. It's been almost 2 years since I posted this thread and I've kept a couple of the soaps since then.
A lot has happened in the interim and I was stuck in a very challenging situation housing-wise, so I hadn't been soaping very often for the past year.
However, I did keep some of the soaps on this thread so that I could share with you all how they turned out, ~2 years from when I first made them.
I was able to answer most of the questions that I had in the OP:
- Noting any changes to the soap's properties as it passes the 6 week, 8 week, and 12 week mark. Will it reach its optimum usage age at 90 like the HACCI site says?
Honestly, in my opinion it reached its optimum usage age at about 6 months after making. More than a year onwards, the original soap was still quite soft and spongy, and beyond the 6-month mark it was diminishing returns.
- I've heard that you can get dehydrated honey, although not in my country. I'd be super curious to see someone trying a similar style of soap with dehydrated honey though! Dehydrated honey would overcome the challenge of too much moisture and possibly contribute to a harder bar.
I still wonder about this. I haven't been able to get ahold of dehydrated honey, so unfortunately I could not test this out. However, I would theorise that even dehydrated honey would contribute to softness of the soap as the sugars would be hygroscopic.
- My municipality supplies slightly hard water and I've recently begun adding citric acid and extra lye to my soap batches as a chelating agent. I will try this with the same recipe to see if it alters any part of the soapmaking process or batch properties.
In the newer batch, it helped my skin itch less when washing with hard water. When I tested the bars I saved tonight (which I will explain later), the original high honey bar without citrate left my hands itchy and smelling soapy even after a good rubby rinse. Having used some of the newer bars during my hiatus from this forum with citrate included (unfortunately without pictures), I can say that those don't make my skin itch when used with hard water like my older soaps do.
- Increasing the suitability of the bars as a facial soap by decreasing the comedogenic oil content, such as cocoa butter and coconut oil. Could I retain the hardness of the soap this way?
I can say yes, a higher shea butter percentage did help to preserve hardness; however, the bars where I added the mongrel Rose EO, added the honey to the oils, and froze the batch became much harder and less spongy than the batch without the EO, where I added the honey to the lye and did not refrigerate. My guess is that it's the EO that made the difference here, and not the freezing or way in which I added the honey, as the first non-scented batch where I also froze the soap - my reasoning being that the first batch was spongy in a similar way despite also being frozen and made with the honey-in-oils method.
- Trying beeswax again in the recipe, introducing it at 0.5% to see if helps combat the moisture absorbency without sacrificing lather.
This I didn't try because I discovered that I really dislike how beeswax makes my soap turn out, that is, kind of waxy, so I was loathe to do a batch with it.
- Assessing the performance of the soap during packaging and storage.
The soap shown in the OP was spongy, that's all I can really say about it. ~2 years onwards, it still gets much softer when it rains. Not to the point where you can deform it by pressing on it, but the corners would dent a lot easier.
======================================
Alright, now that I've addressed the questions in the OP somewhat, the question remains: How did these soaps change, if at all? How did these soaps perform? Let's see:
No. 1: The soap made in the OP, suprisingly, lost the bright-orange interior after this long period of time. It lathers really really beautifully. I said "Wow" when I tested it just now. It really seemed to live up to the "microbubble" hype. No soap I've made to date has ever lathered like that, and it's really beautiful. I sent a few bars home to my parents who have soft water a year back, and their comments have been that they use it for their hair (I guess whatever makes them happy), but that it gets mushy very easily and don't hold their shape well. Another surprising thing is that, compared with the honey-in-lye soap, this batch actually smelled very faintly of honey! VERY faintly though. I think it would disappoint anyone who was looking for a strong smell.
No. 2: The "facial" soap made using
@IrishLass 's honey-in-lye method continued to smell like pretzels for about a year, after which they started absorbing the odours of the soaps that were curing around it, leaving very little honey scent. The 55% shea butter content did not make them crumbly at all, possibly owing to the mediating factors of the honey. This batch did not lather well - the lather was creamy, however, and I enjoyed using these soaps for my face. This soap did hold its shape well and did not disintegrate, but I noticed it would feel spongier and spongier in the shower as use continued.
No. 3: The "facial" soap made with the honey-in oils method, which was frozen after pouring in moulds, seized with the addition of Rose EO. Unfortunately, I thought I had saved a bar but I can't find it. This one smelled like roses with very little discernible honey scent in itself, though perhaps if I really paid attention I could make out a faint honey note. The interior, which did turn bright orange, faded to grey after a year. Again, the lather was quite subdued compared to the first batch, but there were apparent bubbles when compared to No. 2. Not quite "plush microbubbles" as No. 1, but definitely a fine and rich foam. Interestingly, this batch held its shape extremely well and dried to a hard bar when used to the shower. Unlike No.2, this batch was much harder to cut and, although it did not crumble, seemed like it would crumble more readily than the former soaps. I regret adding the Rose EO because as it is I cannot attribute the differences from No. 2 accurately to a single change in variable at this point, but if I were really pressed my money would be on the addition of the EO. This was a very popular soap with my ex, who bought out all the limited number of bars I had, used them as facial soap and raved about it for his oily skin (and he had been the primary beta tester for my soaps) so I would say it was a success.
He mentioned he liked the fine lather a lot.
======================================
So, in the end, what have I learned?
1. If you want a strong honey scent in your soap, ridiculously high amounts of honey (up to 17-20% weight of oils) won't really get you there. Rather just use an FO, or a rose-type EO if you want a noticable honey experience.
2. I'm not sure I would personally make these soaps again, with the exception of soap type No. 3 for facial use. Type No. 3 is VERY plush and I would recommend it as a project for a very special occasion. Otherwise, my opinion is that the effort, expense and tradeoffs in texture makes it prohibitive as a staple.
3. When working with high pecentages of honey, the best aesthetic results (IMO) is honey-in-oils, using individual moulds and freezing immediately for at least 24 hours after pouring.
4. Not even a high honey percentage will give you strong, "microbubble" lather if you use a high percentage of shea butter. However, it might give you a decent lathering experience if you use the honey-in-oils method.
5. The HACCI soap copy is mostly BS.
======================================
Anyways, I hope this will be helpful to people who want to put a lot of honey in their soaps for some reason.
I've included pictures of the soaps from batch No. 1 and batch No. 2 for your viewing pleasure. These were taken tonight. Again, unfortunately I couldn't find the bar from batch No. 3 I thought I'd saved.
Apologies for the necro if that's inappropriate; I'm happy to make a new thread for this as well if that's the case. Please let me know.
