Discontinued Vaporfection viVape

[oldiebutgoodie]

I'm a couple weeks late to this discussion, but thought the following might be useful data . . .

There were a number of questions and comments re the whip method continuously delivering vapor, could the flow be safely blocked, comparisons in that regard to the Q and Oracle forced air methods, etc. I discussed these exact questions directly with both Arizer and Oracle. So I'll share their responses as you may feel they are relevant to the Vaporfection questions.

I have on occasion used the Q's fan assist with the whip, both with and without it attached to my bubbler. The short answer is that Arizer recommends that the vapor flow not be blocked with the fan running. The fan is not powerful enough even at top speed to push vapor thru a water chamber, so attaching to a bong with the fan running is just like stopping the flow at the end of the whip with one's thumb. Arizer indicated that this would create back-pressure to the fan, forcing the motor to work harder. Obviously how much time will pass before that will eventually affect the performance or life of the fan will vary based on use and fan speed, but ultimately even a Delta quality fan will be affected and hence Arizer's recommendation.

The Oracle uses a pump. Bogdan stated that it is powerful enough to push vapor thru a water chamber. However, this requires using the direct connection method to the bong, bypassing the bag (otherwise the pressure simply diverts into the bag). Once the bag is filled and pump turned off, the unit would need to be turned on/off to facilitate taking a hit, since there is not a passive draw capability. Consequently there would be no back pressure to the pump (the negative effect if any would be on the emitter, from more frequent powering on/off's). Comparison relative to the Vaporfection whip doesn't appear applicable.

Vaporfection appears to provide zero information on the mechanics of its system. But given how quiet it is and the bag fill time, that does suggest a fan (as the Novus used) as opposed to a pump. The only apparent reason for continuous flow would seem to be a convenience feature like that of the Q. Clearly the (assumed) fan is being engaged at a lower speed compared to the bag method. But even with a very low speed, hot air is still passing thru the herb continuing the convection process. And if blocked for an extended period of time, eventually there will be back-pressure.

The web site indicates this is a "re-engineered improved" version of the Novus, which is a fan forced air system. Checking the Novus might be instructive, i.e., does it continue to push air as long as the unit is on, does it dis-engage the fan when the wand is removed?

There is this FAQ on the website:

"Q: How can I maximize the lifetime of my heating element?
A: Its important to always remove the whip from the heating chamber when not in use."

Since the element is obviously turned off when the machine is turned off, this implies that insertion of the wand engages the element and presumably also the fan. Or it may be that the fan is engaged when the unit is turned on, but the element only when the wand is inserted. This is just speculation, but if so it might address the concerns that have been raised. Why would the fan be engaged at all with the whip? Again, one could speculate it to be a convenience feature ala the Q, but without the same flexibility on/off & speed control.

Personally, I could overlook the lack of any documentation on the website if there were a company presence on a site such as FC so that questions from veteran users could be addressed. Consequently, I would not purchase this unit without obtaining answers from Vaporfection. There is a Contact page on the website.

Oh, and btw, re the question about the touchscreen: The FAQ indicates it is not like Apple's which is heat sensitive. It is pressure sensitive. Vaporfection recommends pressing with "your fingernail".

 

[max]

this implies that insertion of the wand engages the element and presumably also the fan.

I don't think that inserting the wand engages anything, as far as turning it on. This has never been the case with previous Vaporfection models, or any other forced air models.

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

this implies that insertion of the wand engages the element and presumably also the fan.

I don't think that inserting the wand engages anything, as far as turning it on. This has never been the case with previous Vaporfection models, or any other forced air models.

I hear you. Well, that puts that speculation to bed, doesn't it? Although it begs the question then whether that flow continues when the wand is removed. I was admittedly reaching for some logical explanation. That puts us back to square one, because even if the flow is slow with the element on, then there will be convection/vapor loss. I don't get it. Leaves one to speculate in ways probably not favorable for Vaporfection. Thanks for the reply, max.

 

[stebod]

Has anybody had any experience of using the novus with an aquavape, can the vapor pass through the water with just fan pressure? Would be most silly of them to sell an accessory that could harm your vape through back pressure. Could it be that the fan disengages if back pressure is detected, im confused

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

Has anybody had any experience of using the novus with an aquavape, can the vapor pass through the water with just fan pressure? Would be most silly of them to sell an accessory that could harm your vape through back pressure. Could it be that the fan disengages if back pressure is detected, im confused

Not the Novus, but I've used the Q with an aquavape, and it's fan will not push the vapor thru the water chamber. And it has a fairly powerful Delta, but the overall size of the machine will limit the size and hence power of the fan. Another factor is that a relatively narrow airflow path requires considerable force. Another factor is the length of the whip, as pressure will dissipate over its length. A pump is typically a different matter, usually being more powerful, which is why the Oracle can displace water as I would expect the Herbalaire to also be able to do. Of course, the volume of water is a factor, too, but you asked about the aquavape, which IIRC only holds about 1-2 oz.

As far as a relief value, yes, that would work. In my prev post, I actually included that speculatively, but then edited it out for brevity. The Q certainly doesn't have one.

So folks, OK I went ahead and put the questions to Vaporfection directly. Let's see what they have to say.

 

[stebod]

Will be most interested to see what they say about this. It could be (looking from the video) that the fan and heating element are constantly engaged which is of concern at 700 watt. If blocking the whip is an issue it must be a matter a inserting and retracting the whip as and when you require a quick hit. I also think that the vivape will not have the fan power to blow through an aquavape and you would need to do the same, in which case it may be a power hungry beast but actually waste very little vapor. I could be completely wrong however

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

Will be most interested to see what they say about this. It could be (looking from the video) that the fan and heating element are constantly engaged which is of concern at 700 watt. If blocking the whip is an issue it must be a matter a inserting and retracting the whip as and when you require a quick hit. I also think that the vivape will not have the fan power to blow through an aquavape and you would need to do the same, in which case it may be a power hungry beast but actually waste very little vapor. I could be completely wrong however

Note however max's comment above re my speculation that inserting/removing the wand engaged/disengaged the element and/or the fan. It definitely would not make sense to disengage the element, as that would drop the temp for the next hit (altho IIRC the site somewhere says something about algorithmically micro-processor controlled temp). I can see it disengaging the fan, however - perhaps that is one of its "revolutionary" new features. I included this in my questions to Vaporfection.

 

[stebod]

Any word from vaporfection on our highlighted issues?

 

[CarlosSpiceyWeiner]

Any word from vaporfection on our highlighted issues?

I haven't heard anything

 

[CarlosSpiceyWeiner]

I hope vaporfection makes it a very merry xmas for me.

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

OK folks, I received a reply from Jonathan Postma at Vaporfection this morning. First for context, here was my query:

I am interested in your new ViVape, but have a a few questions please: I have seen 2 reviews both of which indicate that there is a continuous vapor flow when using the whip method. Is that correct? Assuming so, doesn't that result in convection/vapor loss? When one removes the wand to stir, does that flow continue? Can the user safely block the flow at the mouthpiece between hits, or as would happen the same if the whip were attached to a water piece? The unit looks quite lovely, but as you can see, I\'m confused about the above. Thank you.

Vaporfection reply:

The air flow is continuous however it is very efficient. If you want to not lose vapor simply remove the whip from the heat chamber between drags. This method is better than blocking the flow with your hand at the mouth piece. When you are ready put the whip back in and begin inhaling and vapor flows immediately. I assure you this is the best direct inhalation device period. I hope this answers your question. Good luck.

Analysis parsing the reply:

1. The reply confirms the reviews we have had posted, i.e., that there is continuous air flow. The statement "If you do not want to lose vapor . . . " indicates that, yes, there is some vapor loss.

2. Vaporfection apparently does not see this as a concern because the flow is "very efficient". I do not know how to interpret "very efficient".

3. My question re whether the flow continues if the whip is removed, was not directly answered. There is the statement "If you do want to not lose vapor simply remove the whip . . . " as well as "put the whip back in and begin inhaling and vapor flows immediately". This implies that the fan is disengaged when the whip is removed and re-engaged when the whip is inserted. Technically speaking, this would possible with either a simple trip switch at the insertion point or a valve mechanism which activates the fan air pressure from the user, but of course this is purely speculation. In any case, the indication is that the flow is stopped upon whip removal.

4. It is apparently not recommended to block the flow. Note that in my question I posed the possibility of the user doing so manually (e.g., finger) but also as would occur were the whip attached to a water chamber. I take from this that however the whip is used, it should be removed from the unit between hits.

Editorial: While the reply did clarify that the vapor flow is continuous, that it should not be blocked, and that it can be stopped/started by removing/inserting the whip, I still was left somewhat unsatisfied. The implication is that this should not be a concern at all because the flow is "very efficient", but there was no quantification or explanation to what that really means nor why it is so. I remain baffled as to why there is a continuous flow at all, given that it seems to serve no functional purpose for the user.

Also, I'm not sure how to take the emphatic final statement assuring me that this is the best direction inhalation device period, Were my questions taken as a challenge (I thought I was diplomatic)? Did Vaportection suspect I was a shill for the competition? Is this a sore spot because of having received such questions before? I have no idea. But while such a dogmatic statement one might expect from a sales person, I wouldn't think so in response to a functional question from a prospective customer, and certainly not without substantiation. IMO, this somewhat undermines the credibility of the fundamental answer which, to paraphrase, is "trust us, no need to be concerned, this is the unequivocally the best".

That's just my opinion. Personally, I will wait until users here at FC can provide us with specifics from their own testing before drawing any final conclusion. Until I have such further information, I will not feel comfortable purchasing the unit. Again, just my opinion.

 

[stebod]

Could it be that the vapor flows immediatly after reinsertion of the whip because the fan is always on? If so this could be costly to run and double as the first touch screen room heater

 

[Hippie Dickie]

If you want to not lose vapor simply remove the whip from the heat chamber between drags.

hmmm ... i interpreted this to mean the herb is in the end of the whip that plugs into the viVape, not inside the viVape itself. So removing the vape removes the herb from the hot air flow (which never stops).

 

[Stu]

If you want to not lose vapor simply remove the whip from the heat chamber between drags.

hmmm ... i interpreted this to mean the herb is in the end of the whip that plugs into the viVape, not inside the viVape itself. So removing the vape removes the herb from the hot air flow (which never stops).

This is how I understood their reply as well. It seems like the wand/bowl setup is similar to SSV/DBV/VB.

 

[stebod]

Personally I don't care much about the constant air flow (if that's the case) the thing that bothers me is the 700 Watt power consumption, that's more than my PC!

 

[max]

I assure you this is the best direct inhalation device period.

He's claiming it's the best in every respect and that's just ridiculous. If they ever plan to post here they're going to have to change that rhetoric.

I remain baffled as to why there is a continuous flow at all, given that it seems to serve no functional purpose for the user.

It's not designed for the benefit of the user. It's supposed to improve performance or longevity, or both. It's very common for the high end digital boxes. The forced air flow is not strong and not at all like the flow needed to fill a bag.

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

I think you guys are right - I had forgotten that the bowl is at the end of the whip and consequently air flow over the herb stops when the whip is removed, hence no vapor loss. So, yes, a setup similar to the SSV, etc.

Except that the ViVape has a continuously running fan, and if one review is to be taken literally, not slowly running either ("visible vape coming out of the whip like a geiser"). In any case, since that vapor push cannot be controlled, I wonder how users who want a fully passive direct draw would feel about that. I've used the Q's whip with the fan on, but for me at least only the very low Fan 1 is practical.

Reading back again over this thread and seeing other comments about the marketing, I guess the emphatic "this is the best direct inhalation device period" statement should just be taken as sales-speak.

EDIT: I was posting this as max was posting his . . . max, amen to your first observation. To your second, I defer to your enormously greater experience. The earlier review's "like a geyser" comment led me to think the flow was rather substantial, say like the Q's Fan 2. Thx, max.

 

[max]

The earlier review's "like a geyser" comment led me to think the flow was rather substantial, say like the Q's Fan 2.

I'm just going by previous models, including this company's. The forced air flow on other models is/was just enough to push out a little vapor. I can't imagine anyone designing the vape to pump out considerable amounts of vapor all the time. It just wouldn't sell. These high end digital boxes seem to have cooling requirements that aren't needed on analog designs or even digital vapes like the Extreme.

Here's some info from the site of another high end digital box, the Evolution (not to be confused with the Evolutions 7 )-

"Another feature ensuring the safety of the vaporizers electronic equipmentand potentially your house as wellis a thermal protection device, which will cut power to the heater alone, leaving the fan on in the event that temperatures rise above 125 degrees Fahrenheit inside the enclosure. If this device overheats as a result of a fan failure, fire, or just innocent use while basking in the sun, you will notice the temperature slowly, and then rapidly, decreasing as the heating element cools down. It may seem as though something is broken, but the safety device will reset after 15-20 minutes, once the unit cools below 90 degrees or so. This safety feature may be particularly problematic for people in Arizona attempting to use the machine outdoors during the summer.

The cooling fan is the last piece of critical equipment that you should be familiar with; it needs to be examined about once a month for rampant dust bunnies, hair, and dirt, which should be regularly cleaned to prevent clogging the inlet or any of the vaporizers other air vents."
http://evolutionvaporizer.com/VAPORIZER-MANUAL-2010.php

 

[Hippie Dickie]

where does the 700 watt specification come from? seems kind of excessive to me.

 

[vapormonkey]

THAT'S what I'm talking about HD...

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

Well, I'm embarrassed. I must be getting really old after all.

Max is of course correct, it's about cooling. Having a Q and having looked at other forced-air systems, it never occurred to me that there would be a secondary purpose for the fan. But then when I looked at the Evolution manual, it was clear. I took another look at the guts of the Q, and the interesting discussion in a long fun thread here about building one's own. The type of design in the Evolution, and the Vaporfection presumably shares some of these characteristics, has been around in electro-mechanical devices of various types for a long time and still is. There is always the basic question of managing the thermodynamics. If the type of heat generation (in the Evolution, wire coils within a core encased in a metal sleeve) requires high wattage, and the heat-subsystem throws off significant secondary heat, and there is a small fully closed enclosure with limited dissipation inside of which there are also components with their own heat tolerances, this is all translates into needing an active cooling subsystem to maintain the circulation required for safe internal ambient temp. Otherwise, it fries. The Evolution's internal ambient range is 90-125F. The fan needs to run continuously for intake/exhaust to maintain this range, and if the temp rises above that a sensor cuts off power to the element while keeping the fan running for flow-thru until the temp sufficiently drops. All pretty straightforward and common.

No wonder Vaporfection said not a good idea to block the whip. Duh. If the user does that with the Evolution, the machine will cut power to the element. But depending on cool-down, it could still fry without flow-thru. I wouldn't be surprised if the Vaporfection might do something similar.

So comparing this to a forced-air system like, say, the Q is really apples-oranges. The fan in the Q plays no role in cooling whatsoever; it's cooling is passive. The Q's heating system apparently does a very good job of thermal watt conversion and containment, so it doesn't throw off a lot of heat outside of the path and that heat is above the electronics. The enclosure provides ample space and surface area for safe dissipation.

Seems to me then that the re-design of the Novus to the ViVape is much more about the aesthetics and whiz-bang touchscreen.

About the 700w number, I don't know where that comes from but I agree, that's a lot of juice - and heat.

 

[max]

where does the 700 watt specification come from? seems kind of excessive to me.

I don't know why it has to be so beefy, but I remember the number from previous versions.

Seems to me then that the re-design of the Novus to the ViVape is much more about the aesthetics and whiz-bang touchscreen.

I'd agree. Seems like the new model was conceived in a marketing meeting rather than It's more of a glitzy tweak of the same old design, although the same old design is a good one. But it's not really new technology other than adding the bag fill and touchscreen.

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

I feel I should share with the community that I received a direct reply via personal email from Jonathan at Vaporfection in regard to my posts above following my initial inquiry to Vaporfection. He is a co-owner of the firm. I don't think it appropriate to go into all the details of our rather lengthy exchange, but as I indicated to him, I will do my best at providing an accurate and fair synopsis.

Let me say up front that I made clear that I was only speaking for myself. If I was out of school, mea culpa and I'll take my medicine.

Jonathan was not pleased, feeling that there was "over analysis", "assumptions", and "misunderstanding" on my part. He went on to describe how removing the whip disengages the vapor production while the temperature remains microprocessor controlled, and that the fan continues to operate in a safety cooling function.

I responded that the goal was to clarify the concern raised in previous reviews regarding "continuous vapor flow" with resulting "vapor loss"; that without any product documentation or presence here we were left to hypothesize, and that in any event any speculation was clearly identified as being such. But most importantly, that after discussion including my having been corrected by others, it was concluded that the unit operates just as he described and consequently any concerns about vapor loss or continuous air flow appeared to be satisfactorily resolved.

Jonathan was also unhappy with my characterization of his statement ("I assure you this is the best direct inhalation device period") as being "dogmatic". He referred to the "talent" and "success" of Vaporfecton's engineers, the "rigorous testing", the quality of the design and components, etc. He added that "Vaporfection would not release any product until it dominates the competition in almost every accolade" and that he "can safely say, in his opinion, it is without question the best direct inhalation vape there is", and that "Vaporfection is going to continue to change the vape world with constant innovation." He invited me to "buy one so you know what I mean".

In my response to that I shared that the FC community is extraordinarily experienced, sometimes sought out as beta testers for new products, has an expectation of good vendor information, and hence specifics and data are requested rather than simply accepting claims. I stood by my use of the term "dogmatic" because it is defined as "the expression of opinions very strongly as if they were facts", suggested that his private message was taking a similar approach, and then I referred him to the first part of max's post 116.

I concluded with best wishes for success with their new products, and he responded with a thanks for my honest feedback.

All I want to add at this point is, I don't wanna do this again.

PS. I also noted for Jonathan that there were open questions re the 700w specification. Beyond that, there was no discussion on this point.

 

[max]

Vaporfection is going to continue to change the vape world with constant innovation

They've changed the vape world with a touch screen? I doubt it. They may end up with a dual mode vape that gives great performance in direct draw mode, but it'll take time to tell if it's gonna be reliable. And sooner or later someone's gonna open up one of these, and we'll see how isolated the air path is. So far models of this size, with all the fans and electronics, haven't fared well with the vapor path.

They've had years to try and dominate the competition, and they haven't even been able to dominate the Evolutions7, as far as I can tell. I have no idea of the sales figures for this company or others selling the high end whip units, but in the past these aren't the models that retailers have been hot to sell. We'll see how the vi and mi vapes do.

 

[OhTheAgony]

His email sounds just as pretentious as their adds to be honest.

Is he dutch btw? His name is.