Fearless Disaster
Well-Known Member
please delete, trying to combine posts
Went back ~100 pages to the last ZXL drop to make sure this is the right Z for me. It was mentioned the ZX's smaller design with an optimal load of ~100mg will be smoother than the same amount in a ZXL due to a larger % of the bowl being filled with material.
When using the ZXL at its sweet spot, say 200mg, will we see that same ZX smoothness return with the fuller bowl? Or are we looking at a "harsher" hit relative to the ZX regardless of qty consumed ?
My individual bowl sizes are around 100 - 130mg and it takes two of them, usually, to be where I want to be. Smaller bowls provide a better, tastier extraction with my current setup, but I'd rather be able to load 200-250mg and have a mega tasty one hitter with a clean up. Given the ZXL is released far less often than the ZX I think it's a "safer" choice in that it will be easier to snag a ZX in the future if that's where my consumption takes me and I won't be kicking myself for missing out on the L![]()
Sounds like a winning formula (and like I'll be buying two bowls...and a stand). Thanks!A bit hard to say as it's rather subjective as well as this new ZXL will have the option of adding the 14MM bowl which is aimed at smaller doses.
It's about half the capacity of the 18MM ZXL bowl. Quite similar to the capacity of the 3 shelf ZX bowl at the largest setting.
I love to have a CH style holder. That would be sweet with my setup.the only trick when i looked into them is that the metric ones (16mm, etc) may have metric threads in the hole so you might have to find the closest fitting imperial one to get imperial threads. If I recall, one of the metric sizes (m4? m5?) is close enough to the threaded handles that we use that it can be used.
I love that second one! the changeable disc is a great idea. tracking down titanium heatposts in certain sizes is a pita!
+1Sounds like a winning formula (and like I'll be buying two bowls...and a stand). Thanks!