I agree, it's not like a Dynavap at all. My assumption is the sweet spot for applying heat to create a longer vapour production window is somewhere between 40-60 seconds. It's been my experience that anything beyond that would be subject to diminishing returns and risks combustion. I guess I should have clarified that I consider a "slow" heat up to be somewhere in the 45-60 second range and what I consider fast is 25-35. This all depends on your torch and flame size too of course, so it's all relative. My set up results in 40 second heat ups to the click from cold on a full chamber and yields 30+ second windows through glass consistently. I posted a pic earlier in the thread illustrating my set up for testing using the exact same parameters, (load amount, flame size) in order to gauge how many cycles a Firefox could output:
I found even a smaller flame size properly placed can yield good results. Do you find the more aggressive heating results in longer vapour production windows? To be fair, when I heat that way I'm typically trying to extract as quickly as possible so I don't really make note of heat retention specifically in those instances.
On a different note, Does anyone have any thoughts on the device being conduction vs. convection? I noticed John mentioned that it's mostly a convection device in the Sneaky Pete interview. I think the idea was that the herb decarboxylates from ambient heat as it's applied, but is primarily convection once a draw is taken and the air is forced through the chamber. I don't know how I'd characterize the vapour to be honest. It doesn't feel or taste like your "traditional" convection device like the Flowerpot, Herborizer or other injector style devices out there. But it also differs from conduction devices like the VapCap or even a Vapman. If the link isn't working properly, the section in question is at approximately 48:00 into the video:
To be clear, I'm not holding him at his 95%-98% convection statement. I'm not sure I agree, but I get that he's just estimating and throwing a number out there. The vapour is thick like you'd expect out of a conduction device, but doesn't quite have the same taste, that's the main thing that stops me from arguing that it's mainly conduction. I couldn't argue effectively against that, but it just doesn't "feel" like it's primarily or even possibly, mostly conduction. At the same time, it doesn't quite taste like a convection device, nor is the vapour profile identical in that regard either. I don't know, it's different at the very least.
I had to clean my unit yesterday and decided to re-assemble without the spiral. I reasoned that because I use mostly though water the added benefit would be minimal, but I was wrong. Even through my bubbler, I was finding the same type of hits were causing me some chest discomfort. I don't know if it was temperature, volume, vapour conditioning or a combination, but after re-inserting the spiral I'm finding it to be much more comfortable.