The Convection Thread

arb

Semi shaved ape
Cool, tell me more! Doesn't a lot get wasted sticking to the grinder surfaces? When did you decide to switch to a powder grind for convection vaping?
Two quick pulses is a course grind.
Four quick pulses is a fine grind exactly the same as a s&b grinder produces.
Some gets stuck on the machine but only so much and it scrapes off if it matters.
I like a fine grind about 5mm deep scoop loaded in a half inch bowl.
One big hit stir another one for cleanup and done.
 

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
@pretty-chill, thanks for the rundown!

That's pretty much exactly how I used to prep my fine grinds, except I skipped the pressing stage and went straight to the mesh screen. For those curious, this grinder tech is more commonly called a "card grinder", of which there are various hole sizes available.

And you've confirmed the low temp requirement that I found as well. Same page there!

I think the hot spotting with a fine grind is simply caused by using the same settings/techniques used for coarser grinds and then overheating as a result.

I find that coarse grinds are more tolerant to high heat and fast inhale speeds.

Once dialed in for a lower temp, super fine grinds do work wonderfully, and I still go back to them from time to time!

IME, coarse grinds produce a brighter cleaner taste... and I get more of those lemony, minty, gassy, etc.. terpenes coming forward.

Fine grinds mix in more of a deeper, earthy, creamy, taste.

On average, I aim to extract fine grinds slightly slower than coarse grinds.

I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but I go back and forth between preferring fine or coarse. I guess I have to settle for liking both, haha.

I think the key with any grind is to avoid wildly different particle sizes and dense balls of material.

Back to what @invertedisdead said about modern flower being super potent. A super easy way to drastically increase vape performance is to simply start with more trichome rich material. Like any other form of consumption (coffee, tea, food), the easiest way to increase the quality of the end result is to increase the quality of the raw ingredients.

A fine grind of high quality flower could be just as trichome rich as keif from lower quality flower. And for me, more than potent enough.

_________

What's next to talk about besides grind size? Chamber material? Stem cooling? Extraction temp?
 

invertedisdead

OG Baller
Like any other form of consumption (coffee, tea, food), the easiest way to increase the quality of the end result is to increase the quality of the raw ingredients.

More killer, less filler!! :wave:


I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but I go back and forth between preferring fine or coarse. I guess I have to settle for liking both, haha.

I think the key with any grind is to avoid wildly different particle sizes and dense balls of material.


The buds density may be a consideration for grind preference - fluffy sativa leaners in a course grind may work better than ultra dense "Humboldt Hardrock" as I call them with much unexposed internals at the same grind. Perhaps denser nugs could benefit from a finer grind for more exposed surface area. Playing on how sativas can take up twice as much volume in a jar due to vast density variances.

What's next to talk about besides grind size? Chamber material? Stem cooling? Extraction temp?

Whatever it is, sign me up!

This is like the best thread on FC right now. This is the old school FC vibe, getting down to the nitty gritty and sharing observations.

It's seriously wonderful to see some modern vapor discussions and not just "what battery should I get for my log vape" :rofl:
 

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
The buds density may be a consideration for grind preference - fluffy sativa leaners in a course grind may work better than ultra dense "Humboldt Hardrock" as I call them with much unexposed internals at the same grind. Perhaps denser nugs could benefit from a finer grind for more exposed surface area.

Man, such a great point. Fluffy flower seems to manually break apart effortlessly into perfect coarse calyx/leaf with trichomes intact.

But those dense flowers... don't even bother, you have to do so much prying and cutting... not worth it.

I toootally think that basing your grind size on flower density is a good practice. This also might be good flower buying advice. If you want brighter flavors, you may want a coarse grind, and if you want a coarse grind, you'll need fluffy buds.

It's seriously wonderful to see some modern vapor discussions and not just "what battery should I get for my log vape" :rofl:

I just love nerding out!
 
@invertedisdead totally agree on the full-spectrum thing, there are definitely non-vaporizable compounds in the mix. This is why I always orally consume the fresh AVB. The effects are subtle but it does seem to extend the overall effects a little bit, and I get a more "full-spectrum" effect. With this in mind, I usually don't take my AVB very far either since I know it'll get consumed anyways.

@EnemyLemon yes, some of those compounds also likely degrade before vaporization. However, I have a bit of a personal theory that convection vaporizers allow you to inhale some of the acidic cannabinoids, especially with quick extraction speeds and slightly lower temperatures. I believe those temperatures don't instantly decarboxylate the acidic cannabinoids and thus in the first vapor stream we may actually be inhaling a decent amount of acidic cannabinoids. Another thing that is not often talked about is that some of the acidic cannabinoids can be carboxylated at different positions. For example, acidic THC exists as THCA-A and THCA-B. THCA-B is a lot more stable and resistant to decarboxylation, so we are probably inhaling some of this. This is great because THCA has some very interesting effects, including various effects such as activating the vanilloid receptors TRP1A and TRPV2 while also inhibiting TRPV1. THCA also appears to inhibit every single enzyme system that plays a role in endocannabinoid degradation such as FAAH and DGLα and it also inhibits anandamide transport. Perhaps the really fine grind + low temperature is allowing me to inhale some more acidic cannabinoids, which is maybe why the effects feel a little more therapeutic. Also, the grind is definitely nowhere near as fine as that. It actually doesn't come through the dynavap CCD at all on the woodscents.

IME, coarse grinds produce a brighter cleaner taste... and I get more of those lemony, minty, gassy, etc.. terpenes coming forward.

Fine grinds mix in more of a deeper, earthy, creamy, taste.

Totally agreed here! I notice the same with coffee, incomplete/selective extraction leads to bright clean flavours. More complete extraction mixes in more mouthfeel, sugars and body that would normally be left behind in the coffee. This becomes a little problematic sometimes, for example a lot of natural Ethiopian coffees have strawberry or blueberry flavours. When you selectively extract the top note/bright flavours you get this very impressive strawberry ester like taste. However, without some body and sweetness backing it up, it doesn't taste like real strawberry and it tastes a little bit thin and artificial. With more complete extractions, these strawberry flavours are not as immediately noticeable and don't jump out of the cup, but over time the more "complete" picture tends to be a little more complex and interesting, although not as immediately impressive. The same thing I'm finding here now a little bit between fine and coarse flower, so this is also where personal taste comes in and I think this ties in with coffee again perfectly. People get pretty nerdy about coffee and try to use differently designed pour-over devices (flat bottom vs conical) to try and selectively tease out different flavours to suit their tastes.

I toootally think that basing your grind size on flower density is a good practice. This also might be good flower buying advice. If you want brighter flavors, you may want a coarse grind, and if you want a coarse grind, you'll need fluffy buds.

This ties back into coffee too, whenever I get a new bag of beans, I have to recalibrate my grinder. No two beans are alike, and if I grind the same bean at the same setting I'll get very different flow properties. This difference is especially noticeable between cultivars, for example, Ethiopian landrace cultivars tend to be small and dense, and need a coarser grind, whereas Columbian cultivars are often a little less dense and appear to need a much finer grind size. I would expect this same exact concept to apply to flower. Furthermore, we may also want to play with different parameters like heat between different strains and tamping vs no tamping. A one size fits all solution doesn't exist for coffee and I wouldn't expect it to for cannabis and hemp either.
 

RxPlorer

Well-Known Member
Another thing that is not often talked about is that some of the acidic cannabinoids can be carboxylated at different positions. For example, acidic THC exists as THCA-A and THCA-B. THCA-B is a lot more stable and resistant to decarboxylation, so we are probably inhaling some of this. This is great because THCA has some very interesting effects, including various effects such as activating the vanilloid receptors TRP1A and TRPV2 while also inhibiting TRPV1. THCA also appears to inhibit every single enzyme system that plays a role in endocannabinoid degradation such as FAAH and DGLα and it also inhibits anandamide transport.
Thanks for the knowledge bombs! I bookmarked your post.
 

El Rawn Hubbard

Well-Known Member
Two quick pulses is a course grind.
Four quick pulses is a fine grind exactly the same as a s&b grinder produces.
Some gets stuck on the machine but only so much and it scrapes off if it matters.

I've had similar results with a cheap coffee/spice grinder. As long as it's not too sticky it's great for quickly hacking up a few nugs 🪓

I also like a fine grind (from scissors and cup) for my Lotus. With sharp scissors it doesn't take long to get a small and even texture without completely bruising everything.

Man, such a great point. Fluffy flower seems to manually break apart effortlessly into perfect coarse calyx/leaf with trichomes intact.

But those dense flowers... don't even bother, you have to do so much prying and cutting... not worth it.

I toootally think that basing your grind size on flower density is a good practice. This also might be good flower buying advice. If you want brighter flavors, you may want a coarse grind, and if you want a coarse grind, you'll need fluffy buds.



I just love nerding out!

This ties back into coffee too, whenever I get a new bag of beans, I have to recalibrate my grinder. No two beans are alike, and if I grind the same bean at the same setting I'll get very different flow properties.

I feel that I can relate to these trains of thought as if they were my own!
 

howie105

Well-Known Member
Cool, tell me more! Doesn't a lot get wasted sticking to the grinder surfaces? When did you decide to switch to a powder grind for convection vaping?

my wife is going to wonder if I overmedicated when the rolling pin and coffee grinder start smelling like my stash.

A comment on the "sticking" issue, it's only as important as one wishes to believe. Some folks find a few hundreds of a gram left in a grinder as significant and others do not. Perhaps it's as important to focus on how well a particular type of grind and grinder perform with a particular vape and the results. I use some really fine grinds from an electric coffee mill, medium grinds from manual grinders even to whole nugs and really never worry about the stickies till it's time to clean. I think it's to each their own.
 
Last edited:

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
Inspired by @pretty-chill, I went back to trying out fine grinds for a bit.... and pretty much confirmed my preference for coarse grinding.

For whatever reason, the coarse grinds are just feeling smoother in the throat, giving better (to my tastes) flavor, and producing denser vapor.

I thought I would take some photos to show exactly what I'm referring to when I talk about a coarse grind.

Scale is hard to judge, but just know that I try to keep the leafy particles as large as I can, while still maintaining "potato chip" lookin' bits. When I say potato chip, I mean... objects that are made up of a single flat leafy shape. The leaf can be curled and twisted, doesn't matter, so long as it's made up of a flat leaf.

The way a leaf/bract/calyx grows, it usually only has trichomes on one side. So don't worry about uncurling flat "chips" to expose both sides equally, if only the outer surface is covered with trichomes.

I do not care about particle size uniformity. I only care about flat shapes.

Flat shapes will all have similar density/mass. I think this could be one reason why flat shapes tend to evenly heat.

Take a look at all these pretty flat shapes! mmmm.

001.jpg



Pictured here below is an example of what I absolutely avoid. Dreaded ball shapes. The leafy bit on the left is a curled flat object (hard to tell from the photo, but it is!). I could uncurl this shape and it would lie flat.

The leafy bit on the right, is a tight, dense, ball. This ball is made up of calyx/bract that are tightly overlapping each other. This ball shape will vaporize slower because it requires more heat to penetrate the higher mass/density.

If you have a chamber load filled with flats and balls, you'll overheat your flats before fully extracting your balls (DON'T EVEN GO THERE).

002.jpg


Here is the perfect chamber load. Note how loose and fluffy it is. By keeping the trichome hairs and flat shapes intact, you'll be able to pack very fluffy. Look at all those air pockets! That's exactly what we want. ZERO tamping here.

003.jpg


A look at the top. Notice the air pockets around the outside, between the glass walls and the flower. You can almost see right through this load of flower, that's perfect!

See how all those trichome hairs are acting as bumpers, keeping each flat leaf from touching each other too tightly. This creates all sorts of air flow.

004.jpg


___

Very interested in y'alls grinds and how they compare and contrast.
 
Last edited:

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
@LesPlenty , In my experience, vapor density is consistently higher with a coarse grind.

At first glance, I'd agree with you in the concept of more surface area = faster extraction = denser vapor.... but i think it's more complex than that.

What I think matters more, is available surface area, the surface that is making direct contact with the heated air.

Since coarse grinds allow for a fluffy pack, which in-turn allows for more even airflow, you actually see greater direct contact between the surface of the leaf and the heated air, compared to a fine grind.

Surface area is only one variable among the many that determine the actual extraction speed.

Also keep in mind that the trichomes we want to extract are on the outside surface of the leaf, so grinding finer only exposes inner plant material.

I'm not sure why finer grinds generally feel harsher to me... but It's not always... and could have just been a fluke over the last number of sessions where I was paying attention to such things. More research needed! :spliff:
 

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
I'd be interested to know what people are using for convection vaporizing hash or other concentrates.

I've been experimenting with "Afghan black hash".

Crumbling hash directly into the chamber works... but not well. You need to use higher heat to penentrate the dense mass.. and you really only vaporize the surface. It's tasty, but vapor production is low, and taste degrades as the out layer is toasted... even if the inside is still totally unvaped.

The second method is to use something like hemp/cotton fiber as a wick. The issue I found with this is that you get areas of dry fiber and resin soaked fiber. The dry parts take the heat faster, and so you may get some additional taste coming from the dry parts of the fiber that are overheated. This method also usually uses a high ratio of fiber to hash.

So, based on the golden rules of convection, surface area and airflow... I stumbled on a method that's been working really well for me!

I take a ball of hash and squish it with a hot iron inbetween two sheets of thin washi paper. Pretty much like a low temp rosin press. The washi is very absorbent, and so the resin saturates the paper. The result is a sticky, stiff, fully saturated paper, and a dried husk of the hash leftovers.

I then cut the paper into thin ribbons. These ribbons are then balled up and loaded into the vape.

With this method you can use much lower temps. Flavor is great. The chamber stays totally clean.

Not sure exactly if this will something I keep doing... but it's been fun to play around with. I'd like to try making a few larger sheets of this paper, and put them in a little 'hash book'. Strips of hash paper could be cut from the book on demand.

20211024_133933.jpg
 

Razhumikin

Well-Known Member
I'd be interested to know what people are using for convection vaporizing hash or other concentrates.

I've been experimenting with "Afghan black hash".

Crumbling hash directly into the chamber works... but not well. You need to use higher heat to penentrate the dense mass.. and you really only vaporize the surface. It's tasty, but vapor production is low, and taste degrades as the out layer is toasted... even if the inside is still totally unvaped.

The second method is to use something like hemp/cotton fiber as a wick. The issue I found with this is that you get areas of dry fiber and resin soaked fiber. The dry parts take the heat faster, and so you may get some additional taste coming from the dry parts of the fiber that are overheated. This method also usually uses a high ratio of fiber to hash.

So, based on the golden rules of convection, surface area and airflow... I stumbled on a method that's been working really well for me!

I take a ball of hash and squish it with a hot iron inbetween two sheets of thin washi paper. Pretty much like a low temp rosin press. The washi is very absorbent, and so the resin saturates the paper. The result is a sticky, stiff, fully saturated paper, and a dried husk of the hash leftovers.

I then cut the paper into thin ribbons. These ribbons are then balled up and loaded into the vape.

With this method you can use much lower temps. Flavor is great. The chamber stays totally clean.

Not sure exactly if this will something I keep doing... but it's been fun to play around with. I'd like to try making a few larger sheets of this paper, and put them in a little 'hash book'. Strips of hash paper could be cut from the book on demand.

View attachment 13947
Thats insanely cool! Do you worry about any negative unintentional effects from vaping the paper though? Im largely unfamiliar with the physical properties of washi paper but i would be worried about combusting the paper at a minimum.
 

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
@Razhumikin, Washi is basically just cellulose. Likely very similar to rolling papers, hemp fiber, cotton, etc. Cellulose is stable to very high temps, and it feels like you can really push the heat without the paper browning. I've never been anywhere near charring temp, but I assume that would taste awful, haha.

You could probably use rolling papers for this, but rolling papers could perhaps be less absorbent.

Washi comes in ultra-high quality grades that must be suitable for art conservation work... meaning.. it'll be as pure and inert as possible. These papers are handmade for the entire process, and use more natural means for preparing the plant fibers. We're talking.. like.. cleaning the kozo fibers in mountain streams, and sun bleaching..etc..

There's definitely more to look into here... but for now I feel safe using high quality washi.
 
That's a very smart method of vaporizing hash! I'm still on the squish and fine grind train and have found that vigorously mixing some temple ball hash into my compressed flower powder works really well. Similar to your method, this creates a lot of surface area and allows for efficient vaporization at low temperatures. I find this works well with other sorts of concentrates and when stored in a small tightly closed container, I find that I can pre-make some blends with different types of flower and hash so I can get the tastes and effects that I want. I'll definitely try out this method though, I like being able to taste the hash "solo" and I haven't figured out a good way to do that yet in the wood scents but looks like this method would be perfect! Where is the best place to grab some of this washi paper @Dan Morrison ?

A quick update on the compress + grate fine grind method. I find that it works perfectly in the woodscents and I can really push the temperature down and get fantastic extraction, taste and effects. However, in my healthy rips rogue (using the dosing capsules), it doesn't work very well and I get much better taste and extraction from a coarser grind. So I think grind size is also heavily vaporizer dependent. I think the big difference might be load size, since the load size of the woodscents is so small, it seems to favour this compressed fine grind and I get an "espresso" style vapour experience. Quick extraction, very dense and flavorful but using a small amount of material and fairly low temperatures. However, in the rogue, the fine grind produced thin vapour that was not as flavorful as a coarse grind but the load size is also quite a bit larger than the woodscents. I also tried gently crushing up and swirling around a small bud in a fine mesh strainer in order to get some "dirty kief" and visually this seemed to work quite well. I ended up with probably 60% trichomes and about 40% plant material. The flavour was even more pronounced and vapor production seemed even more efficient. It's just a bit of a hassle to do it, but nice for sampling small amounts of new flower every once in a while in the woodscents. I think figuring out an efficient way to make "dirty kief" would be an interesting pursuit as has been pointed out in this thread by a few people already!
 

jbm

Well-Known Member
@Razhumikin, Washi is basically just cellulose. Likely very similar to rolling papers, hemp fiber, cotton, etc. Cellulose is stable to very high temps, and it feels like you can really push the heat without the paper browning. I've never been anywhere near charring temp, but I assume that would taste awful, haha.

You could probably use rolling papers for this, but rolling papers could perhaps be less absorbent.

Washi comes in ultra-high quality grades that must be suitable for art conservation work... meaning.. it'll be as pure and inert as possible. These papers are handmade for the entire process, and use more natural means for preparing the plant fibers. We're talking.. like.. cleaning the kozo fibers in mountain streams, and sun bleaching..etc..

There's definitely more to look into here... but for now I feel safe using high quality washi.
Jesus, Dan, talk about thinking outside the box. That’s pretty fucking brilliant. Now I want to find some hash (old school hash, not bubble, ice water, etc, what they call charas iirc) so I can try this out.
 

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
Where is the best place to grab some of this washi paper @Dan Morrison ?

I get my paper from the Japanese Paper Place in Toronto, but there are places in the U.S. (Washi Arts) that sell a lot of the exact same papers. I'm only just scratching the surface of this method so far, but I do think there is something here worth exploring. I'm not sure what thickness of paper is going to work best, but I'm fairly certain that you'll want 100% plant fiber (probably kozo, but you can get mitsumata or gampi, which are shorter fibers) and you'll want the highest quality hand made paper. Ideally made in the traditional methods that use natural bleaching methods..etc..

I've been testing 15g paper, which is quite thin, It's basically a tissue. It seems to be working well. But I have nothing to compare it to. If I had to guess, the 10-30g range is probably ideal. The paper I am using is called Tosa Usushi (washi arts carries it). The quality of this paper is not TOP grade, and it is bleached... but I have not noticed any weird taste from it.

The paper must be unsized. Look for the word "sized" in the description, if the paper is sized it's a no go. Sizing makes paper less absorbent, which we don't want.

I think the big difference might be load size, since the load size of the woodscents is so small, it seems to favour this compressed fine grind and I get an "espresso" style vapour experience.

I totally found the exact same thing. I have tried a wide and narrow diameter chamber in the same vape (The Nomads/Toad), and the narrow diameter chamber is noticeably better with fine grinds. Even when all other variables are the same, I like the narrow chamber more with finer grinds.

I also wonder, how would you compare the depth of the chamber?

I think it comes back to airflow. Not sure exactly what is going on... but definitely something! haha.

@jbm

I'm not sure if the "hash paper" idea is new or not, but It just seemed like a fun thing to try.

I've been exploring the hash paper more, and have been comparing it to the more common method of using cotton with crumbled hash. I can say that the hash paper is superior, at least in a full convection setup.

I think the key is that the paper itself forces the concentrate into a very thin layer. The thin strips allow for huge surface area so that you're able to use very low temps. I found myself using lower temps than I would if vaporizing herb, which is counter to every other hash vaporizing method I've tried.

Because the paper is so low in thermal mass (unlike SS or ceramic concentrate pads), you don't need to waste a whole bunch of heat trying to heat up the substrate.

I find with hash, even if you grate it down into a fine powder, it will immediately start to meld back together and form blobs once heated. These tiny blobs will overheat on the outside before the interior is fully vaporized.

I am also really liking the convenience. I've been tweaking the hash paper making technique, and it's really quite easy. All you need is some washi, parchment paper, and a bottle filled with hot water.

Interestingly, the process of making the paper filters out any plant matter, so the paper is actually just saturated with hash rosin. You'll get a single sheet that is coated with all the plant matter in the original hash. This single sheet can be used the same way and still tastes awesome!

This makes me believe this method would work for pretty much any concentrate out there.

When I get my footings better I'll definitely post a little pictorial on how I make this stuff.
 
Last edited:

invertedisdead

OG Baller
On a different subject, I have been grinding loads finer and getting much richer hits. Noticed too many small blackened ABV balls that were bright green inside when broken open. The io hits great, the weed is pretty good, a consistent fine grind makes a difference IMO. I should add that I'm not talking about grinding it super fine. Mainly just grinding an extra 30-45 seconds with fingers to make it all about the same consistency.

@JBone65 posted this in the Grasshopper thread but I wanted to talk about it here in the Convection thread. I've been thinking about this myself recently, so when J-bone posted this, I thought it was worth discussing.

I was theorizing recently that perhaps this is an under-mentioned difference between vaping and combustion. I'm thinking there could be a sizable amount of unexposed trichomes in many grinds that ends up not vaporizing, but hypothetically when incinerating, these cannabinoids maybe are vaporized due to the complete penetration of the plant material.

Playing back into something we talked about briefly in here, catering the grind to the density of the flowers.
I've got some Girl Scout Cookies grown under LED that is ridiculously dense, an ounce looks like a quarter. And I've been noticing the same thing J-bone mentioned, when I inspect the AVB there's still lots of internal pockets that were basically untouched.
 

MinnBobber

Well-Known Member
After experimenting the different grinds, I am staying with my :
-pluck individual calyxes and temp step with pure natural full flavors to start and then…
- pop those super dry calyxes with a tweezers and you get all those hidden internal pockets pulverized into a monster full boat extraction at your high temp.

I get both ends of the spectrum, full natural flavors and then max extraction.

I also use a hemp paper tea filter to grab that AVB DUST , the micro particles from exploding calyxes…..😀

Harvesting calyxes also makes it more of a tea ceremony celebration. 🫖

The Cannabis Whisperer 😉
 

JBone65

Well-Known Member
My comments pertains mostly to my portable grasshopper io. It only holds 0.19g and stirring doesn't work due to no room. Due to the cylindrical shape of the chamber, the heat will contact essentially all the weed and strip out the good stuff without stirring.

I also have a desk top with a bigger chamber. I can put a small chunks of bud in that one and gently stir it to gradually break it apart.

I get consistently better hits with a consistent medium-fine grind in the little io, and I believe it contributes to getting more hits as well. I always temp step and get 11 good hits, finishing with three hard pulls at maximum temperature of 230°C, which mostly blackens and reduces the ABV mass by >40%.

It's a related issue, but I also keep a little weed in tupperware and let it dry a little. IMO you know it's too fresh and sticky when you can't finish the grinding easily with fingers. I get a better hit and my io doesn't get as much residue when the weed is a little drier. It should have the same compounds as long as you keep it cool and don't leave it out too long.

There something magic about strong convection heat flowing thru finely ground excellent sativa.

Just my opinion, not 100% sure I'm doing it right.
 
@Dan Morrison I ended up trying the washi paper method and it has been blowing me away! However, I am not using washi paper, I am actually using a chemex filter as I realized it is actually somewhat similar to washi paper (but of course not of such high quality). I tried the pressing method and it was very absorbent too. However, I was feeling lazy after a couple of attempts and decided to just cut up some plain strips of chemex paper, formed it into a loose ball and dropped it into my woodscents. Then I put some hash inside of the crevices of the "paper confetti" and vaped it. I was very blown away, vapor production was instant and very flavorful. This is probably the best method I have found for vaporizing more traditional hash styles but it also works well with more conventional concentrates. So perhaps skipping the pressing step and just making a "paper confetti ball" and loading that up with hash is a much simpler and perhaps even more efficient method for vaporizing hash!
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
@Dan Morrison I ended up trying the washi paper method and it has been blowing me away! However, I am not using washi paper, I am actually using a chemex filter as I realized it is actually somewhat similar to washi paper (but of course not of such high quality). I tried the pressing method and it was very absorbent too. However, I was feeling lazy after a couple of attempts and decided to just cut up some plain strips of chemex paper, formed it into a loose ball and dropped it into my woodscents. Then I put some hash inside of the crevices of the "paper confetti" and vaped it. I was very blown away, vapor production was instant and very flavorful. This is probably the best method I have found for vaporizing more traditional hash styles but it also works well with more conventional concentrates. So perhaps skipping the pressing step and just making a "paper confetti ball" and loading that up with hash is a much simpler and perhaps even more efficient method for vaporizing hash!

Do you use any more traditional dabbing mediums, and if so could you compare it to using convection with paper?

I'd be a little worried about using any sort of oil in a stem based convection vape. Couldn't the oil drip down onto the heater? Or does the paper absorb enough that this isn't an issue?

I've gotta say, this is a fascinating concept. A lot of reclaim gets wasted when I q-tip a banger. Using paper would be an easy way to save the reclaim. Save up a bunch of spent paper and then extract the 'claim with everclear.
 

Dan Morrison

Well-Known Member
Manufacturer
@pretty-chill

Whoa! That's awesome! Sounds like the chemex paper is very similar. I think the main criteria to look for is thin and absorbent. Obviously the chemex would be food safe.

I have tried the confetti method but didn't find it quite as good as the pressing method. I'm sure it also has a lot to do with luck and technique, sometimes it takes a few sessions to really feel out a certain technique, so I might just be missing something!

Interested to hear if you've experimented any more!

@florduh , The method of pre-saturating the paper and then cutting it into strips works equally well with any concentrate, so long as the paper is able to absorb it.

Whether or not it's going to be better than dabbing a full melt concentrate with a rig? I doubt it. I see this mainly as a method for using concentrates in a 100% convection setup.

Technically if you were extracting your reclaim, I don't see why you couldn't just extract it from q-tips, instead of paper.
 
Do you use any more traditional dabbing mediums, and if so could you compare it to using convection with paper?
I don't use concentrate all too often but have tried most traditional dabbing mediums including cold starts which is one of my favorite dabbing methods. That being said, traditional dabbing methods don't interest me all too much, I find it all to be a little bit finicky and it doesn't work for one of my favorite concentrates, traditional dry sift, or temple ball style hash. With the confetti paper, I can vaporize both traditional hash and concentrates so that's a big plus for me. I think the thing that I like the most about the confetti paper method, is that I get more heady convection style effects. Traditional dabbing methods feel a little bit heavier to me but these convection concentrates feel particularly clear-headed which is super nice! I think this is likely due to inhaling more THC-A with convection vaporizing than you get from conduction style vaporizing (which I would count most traditional dabbing methods as). This is pretty similar actually to the discussions we have been having here, where quite a few people seem to find they get more stoned from conduction vaporizers, same could be going on with traditional dabbing methods. I certainly think traditional dabbing methods have more impact, but I prefer the effects and taste of convection conffeti dabs!
Interested to hear if you've experimented any more!
I've kept experimenting! I've recently discovered that you need quite a bit of power to make this method work well. I needed to turn up the temperature a touch to get it to work in the wood scents and it worked really well. However, I now have a hot rod, and have been trying that out with this method and find that with the extra power on tap, I can vaporize the concentrate off the paper much more efficiently. I get large but very cool and tasty hits now, I think the increased surface area and extra power on tap are having a very positive effect! The effects certainly also seem more "heady convection" style now. I'm pretty sure this is now my favorite method to use concentrates and actually has gotten me much more interested in finally finding some really nice concentrates, so thanks for the tip! I'll also have to try the pre-saturation method again, perhaps washi paper absorbs the concentrate a little bit differently. I have a feeling that perhaps a chemex filter is actually a little bit too absorbent and has a harder time releasing the concentrate, this is perhaps also why I have found that with lots of power on tap, this method works a lot better.
 
pretty-chill,
  • Like
Reactions: GoldenBud

GoldenBud

Well-Known Member
I don't use concentrate all too often but have tried most traditional dabbing mediums including cold starts which is one of my favorite dabbing methods. That being said, traditional dabbing methods don't interest me all too much
I prefer to vape concentrates with convection devices too, but the cleaning sometimes is a longer procedure.... the high is better, the taste ofc is better!
 
GoldenBud,
  • Like
Reactions: NYC_Frank
Top Bottom