Discussion in 'Portable Vaporizers' started by WildinOut, Nov 9, 2011.
good review. I guess the mflb is in my future.
Dude, we owe you much for your honest review. We know constructive critism isn't easy, so props to you for that. I'll be passing on this and considering a mflb and upcoming vivape to compliment my solo (and future cloud!)
Thanks for the honest review THC.
With this being a full conduction vape, it is right? but is it possible that you could load a small amount then compress it with another screen or something else to simulate a packed full bowl, ya the stir tool wouldn't work but maybe you can pull some big hits like that.
Hay TherealVaporblunt does the entire bowl get hot or is there a concentrated heat area that we could try to keep the herb in contact with, and is this a full conduction vape or a mix of conduction and convection.
The entire bowl gets hot. The video the thcmuscles posted showed large vapor clouds, is he looking for clouds bigger than that? Like I said, Im a novice compared to you guys, but those were pretty large clouds. By rule I'm not allowed to mention of vapes by brand but I used one of the best portables (according to FC) that cost more than my vaporblunt and vaporblunt out preformed it on almost every level. As far as the silicone, I don't think it is going to go bad, it just needs to be routinely cleaned, once a week I would suggest. I am concerned about your efficiency claim, and I'm going to give this issue my full attention when my engineers return from thanksgiving break. I will keep u posted....
Car charger will be here after the first of the year
I will note, two pipe cleaners twisted together easily snaked the entire vapor path to the bowl. Cleaning is no big
After discussing the ABV color with a few people, and having a year of experience with my No2 knowing Temps to ABV color I think that the VaporBlunt is not heating to designed parameters. I feel that if this vape was heating to the designed 410F I would get getting far better clouds.
VaporNation: Please post your video, I'd like to see another VaporBLUNT in action. I said it before and I'll say it again, vapor density is the only complaint with this vape. If this was resolved it would have many advantages over current top portables. I have a solo on the way, but if I could get the same clouds out of the vaporblunt I'd use it instead because I think its sexier, heats faster, holds more and is one piece.
This is getting good. THCMuscle you have no idea how much we appreciate your brutally honest input on this device. Really happy to hear you have a Solo on the way...very interested in hearing what you think and in comparison to the Blunt.
One thing that I can absolutely, without a doubt guarantee is that it reaches the proper temperatures. In our assembly plant we test EVERY single unit. The allowed variance is +/- 3 degrees or it is rejected. Silly question here, but you are using top shelf herbs, right? Are you on standard or turbo? Are herbs dry or wet? I'm out of town for T-day, when I get back let's meet up and have a session. I'll bring my other vales to compare.
Here's a link to a happy customer review. Not as thorough as muscles review, but I liked it!!!!! http://forum.grasscity.com/apprentice-tokers/946399-vapor-blunt.html
That post on Gcity was encouraging. I will whip it out again tonight and see what I can produce.
After trying some lighter loads in the vaporblunt yesterday I think I have a theory on its seemingly low vapor production. The best hits I can get from the unit are with a moderately full chamber and either mouth dragging it like a cig or using my MFLB technique by inhaling through your nose as well to reduce the flow into your mouth. The Vaporblunt can obviously produce vapor but not at a fast rate. There needs to be more flow restriction to compliment how the vape makes vapor. It almost has 0 drag when packed lightly, hence almost no vapor what so ever. Even with a jam packed chamber if you inhale like you *think* you should you will get hardly any visable vapor.
I would like to see a different cap made for these, I think it could increase the hit quality greatly.
A: the stirable bowl isn't needed, it doesnt effect ABV quality (its very even color with no stiring), not to mention most new vaporizers now a days have done-away with the need to stir. I think its something from the past. The no2 does a brilliant job at cooking ABV thouroghly with a nearly identical heating chamber and delivery system.
B: A new cap could seal the end better and provide the flow restriction needed to get a thick hit.
A new cap could potentially put this vape in the running with the top portables. Right now I think its not NEARLY flow restricted enough for the way it needs to be operated/hit. I've heard reports of the solo having pretty thick flow restriction which is exactly what the blunt needs.
I am going to test out my theory tonight, I will tape over most of the end of the stir-cap to achieve desired flow restriction, then I will load it up and see if I get a better, less technique requiring hit.
I played around with the VaporBLUNT last night and I have determined flow rate is not the problem.
I've found that a completely gravity-full (not pressed) chamber on turbo and utilizing the nose/mouth inhale technique can provie pretty satisfying vapor clouds. What is most statisfying about the clouds is not so much their density, but the flavor and total number of clouds you get. The vaporblunt seems rather efficent with this size load, and will provide many many many hits.
Stu from the forum will get be getting my VaporBLUNT shortly to do his own review...
Always good to hear positive things about new products. The makers of this product sound like nice guys and I appreciate you taking your time and writing quality reviews.
Stu has been around for a while I'd also love to hear his opinion on the vaporBLUNT.
All in the name of science.
thanks for the great review and frequent updates Thcmuscle, this vape is definitely on my radar now
If anyone cares, the VaporBLUNT is now available for $219.
good move, vaporblunt!
the $200 price range is where i see this unit competing in.
Check there official and found the new price. Thanks for the news though.
Yes, we have lowered the price. After receiving multiple feedbacks that said the vaporblunt would hands down be the best vape in that price category I decided that the change was important. It severly affects our profit obviously, but what's important to me is to build a brand that people trust and respect. This boards feedback had a lot to do with the price change, as well as feed back from major online distributors like vapor nation. They know a lot more about selling vales than me! This is my first attempt at making a vape, and I think we have a product that is fairly priced and works great, I hope you agree.
I have to agree that the new pricing really does make it more appealing, and competitive. I see that you sell the batteries by themselves on the website, is this a tedious task or is it relatively simple?.
The Vaporblunt has never failed to get me very high, but I must admit this is the most frustrating vaporizer I've ever used.
If you inhale slightly too fast (anything faster than you'd hit a MFLB) with any chamber size you get no vapor what so ever, regardless of Boost mode. Every time I try to get pleasant vapor from the vaporblunt I get so frustrated and after I waste some bud trying I whip out my MFLB. Better taste, quicker vapor and better hits.
This could be a stupid question because I don't have the device but is there a simple way to test the idea of pulling the air though the vape in the opposite direction as it does now so that fresh air runs though the silicone tube then to the bowl where its heated then heats the load using some convection effect along with the conduction it has now. Like I said maybe a stupid question, could be something I'm missing that makes it impossible.
Well that would shortcut the long vapor path, which contributes to its cool vapor.
I can't quite put my finger on the causation of this poor vapor production, thats what makes this vape frustrating. Sometimes it seems like its rebound, sometimes it seems like flow rate, sometimes it seems like chamber size. This thing occasionally puts out semi-decent vapor, and frequently puts out very very poor vapor. A new problem I have discovered is the vaporblunts "Screens" (small pressed aluminum pieces with small holes) are very porous and finely grinded herb easily makes it through. I've found AVB debris all the way up to the mouth piece from very little use. I've never gotten any in my mouth, but I dont like these screens. Bad design.
Its puzzling to me that the No2 works so well and this works so poorly. They seem so similar.
I would definitely point my finger toward the rebound side of things, it seems this vape definitely puts out better vapor after having sat for a minute or two. It seems like it cools down to sup-optimal vapor temperature with even the slightest pull. The No2 can produce thick clouds even with a decent pull, making it great for giving to a non-vaporist and simply saying "Inhale". If you did this with the vaporblunt many many people will get poor-to-nothing results and probably be very disapointed. I dont think this is a quality a vaporizer should have especially targeted at Ex-blunt smokers that want fat rips. The no2 fits this bill 10X better. The No2 can whitewall a 3ft bong with a fresh chamber, I dont think the vaporblunt is physically capable of doing this. The no2 can also kill a full chamber in about 3 minutes on 400, the Vaporblunt would require 2 12 minute cycles to properly brown a full chamber.
I would reccommend a MFLB or No2 over the vaporblunt every time.
This is what I'd like to see in a Vaporblunt V2:
Slightly smaller (even 1/4 smaller would be great)
Non-stiring cap (unneccesary)
The same quick heatup time it already has
Same Flavored tips (I like this feature)
Thick, hard hitting Vapor production (this is this vapes weakest point)
Gong addapter (easily made to fit mouth piece)
Actual screens (stock metal pieces are too porus, ABV EASILY escapes chamber)
If all these were combined into a new unit, I would buy one at the original price point. ($269)
Separate names with a comma.