I can easily get 3 full trenches out of my MFLB batteries, which are just plain rechargeable AA batteries, about the same size as the GH batteries (not convection, I know, so its not exactly a fair comparison). You can buy lithium AA batteries the same size as normal AA batteries that last 8x as long as standard batteries.
While I feel the actual vape time may be less than what they say, its certainly not impossible to be able to do multiple loads in something the size of the GH, we have that technology.
I'm afraid that this is not just an unfair comparison; these are near completely incomparable technologies. The amount of power required to maintain a heated stream of air capable of vaporizing cannabis is several orders of magnitude above that of heating a piece of mesh up to vaporization temperature. On demand heating takes that up even more. Of course this can be mitigated by intelligent design and insulation, but only to a point.
It's far from empirical data, but in my tests I've found that the MFLB consumes roughly 5 - 7 watts of power depending on the state and charge of batteries in use. This is not a lot of power by any stretch, and in fact I would not be surprised if this is the lowest power consumption of any vaporizer on the market. The MFLB's design, with the herb resting directly against the heating element is what makes this possible.
I think it would be much more informative to look at some of the other portables on the market that are a little bit closer to the kind of internal design that the Grasshopper is going to need to have to be able to meet its claims. For example the Solo, which still has quite a bit of a conduction factor, but I digress. This vaporizer consumes closer to 30 watts, and requires at least a minute to build up enough of a thermal mass to sustain vaporization.
The firefly is a better comparison, but I am having a hard time finding hard information on how much power it consumes per hit. However, taking into consideration the battery packs specs (8.4v/750mAh) and user reports of mean battery life (~40 hits) I can estimate that it is around 55 watts per second. If someone can use a multimeter to measure the resistance of the heater and send it to me, I can find out for sure.
These are both huge units. They have big heaters, big batteries, and they perform well because of that. The firefly is at the absolute cutting edge of portable technology right now, and it needs to be to be able to sustain the kind of heater power that is requires to heat up a steady stream of room temperature air to 200 degrees Celcius on demand.
This kind of a vaporizer is not impossible. On demand heating is already present in other vaporizers, and battery technology just keeps getting better. But right now, I just don't see it as being plausible. I keep running the data points in my mind and keeping coming to the same conclusion; that a vaporizer capable of all of these claims is either going to be very large, or it's going to cost a lot more than 99 dollars. Probably both.
Last edited: