Discussion in 'Ask FC' started by MauiWowee, Jan 20, 2009.
Can someone please explain this for a newbie?
in conduction, heat is applied directly to the herb, the heat then conducts into the herb and caueses the resin glands to boil
this method is inefficient and often ineffective, as the amount of resin that boils is limited to the amount of herb is limited by how much herb can come in direct contact with the heating source. many conduction vaporizers will also overheat, scorching the herb and tasting badly
with convection, heated air (usually around 350f) is passed through the herb, the herb absorbs the heat from the air and the resin heads thoughout all the herb ar boiled off, creating thicker vapor with less herb
convection is better than conduction because the hot air passes through much more surface area of the herb, you dont have to wait for a chamber to fil in order to take a hit, as convection vaporizers heat the air that comes in from ambient temperatures to vapoizing temperatures
btw, you dont need to create so many threads, us fuckers read all new posts because our forum is small enough that we dont have to ignore anything
this should really become more apparent to people when theres pretty much 3 subforms
and why not read about vapor info! i say YAY to it...get even higher
I've never vaporized cannabis but have smoked bowls, joints, and bongs and eaten edibles. I'm trying to decide between the Arizer Solo (more conduction based) and the Thermovape (more convection based) and am curious in the differences in the effects (the kind of high) between the two vaporization methods, convection and conduction (if any).
Convection is usually seen as "better" because the air itself is getting heated around the herb and usually the air flow *is supposed to* cause turbulence that vaporizes the bud uniformly. Also convection vaporizers usually feature "cleaner" air flow paths than most conduction vapes. Be it all metal/ceramic or all glass flow path or whatever.
Conduction is more when the actual bowl, chamber, screen or whatever the herb is laying in gets heated up so the parts of the herb that touches the heated surface gets vaporized. This is usually seen as less desirable because it vapes the herb unevenly and is more prone to getting to combustion temperatures due to user error.
Thanks for the fast reply. By effects, though, I was thinking more of the kind of high.
I don't think you should find many differences in the "type of high" between vaporizers themselves...after all they are both simply vaporizing the herb. Main difference in type of high is smoking vs vaporizing itself (or the temperature at which you vaporize the herb).
The main thing I can say is maybe how the vaporizer hits you, how efficient it is things like that.
If you are a big combustion person that maybe was a fan of Bongs and bubblers and stuff. Then you may want to look into vaporizer that you can use with a waterpipe of some sort. I personally use a bong with my whip-style vaporizer and it is extremely satisfying, equal to that of smoking directly out of a bong. Especially when you get used to using a vaporizer you can dial the heat up and down to get different effects.
Higher temperature vaporizing is usually more "stoney feeling" while lower temperature will activate most of the "euphoric" effects.
Convection seems to be seen as the new standard for vaporizing and I would assume most vaporizers that will be developed and released in the future will be trying to improve upon that.
There is also the matter of THC/CBD to consider, CBD will boil at a higher temperature and is the more "body high" part of the plant.
And I haven't used the Thermo or Solo but I have kept up somewhat on the Solo and have read every post in the Thermovape thread. They both seem to be great for producing big clouds on the go, but the thermo seems to be the more "versatile" of the two.
Yup, I agree with MW. The temperature is the main thing with vaporizing that determines the 'high'.
Personally, I stick to temps. lower than 200c in the day when I still have things to do and crank the heat up to 230c before bed. This allows me to be a bit 'lighter' in the day and not get 'heavy' till the evening.
Also, water filtration makes a big difference when hitting the high c. It can 'tickle' the throat a bit and the water helps to minimise the 'tickle'.
What should really be determining which vape you get will be how you plan on using it. Certain vapes are easier than others to use with water, some have excellent battery life, some are good for solo use while others are great for groups. So, ask your self 'how' and it might help your decision.
If it makes any difference the ThermoVape manufacturer assured a Glass on Glass connector for 14mm and 18mm would be created and released fairly soon.
Well I just got the Arizer Solo and am pretty impressed so far! Hadn't known about the difference of convection vs conduction, but if your trying to get something similar to a traditional whip or bag style vape, but portable, I might go with the Arizer.
perfect. now they need to make it so you can plug it directly in and bypass the battery section all together....
I don't think the Arizer Solo is primarily a conduction vape. I think it's a convection vape.
Yes, the herbs are in contact with a hot metal surface, but the main vaporization seems to take place as heated air is drawn through them, which is convection. I think the main role of the heated "cup" the stem sits in is to prevent heat loss as the hot air is drawn into the space.
Also, I have not used the Thermovape, but I've had a Solo for about a week now and I am seriously digging it. My previous vapes have been an Aromazap, Vapor Brothers, Vapor Genie, and a homemade DIY heatgun/valveset arrangement that has been my main rig for years.
that's also in the works!
Ancient thread resurrection....
This would suggest that a convection vape almost has/needs a positive airflow to pull warm air through the herb.
For example, in the case of the Cera, the heater is right under the herb - it is billed as convection, but the proximity of the herb to the heater would suggest conduction. I'm confused....
The position of the herb is similar in the INH, yet this is billed as conduction.
Can anyone put me right?
EDIT: Just seen the latest video from the Cera team - I would like to pair the Aqua Vape glass with whichever I buy - the really long draws, and slightly thinner clouds of the Cera to my eye may not work as well as the INH? Another factor to consider...
Hey vk2003, interestingly enough I've been thinking the exact same thing in regards to the Aqua Vape and the INH I recently purchased. (I've also been considering a smooth flow as a more portable option than an aqua vape when required ...). I've been using my Cloud's Hydratube with a little stubby GonG adapter I've rigged up for my INH (just for fun to put the INH through the paces, but also a quick way to medicate if I don't have time to wait for the Cloud to heat up)
With conduction you heat some kind of platform that is in direct contact with the herb and thus, heats the herb directly.
With convection, you heat the air somewhere before the bowl and it is the hot air that heats the herb, not the bowl that is hot.. although with many vaporizers the bowl gets hot too so we agree that a mix of conduction AND convection is ocurring.
And there are no vaporizer models these days (other than the cheap, outdated dome vape design, ie. BC Vaporizer) that have this inferior 'cook only one side' design. You may have to shake/stir with some models, in order to get all the herb exposed to the heat, but that's the case with some convection only designs, like the SSV. My DaVinci portable has some conduction heating, since the sides of the heating chamber/bowl are metal and provide heat, but if that weren't the case, and the sides of the chamber didn't transfer heat, the vape would still be just as effective and efficient. It would just take slightly longer to heat the bowl, with convection heat only.
So unlike the old 'hot plate' design, where you had to flip the herb like a burger to get both sides heated, today's models are quite efficient, whether they're convection only or a combination of the two designs. The only real downside to conduction now is that you're getting heat while the vape isn't being hit.
What is a smooth flow?
Most importantly, they both get the job done
The aqua vape is similar to the Cloud's hydratube and would be the better option for at home use but can be spilt, water can be blown into the vaporizer, can't really be pocketed while out and about ... etc.
The smooth flow is a water "conditioning" tip that is an accessory to the Thermovape products and you dunk it in water and it absorbs some water I believe into a ceramic disc that then moisturizes and cools your vapor on the way through. Since Thermovape doesn't currently have it on their site here's a link to a retailer's site:
Edit: Ok ... for you non-Canadian customers, looks like Thermovape has them on their site again too:
I thought the pushback ring pretty well eliminated that problem.
Oh, you meant those other conduction vapes...
My purpose of this thread is to challenge the notion that conduction is somehow inferior to convection.
I see no difference between the extraction potential of each, and am at a loss of how members have been coming to this conclusion.
I started with conduction style vapes and found them to be far more potent then convection style vapes I had tried soon after, though it has nothing to do with the difference between conduction or convection, so since then I have always wondered why everyone favors convection.
Could someone provide me some EVIDENCE to back up the common claim?
I get stoned off of both, so I'm a fan of either. Convection has much better taste IMO, but they both work fine for me.
It depends on individual requirements/tastes. What may be viewed as inferior to one person, may be superior to another. There are many things I like and dislike about both methods. At the end of the day, nobody is really wrong in this debate...it's about what works for you as an individual.
Separate names with a comma.