So back of the envelope that's probably 4 wraps of cloth and the weight of the fabric is roughly 200gsm? If it's 4 and you're expecting to push this thing to approach Mach 3 (say with a M2245) if I were you I'd consider adding some internal stiffening to any point of the airframe where you only have the CF airframe load bearing. I say this as I flew a very similar vehicle last year in April that ended up coming apart when it was approaching Mach 3. There was a 1.75" space between the AV Bay/NC coupler and the 75-6GXL casing where the forward closure threaded onto a bolt to provide positive motor retention for the casing. And that's where my rocket decided to fail when it approached Mach 3.
Of course ymmv and most likely your airframe is better made than the one I made but I use CF from Soller (3k aero 2x2 twill, 200gsm) and the Renlam/Kirkside/Araldite K3600 epoxy system that benefits from a post cure like your Aeropoxy does. So they're probably not that much different to one another. So in my example if I had used a ~1.75" cut of FWFG coupling tube in front of my forward closure I suspect my vehicle would have had a much better chance of holding together. My replacement nose cone and new mandrels are on the way from Wildman as I type this. Hopefully they'll show up before August, the global air travel situation is seriously impacting international shipping, expecially down here where we've shut the borders to international travelers. I'll be trying this flight again in the future but it'll be 2021 at the earliest, so I've got some time.
Another not so pro "pro tip", make sure your rocket is aligned on the rail if you're going to use a FARG. Mine wasn't and it spend the first second or so under boost wobbling before finally straghtening up and flying true. I know it's a dumb thing to get wrong but I had never used them before that event and didn't consider it until a mate pointed it out to me in photos of the rocket on the rail after the flight had already gone pear shaped.