Discontinued VapeXhale Cloud

[FeePan]

Awesome, looks like the clouds are hopeless outside the USA even with a high end power converter.

 

[Seek]

...As I stated, I know the amount of THC it takes away is very miniscule but it still takes some away which was the basic point I was trying to make...

Well, maybe water will filter a tiny bit of THC. But you would loose much more THC is you inhlaed it dry and didn't absorb it well. Moist vapor absorbs way better and it much less likely to be coughed out (huge loss). So, I would prefer moist vapor with a bit THC gone but that I can absorb easily without irritation and almost completely.

 

[ganja_farmer]

How much should the device click when turned on? My replacement one emits a steady stream of fast clicks that don't stop... I'm worried they'll end in a bang with smoke.. I'm using a power converter because I am in Australia.

Hi FeePan,

This is your replacement unit right? what happened with the first? did VXL cancel your warranty in the second unit?

Is there any other International users having problems with their units connected to an inverter?

Thanks in advance, and excuse all the questions.

 

[FeePan]

Hi FeePan,

This is your replacement unit right? what happened with the first? did VXL cancel your warranty in the second unit?

Is there any other International users having problems with their units connected to an inverter?

Thanks in advance, and excuse all the questions.

Well I received the first one and was using a cheaper inverter so figured it was that. Got my replacement with no warranty but it clicks a lot and never goes green so I don't want to use it...

 

[elmomuzz]

If it's heating it's clicking. Mine clicks all the time unless I crank it for a while then turn it down. Even then it will only stop for a few moments before it begins clicking again.

 

[oldiebutgoodie]

Well I received the first one and was using a cheaper inverter so figured it was that. Got my replacement with no warranty but it clicks a lot and never goes green so I don't want to use it...

If it continuously clicks and "never goes green", that seems to indicate that the unit is trying but failing to reach its temperature setting.

Contact VXL.

 

[stickstones]

drumwizard...The Cloud was my first vapor/water experience. The damn thing converted me. Your posts read like someone who hasn't tried vapor through water yet, as I was a year ago. I think once you try it, you will not be concerned with lost thc anymore.

 

[pakalolo]

Hmmm . . . the second study just says this:

"Surprisingly, the unfiltered joint outperformed all devices except the vaporizers, with a ratio of about 1 part cannabinoids to 13 parts tar. This disturbingly poor ratio may be explained by the low potency of the NIDA-supplied marijuana used in the study, which was around 2.3%. Disappointingly, waterpipes performed uniformly worse than the unfiltered joint. The least bad waterpipe, the bong, produced 30% more tar per cannabinoids than the unfiltered joint."

Not only is this study old, its methods are suspect. Also, the focus of the study was "Tar" to THC ratio. They never said how they defined "tar" . . . and look at the quality of material they had to use to test . . . 2.3% THC? I'm sorry but both these studies do nothing for me. Sure a little THC gets in the water but how many angels can you count on a pin head?

The second URL does not point to a study, it points to a newsletter that appears to summarize the infamous study Cannabis "Vaporization": A Promising Strategy for Smoke Harm Reduction (Gieringer, Dale H. Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics Vol 1. No. 3/4, 2001, pp 153-170.) I can't be absolutely sure because the article doesn't actually provide a citation, one clue that it's not a study. If I'm correct about which study it summarizes (and I think I am) I've posted several times here in various threads pointing out its flaws, most recently right here in this thread, but I see that I don't really explain my reasons there. My post in no tar? so what temp? really...? has more information on why I call that thing infamous.

No reflection on you, t-dub, but I wish people would learn to distinguish genuine studies from newsletters and press releases.

 

[stonemonkey55]

Regarding THC loss in water.... Mark from Vriptech told me that if you are combusting, the THC loss is much higher than vaping. He told me that the tar that is released from the smoke is extremely sticky and THC tends to stick to it. When the water filters out the tar, the THC that is stuck to the tar also gets filtered out. With vapor, since the tar is minimized, so is the THC loss. In my own tests, I do not see a discernable difference between dry vapor and moisture conditioned vapor. Is there THC loss? Sure. But I think the benefits of moisture conditioning outweigh any of the THC loss.

 

[Pappy]

Regarding THC loss in water.... Mark from Vriptech told me that if you are combusting, the THC loss is much higher than vaping. He told me that the tar that is released from the smoke is extremely sticky and THC tends to stick to it. When the water filters out the tar, the THC that is stuck to the tar also gets filtered out. With vapor, since the tar is minimized, so is the THC loss. In my own tests, I do not see a discernable difference between dry vapor and moisture conditioned vapor. Is there THC loss? Sure. But I think the benefits of moisture conditioning outweigh any of the THC loss.

The amount of THC filtered through water is negligible when compared to the amount ingested. Like I'm not wasting oxygen because I can't inhale all the air in the room.

 

[stickstones]

combustion also destroys some of the desirable compounds in the process, so vaping through any amount of water will be stronger than smoking.

 

[Tea Party]

I'm glad I was able to provide you with some humor but what I stated is a FACT. It might be minimal THC that is taken away, but some is taken away none the less. Therefore vaporizing straight vapor will give you more THC than vaporizing through water. However, the benefits of the water is that it cools the vapor and takes out miniscule particles. I personally would prefer not to sacrifice any THC (vaping through water) since a large appeal to vaporizing for me is the increase in THC content. I hope this response doesn't come off as confrontational because that's not my intention. I have provided links to studies which backs up my claim that you can read. To each their own...I still think the VXC is an amazing vaporizer and I'll still consider purchasing one when it comes on the market.

Well shit I guess it's a good thing I live on the west coast where the weed is so strong we don't worry about losing an immaterial amount of thc for a materialy better smoking ( or vaping) expierence.

 

[Nosferatu]

The amount of THC that is water soluble and will get lost is so negligible I agree with everyone who is saying its ridiculous to even be talking about it. Besides we need to stop acting like scavengers that need every last drop of THC. Is .01% of THC being lost really a problem to you when water allows you to take bigger hits and absorb them easier. I don't care what that "study" says, vaping though water I get more THC and desirables into my system than by taking the same many hits dry.

 

[drumwizard]

Thank you everyone for providing more information on the water/THC issue. I stated in my original post that I wasn't trying to be confrontational and "to each their own" but it seems some people are taking it a little harsher than was intended. I'm going to try out vapor through water for the first time with my SSV and 7th Floor's 6 arm water filter cooler moisturizer attachment. I will probably end up getting a VXC in the future if I like the outcome of my test. I don't want to buy every vaporizer on the market but I think having the top 3-5 on the market is a realistic goal of mine. Thanks again for all the feedback.

 

[Venomous]

There will still be guys trying to extract the minute amount of thc in the water. Look att some of the guys who will clear their grinders for every partial of kief they can get.

 

[max]

I don't want to buy every vaporizer on the market but I think having the top 3-5 on the market is a realistic goal of mine.

Unless you're collecting, make sure whatever you buy fits your needs. There is no concrete list of "the top 3-5 on the market" that applies to everyone. Personal preferences come into play since there are quite a few top quality vapes available currently. What allows this one to be among the choices for so many people is that sm tried to include the best features of the most popular models in one unit, and then 'up it' even more from there.

 

[drumwizard]

Unless you're collecting, make sure whatever you buy fits your needs. There is no concrete list of "the top 3-5 on the market" that applies to everyone. Personal preferences come into play since there are quite a few top quality vapes available currently. What allows this one to be among the choices for so many people is that sm tried to include the best features of the most popular models in one unit, and then 'up it' even more from there.

Well put...I agree.

 

[t-dub]

No reflection on you, t-dub, but I wish people would learn to distinguish genuine studies from newsletters and press releases.

Pak you are right. I was reading those pages so fast for content that I kind of stipulated the idea that they were "studies". I aplogize, but most never read what is posted so I was trying to analyze content. I think this discussion has been healthy, I don't see anyone getting too bent out of shape so far and I find it interesting.

 

[drumwizard]

Pak you are right. I was reading those pages so fast for content that I kind of stipulated the idea that they were "studies". I aplogize, but most never read what is posted so I was trying to analyze content. I think this discussion has been healthy, I don't see anyone getting too bent out of shape so far and I find it interesting.

...and I apologize for hastily posting those links seeing as only 1 of them was somewhat of a study. To be honest, I didn't completely 100% read both of them anyways, lol.

 

[Pappy]

 

[Tstat]

OK, Pappy, what the HELL is that? Mobius? It's beautiful!!

 

[pakalolo]

Regarding THC loss in water.... Mark from Vriptech told me that if you are combusting, the THC loss is much higher than vaping. He told me that the tar that is released from the smoke is extremely sticky and THC tends to stick to it. When the water filters out the tar, the THC that is stuck to the tar also gets filtered out. With vapor, since the tar is minimized, so is the THC loss.

The source of this is the Gieringer study I referred to above. Although it is a reasonable theory and could well be true, the paper gives no supporting evidence. To the contrary, the idea is expressed in the paper as (direct quote) "a likely explanation". As I've said before, this paper is sloppy gives the careful reader a lot of reason to question its validity, but this particular distortion isn't the fault of Gieringer. Mark from Vriptech is stating clearly marked speculation as fact. Of course, he could just be repeating something he was told.

t-dub and drumwizard: I want to stress that I was not pointing a finger at either of you. Apologies are unnecessary. As some have probably noticed by now, I have a bit of a hot button when it comes to people citing Gieringer as proof that benzene and other toxins appear in vapour above 200°C, and now this sticky tar thing pops up. I was just generally lamenting that so many people read the damned press release, jump to conclusions, then run around claiming this stuff has been "scientifically proven." Not true.

 

[t-dub]

t-dub and drumwizard: I want to stress that I was not pointing a finger at either of you. Apologies are unnecessary. As some have probably noticed by now, I have a bit of a hot button when it comes to people citing Gieringer as proof that benzene and other toxins appear in vapour above 200°C, and now this sticky tar thing pops up. I was just generally lamenting that so many people read the damned press release, jump to conclusions, then run around claiming this stuff has been "scientifically proven." Not true.

No prob Pak, no offense taken and, btw, you are right thanks for clearing this stuff up.

 

[drumwizard]

The source of this is the Gieringer study I referred to above. Although it is a reasonable theory and could well be true, the paper gives no supporting evidence. To the contrary, the idea is expressed in the paper as (direct quote) "a likely explanation". As I've said before, this paper is sloppy gives the careful reader a lot of reason to question its validity, but this particular distortion isn't the fault of Gieringer. Mark from Vriptech is stating clearly marked speculation as fact. Of course, he could just be repeating something he was told.

t-dub and drumwizard: I want to stress that I was not pointing a finger at either of you. Apologies are unnecessary. As some have probably noticed by now, I have a bit of a hot button when it comes to people citing Gieringer as proof that benzene and other toxins appear in vapour above 200°C, and now this sticky tar thing pops up. I was just generally lamenting that so many people read the damned press release, jump to conclusions, then run around claiming this stuff has been "scientifically proven." Not true.

No offense taken here either. Thanks for the clarification. I don't want to veer everyone off topic too much so please feel free to discuss all things VapeXhaleCloud related again.

 

[Pappy]

OK, Pappy, what the HELL is that? Mobius? It's beautiful!!

Moby Stereo Matrix 60t Limited Edition