Ascent Vaporizer by DaVinci

[OF]

I think that that is going out on a limb a little, I don't see enough evidence to make that claim.

I tend to agree. I don't know of a way to actually sense the load temperature except to put some sensor there like I am.

I see it as unfortunate delays because of slow heat transfer in. Much of that is dictated by the ceramic bowl and glass liner, neither of which transmits heat well at all. My guess is the very similar (design wise) BV2 will do much better when i get to that one because of the heavy metal bowl. Otherwise I think they're actually pretty similar really from a design standpoint.

I for sure don't think DV is trying to be deceptive, IMO that would be pretty shortsighted......they'd be sure to be found out if not by one of us by their competition?

I think 'the fleas come with the dog'.

Due to that belief, I believe that the firmware can be tweaked to better represent the actual behavior(s) of the ascent. Regardless of design.

Sorry, again I don't agree. The hardware to support this doesn't exist. How do you propose to sense a hit happening so you know when, how much, and for how long to lower the displayed temperature?

This one is not getting fixed in software. Not with what's evidently available in the design.

OF

 

[sxmokeUP]

I for sure don't think DV is trying to be deceptive, IMO that would be pretty shortsighted......they'd be sure to be found out if not by one of us by their competition?

Sorry, again I don't agree. The hardware to support this doesn't exist. How do you propose to sense a hit happening so you know when, how much, and for how long to lower the displayed temperature?

This one is not getting fixed in software. Not with what's evidently available in the design.

OF

What is your best guess as to why the temp jumps from 380-400 as an example? Like I asked earlier, "does it really heat that fast? And if so, why does it take do long for OF's tests to get back to 400?"

If that jump was was by 1 degree or 2 or even a 5 degree jump, I can see that happening very fast, but a 10 to 20 degree jump? Hmm.. Now if the ascent accurately displayed that instead of saying it was 400 and ready, the time would increase which should make the actual temp in the bowl higher, because it has been heated longer. Makes sense.

Can I make a request to take temps under the bowl while in use? Just under the 4 holes. Lets try to find out everything we can without actually cracking it open. ie where the temp diode is

So that leads me to my next point which i added to my previous post.

edit: wow, after reading this, especially the end, if this was by design, they failed at designing and developing the temp aspect.

Quoting OF again, "they'd be sure to be found out if not by one of us by their competition?"
And that is why I said their development of the temperature aspect of this product was a fail.

 

[JCat]

I have heard all these stories of decreased use, but have not experienced it. I have been going through an ounce a month for over 20 years. That did not change when I switched to vaping about 2 years ago.

From what I have read here, reduced consumption is common. But it is not guaranteed. Mine stayed the same.

I have the same experience ... consumption has stayed consistent and I've tried all types of vapes. Used to smoke glass bowls mostly though which are more conservative then joints, so the change may not have been as drastic. My consumption stays between 1.5-2.5g per day whether I smoke or vape but feel much better for it now that I vape exclusively. Also smell a lot less etc etc ... preaching to the choir

 

[baltik]

While it's certainly conjecture on my part whether Davinci intended to mislead or not, I think we can all agree that quoting heat up times at the element and omitting heat up times at where it actually counts (which are 4x longer) is misleading. I don't think a car manufacturer would get the benefit of the doubt by quoting EPA mileage on a downhill slope or stating a 0-60 time at the engine RPM level but not at the wheels. My point is that best case their marketing team was negligent in how they represented their product, worst case they were intentionally misrepresenting it to garner sales, neither is ok in my opinion.

I tend to agree. I don't know of a way to actually sense the load temperature except to put some sensor there like I am.

I disagree on this point, I have found other portable digitally controlled vaporizers do a very good job of this, my lowly Vapir n02 was bang on. I think that the bowl temperature can be approximated using an offsetting temperature algorithm, placing the sensor further away or simply shielding the sensor with a similar lining as the bowl. I am not an engineer but my point is that others with more crude designs have solved this issue a long time ago...

This forces me to consider the possibility that Ascent realized at some part of the design process that glass/ceramic lining forces an incredibly long heat-up time and significant heat loss between draws. They also most likely realized that if they went out and advertised "4 minute heatup" and "60 seconds wait between draws" there wouldn't be a whole lot of demand and buzz for their product. So yes I am sure they can fix the temp readings to be more accurate but the question is do they want to because that will make the 4+ minute heat up time obvious to everyone...

Yes I realize there is a lot of conjecture there but the bread crumb trail is strong.

 

[Lazarus]

What is your best guess as to why the temp jumps from 380-400 as an example? Like I asked earlier, "does it really heat that fast? And if so, why does it take do long for OF's tests to get back to 400?"

If that jump was was by 1 degree or 2 or even a 5 degree jump, I can see that happening very fast, but a 10 to 20 degree jump? Hmm.. Now if the ascent accurately displayed that instead of saying it was 400 and ready, the time would increase which should make the actual temp in the bowl higher, because it has been heated longer. Makes sense.

Can I make a request to take temps under the bowl while in use? Just under the 4 holes. Lets try to find out everything we can without actually cracking it open. ie where the temp diode is

So that leads me to my next point which i added to my previous post.


Quoting OF again, "they'd be sure to be found out if not by one of us by their competition?"
And that is why I said their development of the temperature aspect of this product was a fail.

Let's not forget that we are pulling air that is a lot Colder through a heating chamber.

 

[OF]

What is your best guess as to why the temp jumps from 380-400 as an example? Like I asked earlier, "does it really heat that fast? And if so, why does it take do long for OF's tests to get back to 400?"

Can I make a request to take temps under the bowl while in use? Just under the 4 holes. Lets try to find out everything we can without actually cracking it open. ie where the temp diode is

Quoting OF again, "they'd be sure to be found out if not by one of us by their competition?"
And that is why I said their development of the temperature aspect of this product was a fail.

I'm sorry, I don't know what " temp jumps from 380-400" you're talking about. I don't recall saying I'd seen any such jump up in temperature. Yes, some larger fast drops in temperature but the rate of climb I saw was on the order of less than a degree a second going from 380 to 390, and the last ten degrees takes maybe a full minute? Hardly a jump in my book.

If the question is why does it take so long to recover after a hit, the answer is, I think, for the same reason it takes much longer to make the same temperature increase when coming up from cold, nasty old Thermodynamics again....heat has to flow from hot to cold at a rate determined by the conditions.

Heat can't transfer through all the insulation (including the bulk of the load itself) to move that temperature up very fast at all. Drops, OTOH, are an entirely different thing. As our brother member points out:

Let's not forget that we are pulling air that is a lot Colder through a heating chamber.

This is, of course, the very reason you can blow out a match or candle. It's very easy to remove heat in such conditions quickly with a blast of cold air (convection) but the time to replace it by conduction through such a long and resisting path is much longer.

If you can tell me what "temp jumps from 380-400" you're talking about perhaps I have some possible explanation to suggest, but no guesses there's plenty of that already IMO.

As to the request to measure air temperature outside the bowl (under it) I'll consider it but I can assure you the sensor is not there (it would have to have been fired into the ceramic under the glaze) and I seriously doubt it's a diode used to sense temperature......what makes you think so? Of the available sensor types I know of (have used) it would be my last choice for the temperature range (diodes won't take the heat and need messy individual calibration to give the precision called for). Dollars to doughnuts it's a thermistor, sometimes called a RTD (like what Solo does in the same application) and for sure it's not located there.

I believe the area just outside the inlet holes sees the same sort of rapid drop as the center of the load as cold air is drawn though the grill past it.

On the last point, I get it you think this is a sham and doesn't work as advertised, I just don't agree with the details. I think (even though I haven't measure it) that changing the temperature setting eventually changes the heat in the load. Raise the setting and the load goes up by about 'the right amount'. To me that makes the variable temperature feature real. It's just not working in the details like you think it should?

You suggested earlier that a software change could be made to give more accurate indications. Prompting me to ask, "How do you propose to sense a hit happening so you know when, how much, and for how long to lower the displayed temperature?". In exchange, could you please answer that? TIA.

While it's certainly conjecture on my part whether Davinci intended to mislead or not, I think we can all agree that quoting heat up times at the element and omitting heat up times at where it actually counts (which are 4x longer) is misleading.

Read what you want into it (but I recommend you be ready to defend such ideas) but again you can make some vapor at that point, right? They're not lying if they say 'can make vapor in XX seconds'? You're confusing some production with the maximum production some guys crave I think. IMO an important point. I'm trying to explain why sipping on it works well while honking on it doesn't and think I may be being misquoted?

I disagree on this point, I have found other portable digitally controlled vaporizers do a very good job of this, my lowly Vapir n02 was bang on. I think that the bowl temperature can be approximated using an offsetting temperature algorithm, placing the sensor further away or simply shielding the sensor with a similar lining as the bowl. I am not an engineer but my point is that others with more crude designs have solved this issue a long time ago....

Interesting. I don't know the n02. On what do you base this assertion? How did you measure it? Why is it you know "others with more crude designs have solved this issue a long time ago...."? I think such errors both ways (let's remember, Solo load temperature goes up with hitting) exist and folks just are unaware of it because they're not actually measuring what's going on.....could be wrong, of course, but I've shown I think my reasons for thing so?

And I'll ask the same question again, what specifically do you suggest can be used to determine how much offset to show when to show it and for how long if you can't measure the 'heat load' of the unknown hit and it's timing? What is the algorithm and what's it based on? IMO the sensor changes you suggest 'don't feed the bull dog'. Hitting is a dynamic condition under the control of the user. Both the timing and the levels. Consider the case when you open the bedroom window and let cold air in at night. How does the thermostat in another room know how much cold air comes in and when? IMO it doesn't. And while it may have represented the bedroom temperature well before the window was opened, it no longer does after that happens. After the window is closed, the system recovers and the reading is more accurate again. Same as with Ascent?

I get it that looking for a 'smoking gun' to condemn the Ascent design can be attractive, but I don't think I've shown that. Rather, I think, I've explained the observation that sipping works better. Or, looked at the other way, why hitting it hard and fast doesn't work as well? Simply put the rush of cold air quickly takes parts of the load 'off line' production wise as the temperature drops out of the magic range. It's a rate issue, remove the time factor and there's no 'problem'.

Use a different heating system, like TV's heat core convection vapes, and you get the opposite effect,. The harder you hit it the hotter it gets since the air being drawn into the load is above 400F not under it.

Edit: OK, in response to the request below I just ran that test:

Can I make a request to take temps under the bowl while in use? Just under the 4 holes. Lets try to find out everything we can without actually cracking it open. ie where the temp diode is

As you might expect cooling by the outside air leads to a lower temperature, in the 350 to 360F range when I measured it, depending in part on orientation of the unit.

The same sort of ten second draw runs the temperature down to the 220 to 240F range over several runs.

I'm not sure what that shows in terms of sensors (except to say it's not there apparently), but there's the answer I found.

OF

 

[stickstones]

I'm sorry I haven't put in the time to read all the text here about the temp measurements and conclusions, but skimming them made me want to share my user experiences with the beta unit.

I found the temp worked fine and heated up quickly. I wouldn't let it sit much longer after the temp was hit due to smell and vapor loss. A Solo-like draw speed worked best, but it could function with a stronger pull. A little break in between hits always helped, but not a long break...maybe ten or fifteen seconds.

If there are temp discrepancies with the first batch of units, that's not surprising given the many QC issues with that batch. A properly functioning Ascent is a very nice vaporizer and I believe any issues to be QC related, not a function of bad or deceptive business practices.

 

[baltik]

Interesting. I don't know the n02. On what do you base this assertion? How did you measure it? Why is it you know "others with more crude designs have solved this issue a long time ago...."? I think such errors both ways (let's remember, Solo load temperature goes up with hitting) exist and folks just are unaware of it because they're not actually measuring what's going on.....could be wrong, of course, but I've shown I think my reasons for thing so?

And I'll ask the same question again, what specifically do you suggest can be used to determine how much offset to show when to show it and for how long if you can't measure the 'heat load' of the unknown hit and it's timing? What is the algorithm and what's it based on? IMO the sensor changes you suggest 'don't feed the bull dog'. Hitting is a dynamic condition under the control of the user. Both the timing and the levels. Consider the case when you open the bedroom window and let cold air in at night. How does the thermostat in another room know how much cold air comes in and when? IMO it doesn't. And while it may have represented the bedroom temperature well before the window was opened, it no longer does after that happens. After the window is closed, the system recovers and the reading is more accurate again. Same as with Ascent?

I get it that looking for a 'smoking gun' to condemn the Ascent design can be attractive, but I don't think I've shown that. Rather, I think, I've explained the observation that sipping works better. Or, looked at the other way, why hitting it hard and fast doesn't work as well? Simply put the rush of cold air quickly takes parts of the load 'off line' production wise as the temperature drops out of the magic range. It's a rate issue, remove the time factor and there's no 'problem'.
OF

As always I appreciate your work on this and find your factual findings invaluable. I certainly don't expect any manufacturer to approximate the temperature of the load during a hit - as you pointed out waay too many variables. But during initial heatup I expect the load to approximate the stated temp on the OLED. If your vaporizer says it's at 400 degrees I would expect the substance I am vaporizing to be close to that temperature as well.. I think that's a fair assumption as the end user, after all why bother to have a digital readout if it's not representative of the temperature you are actually vaporizing at? Also do we agree that a 4 minute heatup time on an a vaporizer that advertises 60 seconds is sub optimal?

 

[mewash2]

Mine doesn't take nearly that long to heat up, nor do I need to wait more than a few seconds between hits. I find it comparable to my solo, My solo is ready to go when the 3rd light is lit but the clouds get bigger a few minutes into a session. Part of this may be the load drying out, or the bowl just needing awhile after reaching temp to constantly maintain that temp.

 

[VaPeD&CoNfUsEd]

Mine either mewash.

 

[sxmokeUP]

Hey OF, thanks for the discussions.

I'm sorry, I don't know what " temp jumps from 380-400" you're talking about. I don't recall saying I'd seen any such jump up in temperature. Yes, some larger fast drops in temperature but the rate of climb I saw was on the order of less than a degree a second going from 380 to 390, and the last ten degrees takes maybe a full minute? Hardly a jump in my book.

If you can tell me what "temp jumps from 380-400" you're talking about perhaps I have some possible explanation to suggest, but no guesses there's plenty of that already IMO.

Did a search for Ascent 380 400 jump, looked past the last few days and found:

Unfortunately, the temperature display issue is not helped by a reset. I will set it to 390f for example, and it will climb slowly from say 345 to 359, maybe 363 or something, and then jump right to 390 with the coffee cup when I know it's not there because there's no difference. Worse, it seems to give up or something because it never gets to 390 unless I set it to 420, but it's quite inconsistent so these again are just examples and nothing to rely on. These issues can be confirmed with a quick reset, which will usually give me a current temperature display.

AND

Sometimes the temperature guage abruptly skips a section while heating up. For example, If I set it to 420, it will count up normally until it gets to like 390, then it will immediately jump up to 420. Not a big deal, as long as it's internally accurate.

----

I seriously doubt it's a diode used to sense temperature......what makes you think so? Of the available sensor types I know of (have used) it would be my last choice for the temperature range (diodes won't take the heat and need messy individual calibration to give the precision called for). Dollars to doughnuts it's a thermistor, sometimes called a RTD (like what Solo does in the same application) and for sure it's not located there.

My apologizes, I must admit I have no knowledge in that area and assumed they were one and the same.

On the last point, I get it you think this is a sham and doesn't work as advertised, I just don't agree with the details. I think (even though I haven't measure it) that changing the temperature setting eventually changes the heat in the load. Raise the setting and the load goes up by about 'the right amount'. To me that makes the variable temperature feature real. It's just not working in the details like you think it should?
You suggested earlier that a software change could be made to give more accurate indications. Prompting me to ask, "How do you propose to sense a hit happening so you know when, how much, and for how long to lower the displayed temperature?". In exchange, could you please answer that? TIA.

Edit: OK, in response to the request below I just ran that test:
As you might expect cooling by the outside air leads to a lower temperature, in the 350 to 360F range when I measured it, depending in part on orientation of the unit.
The same sort of ten second draw runs the temperature down to the 220 to 240F range over several runs.
I'm not sure what that shows in terms of sensors (except to say it's not there apparently), but there's the answer I found.
OF

Thanks for the test anyway. I thought the heating element was on the bottom or very close to, but like you said, it is not. As I understand it, the thermistor is so deep in the unit that we cannot find it currently. There is also no change in the OLED temp readout when drawn from. Going by one logic is that the thermistor does not change in temp value because it is so insulated. Another logic (strewn together by various statements of temp issues quoted above) is that the firmware is not functioning as designed. If there is any slight variation in that thermistor when drawn from; a 1 degree drop even, a smart firmware designer would ask, why is the temp dropping when heating. That could be the indicator that someone is using it and adjust firmware accordingly. If we find the heating element and test it, great but difficult. This is based on MY reasoning.

If solving the problem now using hardware, I would put something to detect air movement like a mini curtain that sways and detects or something more technologically advanced like an accelerometer for air.

 

[Snake Plissken]

I am pretty confused as to why you would need to take a solo like (milkshake) draw on a wide open unit. Not needing (supposedly) this type of draw was one of the things that initially attracted me to the ascent.

I'm w/ sxmokeup on having trouble believing these temp discrepancies are accidental.

I don't remember the exact numbers, but the issue was so commonplace that is moot. I would try to heat up to say 400. The guage would crawl to about 370-380 then immediately 'jump' to 400. If at this point you try to bump up the temp to say 420, the guage would start at whatever lower temperature it believed itself to be at (not sure this was accurate either). In other words, even though it was telling me my temp was 400 during use, it would start to increase the temp from 370-380 when asked to bump up.

So my question was, if it knew it was only 370-380, why would it display 400? IME, this is not typical behavior and a temp guage is not smart enough to be deceptive on it's own. It does however seem quite possible to set a 20 degree parameter when programming/engineering. ie: if machine is w/in this 20 degree range, display higher # - or, display user chosen # when w/in 20 degrees. The fact that it knows it is not 400, but displays that temp anyway does not seem like a situation that occurs organically.

Most likely people would not want a vape whose temp readout was in constant fluctuation, so some tweaking is understandable.

OF: any thoughts on the heat from the lower portion of the unit? If nothing else, seemed like it was poorly insulated to me.

 

[OF]

There is also no change in the OLED temp readout when drawn from. Going by one logic is that the thermistor does not change in temp value because it is so insulated. Another logic (strewn together by various statements of temp issues quoted above) is that the firmware is not functioning as designed. If there is any slight variation in that thermistor when drawn from; a 1 degree drop even, a smart firmware designer would ask, why is the temp dropping when heating. That could be the indicator that someone is using it and adjust firmware accordingly. If we find the heating element and test it, great but difficult. This is based on MY reasoning.

If solving the problem now using hardware, I would put something to detect air movement like a mini curtain that sways and detects or something more technologically advanced like an accelerometer for air.

Ah, so!

Well there's also another explanation for it I think, it doesn't indicate what you think it does? I think it's showing the user two things, first it's ready to make vapor (with the cup icon) which arguably it is and then it uses the numbers to tell you what the setting is. Not the temperature any longer after the 'countdown to vapor' is done? IMO sound 'human engineering' that way. What does the user want to know? At first it's 'how is the warm up doing'. A thermometer and the numeric value are shown. When it gets there (within a narrow window, remember it 'crawls to temperature' at the end) it drops the thermometer icon and shows the other and switches the display is what I think is going on. It changes modes.

I assumed this from the start (probably why it never bothered me), after all it never drops under heavy hitting does it? Yet we know some drop has to happen to add more heat to make up for the sudden losses. Reading the manual (not a common guy thing....) seems to support this. If it had a temperature set knob like say the HA does, it's showing you what that setting is after it starts making vapor.

I don't think the software is trying to show you what you think it is once it's made temperature. It's reminding the user what setting it's on so he/she can decide to use it or change it.

With the thermometer icon it's showing what a thermometer would measure, when the 'making vapor' icon is showing it's telling you what the setting is (the stuff important at the time). If I were king I'd have gone with two different fonts or something to help the understanding I think, but nobody asked me.

Thanks for explaining what you meant. I agree, it's not taking a ten degree jump and suddenly achieving impossible temperature regulation.....I think it changed modes with the icon shift.

Most likely people would not want a vape whose temp readout was in constant fluctuation, so some tweaking is understandable.

OF: any thoughts on the heat from the lower portion of the unit? If nothing else, seemed like it was poorly insulated to me.

Yup, that's my thinking too.....only you said it simpler which is good. Sometimes concepts get though that way after failing using other words.

"Most likely people would not want a vape whose temp readout was in constant fluctuation, so some tweaking is understandable."

I agree also, better insulation would slow it (but not stop it of course), but that would add to the bulk which I'm sure was not allowed by 'the suits'. If you get more room, you can do things like Solo does (convection cooled bands around the hot part), but I suspect there's not enough room here. I assume there's a metal shell for the heater with the element and sensor. Then there's a rubber seal. Then a glass surface (most likely), the ceramic wall, and another glass wall before the load. That's a long way for the heat to go that other makes avoid (for sound reasons, IMO).

By the time you do all that there's not much left for insulation on the outside of the assembly and still get the covers on. The prior model of DV suffers the same problems (ever try to find a good place to hang onto that sucker when it gets going?)......I suspect it's an old friend to the engineers there.

Thanks for the perspective.

OF

 

[Dreamerr]

Maybe you can explain why three units sticks, vapes and mewash don't work as we reported. That doesn't seem logical to me.
I do think the unit is as advertised but we put our own spin on it and made it something it isn't maybe.
I really don't get how sticks uses a solo draw and it works as I had to go much slower if you can believe that and shorter then my normal short draw which became really annoying to me.

 

[stickstones]

@Dreamer

sounds to me like you have a defective unit

 

[Dreamerr]

It is the same one OF is testing...I had it first.

 

[stickstones]

maybe he should be testing a confirmed operational unit.

 

[OF]

maybe he should be testing a confirmed operational unit.

But I think it is you see? I think it works just fine, as designed. And more to the point, I think Nigel (the owner) has two units so would know better than any of us if it was 'normal'? He's at least used two? I think two randomly selected units that agree are about as close to 'normal' as we can get. I sure don't consider this one defective, or exceptional.

IMO you and I agree closely. If I did it the way you do I'd expect those same results. By letting it idle longer I'm finding a different set of results, but not really all that different. In terms of them being more or less alike in key areas (like size and placement of holes) and seal integrity I doubt there's any practical differences. Likewise, I bet the heaters and controllers take the outside of the bowl to temperatures within a few degrees and batteries are uniform enough to keep the times nearly identical side by side. It's just a machine, and IMO a well designed one in some key respects.

This brings us to the issues of loads (both cure/grind and pack), temperature used, and personal technique. I think that's a far bigger set of variables, really.

If we did a 'blindfold test', do you think you could pick yours out? What do you think the differences in hardware would be?

OF

 

[stickstones]

I wasn't aware that a reliable percentage of the units coming out now were working as designed. Am I wrong?

 

[nigel]

has two units so would know better than any of us if it was 'normal'? He's at least used two?

Only if he was smart enough to have tested both side-by-side before shipping one off, rather than assuming they both functioned similarly.

He wasn't.


Someone else has both a stealth and a burl, however, and I believe they kept both.

I wasn't aware that a reliable percentage of the units coming out now were working as designed. Am I wrong?

You are not wrong.
(If you change your verb tense to "came out".)

The early units, like yours, seem to be fine. A group of the original run, also seem to be fine.

 

[Dreamerr]

Nigel I thought you tried it a few times and said it worked the same from your brief trial. I also don't see how there is a huge difference with the earlier pre large production units to those. The design is the same and we aren't talking about cosmetics here.

 

[nigel]

Nigel I thought you tried it a few times and said it worked the same from your brief trial. I also don't see how there is a huge difference with the earlier pre large production units to those. The design is the same and we aren't talking about cosmetics here.

Cursory comparison at best. If one presume that there are no differences, one doesn't look for them. (Was more concerned about the mystery vapor).


Keep in mind the units are all hand-assembled. On the production units we saw quite a bit of differences.

In the pre-production units, like what sticks had, those were probably done in very very small batches. Batches of 5? 1? 3? 10?

 

[stickstones]

I also don't see how there is a huge difference with the earlier pre large production units to those.

Not in design, but in QC, yes. My reasoning for believing this is all the complaints about the production units with problems that didn't exist on the beta units like mine.

 

[OF]

All good thoughts I think.

I see it as being basically two areas, mechanical and electrical. If the materials are 'right' (say right size holes in the right place) with no obvious defects serious enough to impact say airflow, and the electrical part gets the hot part to the right temperature they're basically all the same. If the basic bowl and stems don't change it doesn't matter what you heat them with.

I've got high confidence this one heats to 400F when asked to (even if that's hotter than I'd normally like). If the next one is a few degrees off from this one (but stable) that only means an adjustment in requested temperature.

Honest failures are just that of course. I don't think there's a 'not very good' here?

I too see no reason why the basic units shouldn't be 'peas in a pod' matches as far as performance. The things that really matter (size and placement of holes, materials used, integrity of seals, temperature accuracy, battery life and so on) are the same (within reason) so the units made from them are likewise the same for our discussion?

Edit: Hey, one other wild thought for those who've played with this guy, does it seem to 'burn' through the weed fast to you? It's nice enough and all, but half or less of the Ascent bowl in the Solo say is about as useful I think. Likewise, that same 1/8 gram load in MFLB. I don't think any is really escaping, but it's probably not a good choice if weed gets lean for you?

OF

 

[grokit]

^ That was my main reason for returning the ascent for a refund, beside the inconsistent heating. It just wasn't efficient at all for me, and I hate wasting material.