Objectively Comparing Vapes

cybrguy

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
There are so many vapes out there now, with very different methods of vaporizing (extracting) the actives in MJ flowers. All these difference make it very hard to objectively compare one vape to another. I think it would be very useful to develop a standard that could be applied to measure the effectiveness of a given vape while being totally agnostic to the extraction method.

@thekarmawhore is the main engineer for the Zion Vape which in nearing production. He has developed a way to describe and quantify how his design produces vapor in a manner that seems quite objective. He calls it a "Session Map", and I think this may be close if not just what we need to get better at objectively comparing different vapes. I would LOVE to see some others with different vapes in this class (or any class) follow this method to describe how their vapes work and produce vapor.
http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/7a3d/w3e7w6ovew7v5526g.jpg
w3e7w6ovew7v5526g.jpg


I would think "Power Level" could easily be replaced with temp, if that is available, or clock position if it is not. Things like "flavor rating" will still be subjective, but will also be relative within a given "Session Map".

Obviously, if Mods think this should be elsewhere, feel free...
 
Last edited:
cybrguy

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
I wonder how we could put this out in front of folks to see if anyone might be willing to use it. it's a great idea, but for naught if nobody uses it. Obviously TKW is motivated to do it as a vendor, but users will tend not to be...

Edit: And to make it REALLY objective it should be done by the same person, but we know THAT isn't gonna happen.
 
Last edited:
Alt101

Alt101

Well-Known Member
In my opinion, the problem with rating things "objectively" is that we are still using measurements like "flavour" which is completely subjective. If you were looking for purely objective ratings for a range of vapes you would want to use the same cannabis in each and do a chemical analysis of the vapor of each, at each heat setting.

Obviously, that's unrealistic for the average Joe to do.
 
cybrguy

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Of course you are right if we were trying to do a completely realistic scientific study. Real science is a lot of work. That isn't really what we are after. We are just looking for a RELATIVELY objective way to compare vapes to one another to help people make decisions on what too get for given needs/desires. Precision would be nice, but not really necessary for our objective. Even doing this casually is a lot to ask folks to do for this project. We don't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good, so to speak. Too much rigor will certainly drive testers away.
 
Last edited:
lwien

lwien

Well-Known Member
steama said:
This is a good idea. The more participants the better the data would be especially on rating something like vapor quality. A vapor quality rating would be important to include even if the data is subjective it is still of great value. The more ratings the more accurate the rating.

I think a good way to approach this is with categories like: vapor quality, conduction, convection, portability, semi-portable, stealth, desktop, torch powered, battery powered, warranty and more relevant categories of interest. You could have as many categories as you needed.

This way a person could look at a specific category they are interested in and see how vaporizers compare in that specific category. Some vapes will be in several categories for example the PAX 2 could be in portability, stealth, and battery powered. Ratings would be from the highest scores to the lowest in each category.

:tup:
Click to expand...

Kinda like a master poll, eh?

Just one of the problems that I see with this though is that one's opinions change over time. The answers that I would have given in regards to my MV would be quite a bit different today than what it was a week ago when I first got it. Also, those opinions would change when one uses other vapes to compare it to, in other words, I may have given my LSV a 10 in the taste department but would now score it lower since having my MV.

Such is the problems with polls and rating systems and is one of the things I take issue with on Buzz's site.
 
CuckFumbustion

CuckFumbustion

Lo and Behold! The transformative power of Vapor.
The whole idea of some sort of chart should be to clarify. As some of you touched upon there is a subjective
thing regarding a flavor scale. and then theres the whole YMMV factor.

To clarify, The density of the vapor should be a well defined and separate category than what is considered "flavor". The flavor should address things like plastic, burning or weird aftertaste. A really good convection would probably score high marks. for example. Something with inconsistent results or allowing for a little burning like a cheap pen vape. Low marks.

Another factor, the temp of the vapor affects the taste and thickness. While getting to know my PAX over time, I have had vapor with the taste consistency/thickness of butter, cream, tea and then mist. By playing around with a single vaporizer I can get this type of range. Not sure how that would measure up to some sort of scale.

Completely Subjective, I do think I have acquired a palette change due to gaining experience. And I finally got to know better the desired "sipping tea" method. Another wrinkle to add to the flavor discussion.
 
Last edited:
AhBeVapin

AhBeVapin

Mindful Member Wellness User
Hey now,
Been staring at this Session Map idea for couple of days. I think I like it.
Here are my interpretations:
Power level or temperature as described by @cybrguy above.
Cycle - inhalation process 10s heat, 10s draw, 5s cool or something to that effect or what @CuckFumbustion said.
Flavor rating - this one is key. I prefer the original concept as I understand it. Continuum of flavor. I.E Is there flavor or is there taste? Doesn't matter what it is, just that it's present and hold bold it is.
Exhaust = density of vapor on exhale
On the Notes, I think Soybean refers to the shade of Nug used. Not all greens are alike.
ABV per usual - I take that as the shade yielded based on time and power level
Flat response = nothing out of the ordinary during session.

I guess we all do this in one way or another as we fine tune our methods with our respective vapes.
I'm just not sure how you keep personal bias out of it.
Maybe Session Maps would provide value to those starting out with a vape you have no experience with or when you feel like you are in a rut with your current one.

I believe the following have to addressed in the exercise, humidity, load size/weight & draw speed. I'm just not sure how. Obviously performance mods would have to be properly accounted for.
I'll play along if others are inclined. I can map the Solo
ABV out
 
Last edited:
RUDE BOY

RUDE BOY

Space is the Place
I see. So the chart is the flow of one session/bowl over the span of 28 hit's, that makes a little more sense.

Still see no value of this for other then personal tracking of the performance of one vape while using the same batch of bud and actually find that info of little to no value.

grokit said:
Even with the mentioned drawbacks, having a place to gauge the overall consensus of these subjective categories would be a nice reference. I will answer said poll objectively and enthusiastically :tup:
Click to expand...


Well Sure it's fun to have Polls like this but with every category being subjective, fun as it sounds it'll end up no doubt just being another "favorite vape" pissing match.
 
Last edited:
D

Derrrpp

For the world is hollow and I have touched the sky
I think that this "session map" is a great idea in theory, but in practice it doesn't really provide any data that would be useful in comparing vapes. The only information I got from this one is that he got 28 hits from a load (which is completely dependent on how much material he started with) and that the flavor degraded over the course of the session (which is completely normal and expected).

With that being said, I do recognize the need/want to be able to easily and objectively compare different vaporizers. I just don't think it's happening here. Maybe this session map would be a good way to compare different individuals' experiences with one particular vape. Even then, the information would be completely subjective though.

The more I think about it, the more doubtful I am that it's even possible to objectively compare vapes in a simplified way like a spreadsheet... A person's experience with any given vape is so complex and dependent on personal taste and preferences that I don't think it could be objectively summarized. The best bet to compare vaporizers is, I'm starting to think, to just read through its thread here on FC. So in that sense, maybe the answer we've been looking for has been staring us in the face all along.
 
Alt101

Alt101

Well-Known Member
I threw together a quick generic survey for a vaporizer. This could be incorporated into each devices post in some way, to help keep all the results for each vape organized.

Questionnaire: http://goo.gl/forms/oHXSYzHx00
Responses: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hqcIa9Pu1ErjHPWsCXwcfbPlxgOL_WGGr2lzcZAUw9o

Give it a look and let me know what you think

Derrrpp said:
ink that this "session map" is a great idea in theory, but in practice it doesn't really provide any data that would be useful in comparing vapes. The only information I got from this
Click to expand...

I could see a poll / rating questionnaire being useful per vape. This would give a quick way to gauge a overall user satisfaction on any given vape. It isn't about "what vaporizer is the best" but how users like a vaporizer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
grokit

grokit

well-worn member
RUDE BOY said:
I see. So the chart is the flow of one session/bowl over the span of 28 hit's, that makes a little more sense.
Yes but a hit for me may be a dozen for you (not really me or u)

Still see no value of this for other then personal tracking of the performance of one vape while using the same batch of bud and actually find that info of little value.
I can see the value of a comparative consensus,

Well Sure it's fun to have Polls like this but with every category being subjective, fun as it sounds it'll end up no doubt just being another "favorite vape" pissing match.
because it's comparing performance metrics rather than vaporizers themselves.
Click to expand...


Alt101 said:
I could see a poll / rating questionnaire being useful per vape. This would give a quick way to gauge a overall user satisfaction on any given vape. It isn't about "what vaporizer is the best" but how users like a vaporizer.
Click to expand...
And even particular aspects of that vaporizer, in comparison to others.
 
Last edited:
AhBeVapin

AhBeVapin

Mindful Member Wellness User
stickstones

stickstones

Vapor concierge
HD Springer

HD Springer

Well-Known Member
I think a poll like this one will get better as the more users input their opinions.The average will tell as close to the truth as a poll like this was meant to do.NOT a scientific poll but rather an in-the-field what to except with a vaporizer.As in life its definatly get out of it what you put into it type of deal.Thats how I see it.
 
slick

slick

Well-Known Member
All this talk of taking many individually subjective truths and turning them into generally accepted objective truths has got my scholarly side all hot and bothered.

If we could have everyone take those surveys....just think of the data sets and charts and graphs we could make! Maybe even more detail? Your average pack size, draw time, sessions before a deep clean, stir or not, etc etc.
 
Alt101

Alt101

Well-Known Member
slick said:
All this talk of taking many individually subjective truths and turning them into generally accepted objective truths has got my scholarly side all hot and bothered.

If we could have everyone take those surveys....just think of the data sets and charts and graphs we could make! Maybe even more detail? Your average pack size, draw time, sessions before a deep clean, stir or not, etc etc.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, I love a good data set. Having 300+ pages of discussion on a given vaporizer is great and all, but it's hard to really distill all of those thoughts and opinions down into something that is usable. Having a place where people can answer questions about the vape and all that information would be parseable makes me excited. So many good charts and graphs we could make. Sorry, I'm a bit of an analytics nerd haha

Edit: I'm happy to add any more questions people think would be valuable to ask.
 
Last edited:
h3rbalist

h3rbalist

I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to, too
How about an FC census?
I personally think it would be more useful, we could incorporate the individual vaporizer ratings within it somehow.

There could be a thread for question suggestions, then one for the census.

:shrug:
 
Beluga

Beluga

Only you can prevent ganja fires.
This is sort of off topic, but I really enjoy the "for sale", "for trade", etc. restricion labels in the classifieds. If someone would be able to add that to the portable and plug in forums I feel that would make it easier for a beginner to find what type of vaporizer they are looking for.

For example: adding "electric", "butane", "session", "on-demand", "convection", "conduction", etc. labels to make searching for that "perfect vape for me" easier.

That's a whole lot of quotation marks. :lol:
 
Hippie Dickie

Hippie Dickie

The Herbal Cube
Manufacturer
cybrguy said:
I would LOVE to see some others with different vapes in this class (or any class) follow this method to describe how their vapes work and produce vapor. ... I would think "Power Level" could easily be replaced with temp, if that is available
Click to expand...

i don't see how to relate power level to temp ... if i know my heater is at 385F (which i do know) ... well, is that what the chart is meant to record? i.e. the session characteristics at each temperature level, say in 5F increments ... i'm not so sure that is useful.

it seems most FCers talk (in the various device threads) about either the low temp extraction and "blast me to the moon" high temp vaping ... and i've adopted a similar approach: i normally opt for just shy of 390F for best extraction, reasonably short session, coolest vapor ... thinking about it, i guess there is some technique required, in that a slower hit produces thicker vapor than a faster hit.

and how about the draw tube? ... the 25 mm tube is a very different experience from the 16mm tube ... more like a bong and supports a bigger, faster hit.

or so it seems to me ... all very subjective, me thinks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom