Discontinued VRIPtech Heating Wand

[stonemonkey55]

Just wanted to update this thread now that my mind is a bit more clear from all the testing the last few days. I am a firm believer the jetflo is the way to go with the VHW. The standard is nice, but I think the picture speaks for itself. We started with two clean lower bowls, and as the days went on, people get picking up the jetflo.

On a side note, Mark wanted me to take another informal survey. He is in talks with one of the high end glass manufacturers to create a co-branded VWT with some sort of diffuser (a halo perc looks like it would fit in the beaker bottom of the next gen VWT) built in. He mentioned that they would be using even thicker glass than the pro model but either they would have to make the inner diameter smaller and keep the same dimensions, or if the inner diameter were bigger, the water tool would be slightly bigger as well. He did mention that he wanted to stay with the ?beaker? design as it has been their trademark shape, but any wish lists, or things you would want in the Super pro model water tool?

 

[SpiralArchitect]

Ice notches if they don't already have them...

That 'bent' shape turns me off, but I'm sure some might prefer it. I'd say get it thicker and bigger all around. No one likes cheap thin glass.

 

[Progress]

Sorry for the shorthand...just wanted to contribute...

SM - jetflo is the way to go with the VHW. The standard is nice, but I think the picture speaks for itself.

Any particular reasons? Could you describe the differences a little? Tastes vary drastically and groups of friends sometimes share similar tastes.

I was also wondering if the bent neck is remnant of the WHG days or if it is still necessary with the VHW (maybe send out units and collect feedback towards a 'VHW-2.0' or 'VHW Pro'

 

[Acolyte of Zinglon]

a halo perc looks like it would fit in the beaker bottom of the next gen VWT

as in a halo perc around the inside bottom of the water tool? that would be a very interesting design, using a large halo perc as a built in diffuser much luike inlines are used

but the halo percs do have a weakness, if theyre not fully submerged they wouldnt work as well and youd get mostly unmoisturized vapor, like if you tilted the water tool back and the water pooled in the back of the beaker, so that the holes in the front were unsubmerged, air likes to take the path of least resistance so a disproportionate amount of the vapor would come through the front holes

also, if the perc is in the very bottom of the chamber, it could add considerable drag to the hit depending on how much water you put in. for instance: if you put extra water in so that you could tilt the tool back and still have everything submerged

i would love to see something like a steamroller, but with a mechanical valve that opens when you press a little lever, kind of like you see on saxophones but opposite, and then that valve would act as a carb and it would be much less unweildy than a standard steamroller with the vhw (or even heat gun) as you could fill the chamber, with full control over the wand, and then when you remove the wand you hold the lever and clear the chamber

i know glass doesnt usually have moving parts, but i believe that something like this would be very funtional

i could draw a picture if anyone is having trouble picturing what im saying

 

[stonemonkey55]

Ice notches if they don't already have them...

That 'bent' shape turns me off, but I'm sure some might prefer it. I'd say get it thicker and bigger all around. No one likes cheap thin glass. 2c

They got the ice notches and it would definitely be thicker, the main difference would be the size of the hole that you would put you mouth into. Good feedback on the bent neck, hopefully it will result in some variety!

Any particular reasons? Could you describe the differences a little? Tastes vary drastically and groups of friends sometimes share similar tastes.

I was also wondering if the bent neck is remnant of the WHG days or if it is still necessary with the VHW (maybe send out units and collect feedback towards a 'VHW-2.0' or 'VHW Pro'

The main difference would be in the result, the jetflo just seemed to produce better results all around, regardless of your inhalation style. The standard had more drag, and with the heat gun, it was easier to get fatter hits (with less effort) with it but with the VHW, it seems as if the jetflo carries this distinction. My hypothesis was that I would get thicker hits with the standard due to the restricted air flow, but the results were the opposite of my thoughts.

I?ll be sure to let Mark know about the feedback with kinked neck. I think it had to do with ergonomics with the heat gun but obviously, the ergonomics have changed with the smaller, lighter heat wand.

as in a halo perc around the inside bottom of the water tool? that would be a very interesting design, using a large halo perc as a built in diffuser much luike inlines are used

but the halo percs do have a weakness, if theyre not fully submerged they wouldnt work as well and youd get mostly unmoisturized vapor, like if you tilted the water tool back and the water pooled in the back of the beaker, so that the holes in the front were unsubmerged, air likes to take the path of least resistance so a disproportionate amount of the vapor would come through the front holes

also, if the perc is in the very bottom of the chamber, it could add considerable drag to the hit depending on how much water you put in. for instance: if you put extra water in so that you could tilt the tool back and still have everything submerged

i would love to see something like a steamroller, but with a mechanical valve that opens when you press a little lever, kind of like you see on saxophones but opposite, and then that valve would act as a carb and it would be much less unweildy than a standard steamroller with the vhw (or even heat gun) as you could fill the chamber, with full control over the wand, and then when you remove the wand you hold the lever and clear the chamber

i know glass doesnt usually have moving parts, but i believe that something like this would be very funtional

i could draw a picture if anyone is having trouble picturing what im saying

AofZ ? yeah, the halo perc would be parallel to the bottom of the beaker, I read the glass thread and was looking at the pics and thought that would be extremely slick way to integrate perculation while still keeping the beaker look. I?m not as familiar with all these different styles of perculation, if any one has any suggestions what would work best with this type of shape, I?m sure he?d be open to it.

Post a pic of what you are describing, it will help me picture it

 

[youdontknowme]

how about going stemless aka fixed stem? percolation would be great, whether halo, tree, disc
id probably take straight neck but keep the scientific shape i like it
good to hear gong is on the way... soon this could be the american herbo

wish i had way more time to post, school...

 

[Progress]

SM - The main difference would be in the result, the jetflo just seemed to produce better results all around, regardless of your inhalation style. The standard had more drag, and with the heat gun, it was easier to get fatter hits (with less effort) with it but with the VHW, it seems as if the jetflo carries this distinction. My hypothesis was that I would get thicker hits with the standard due to the restricted air flow, but the results were the opposite of my thoughts.

The result? Better all around how (thicker, less drag, reg/jet-flow felt/looked/finished/etc., etc., etc.)?

SM - I?ll be sure to let Mark know about the feedback with kinked neck. I think it had to do with ergonomics with the heat gun but obviously, the ergonomics have changed with the smaller, lighter heat wand.

Or possibly the forced air to manual draw difference (too?)?

AofZ ? yeah, the halo perc would be parallel to the bottom of the beaker, I read the glass thread and was looking at the pics and thought that would be extremely slick way to integrate perculation while still keeping the beaker look. I?m not as familiar with all these different styles of perculation, if any one has any suggestions what would work best with this type of shape, I?m sure he?d be open to it.

My I have many ideas (from simple but functional to complex but exceptional. Nonetheless, perfect the wand, etc. before expanding the selection of parts/tools (IMO, of course ).

 

[KeepCalm]

a halo perc looks like it would fit in the beaker bottom of the next gen VWT

but the halo percs do have a weakness, if theyre not fully submerged they wouldnt work as well and youd get mostly unmoisturized vapor, like if you tilted the water tool back and the water pooled in the back of the beaker, so that the holes in the front were unsubmerged, air likes to take the path of least resistance so a disproportionate amount of the vapor would come through the front holes

This is a problem with pretty much all percs - you have to hit them with the tube straight up and down or you get uneven filtration. Not really a big deal but something to keep in mind when considering a perc'd piece. Single chamber tubes with just a downstem that hits the water in the middle can be hit at most any angle

 

[Progress]

KC - This is a problem with pretty much all percs - you have to hit them with the tube straight up and down or you get uneven filtration.

True, they tend to preform best when held at the intended angle (many that are well crafted even remain submerged no matter how you hold the piece).

Single chamber tubes with just a down-stem that hits the water in the middle can be hit at most any angle

Not true, straight down-stems will usually be more deeply submerged in the water when tilted back (ex. the Vrip tools...SM?). Therefore, the perc should be placed in the piece based on your style or chosen accordingly (I am personally a tilt-back and not a table-top for uprights--unless requested by the owner of the piece). If this were taken into consideration with the the VPWT a down-stem with the hole in the side (instead of the bottom could be used to aim the airstream across the bottom of the beaker towards the front of it after leaving the down-stem (sorry, no pic). This would be especially good for 'tilters' like me--I am actually usually 45 degrees back and slightly towards my right, hand from the days I used to use lighters . SM during your tests did most 'subjects' tend to tilt the beaker back/leave it flat/etc.?

 

[vtac]

The upper intake on the right actually doesn't work, its one of the many lemons that were made but I thought it made for a better visual this way.

So that wouldn't affect the performance in your comparison, or am I misunderstanding?

He did mention that he wanted to stay with the ?beaker? design as it has been their trademark shape, but any wish lists, or things you would want in the Super pro model water tool?

A little color or subtle design might be nice. I like the more common 4 way ice pinch design. Less of bend in the neck. Fuck Combustion sandblasted on the side.

 

[KeepCalm]

many that are well crafted even remain submerged no matter how you hold the piece).

Yeah, of course. But there is still only one angle at which pretty much any perc will be operating at peak efficiency, with each set of openings at the same level under the water. Hope that makes sense.

Single chamber tubes with just a down-stem that hits the water in the middle can be hit at most any angle
Not true, straight down-stems will usually be more deeply submerged in the water when tilted back (ex. the Vrip tools...SM?).

If you set up your tube so that the downstem is at the correct angle to enter the water in the center of its surface (edit -takes a little thought about downstem length and water level to get this right), it will function more or less the same at 90 degrees as it does at 45. Try it!

 

[Progress]

KC - Yeah, of course. But there is still only one angle at which pretty much any perc will be operating at peak efficiency, with each set of openings at the same level under the water. Hope that makes sense.

Agreed

If you set up your tube so that the downstem is at the correct angle to enter the water in the center of its surface (edit -takes a little thought about downstem length and water level to get this right), it will function more or less the same at 90 degrees as it does at 45. Try it!

Coincidentally, I happen to have a RooR tube in front of me. When upright, the rising bubbles travel straight up the glass wall through about 2" of water. When tilted back 45 degrees the bubbles travel diagonally through about 3" (by geometry) of water (plus they go up with the support of the wall--less movement/pulling/stretching of gasses than those traveling up the center, unsupported).

Edit: I thought of a concrete example (a short downstem that does not touch the water may touch the water if the tube is tilted)

I could be wrong, please let me know if something I said doesn't make sense .

Toke it easy!

 

[stonemonkey55]

The result? Better all around how (thicker, less drag, reg/jet-flow felt/looked/finished/etc., etc., etc.)?

The jetflo has less drag and produces fatter clouds. Other than that, I don't think there are many other distinctions as to why most preferred the jetflo. I think they like that it took less lung power to produce larger clouds

If this were taken into consideration with the the VPWT a down-stem with the hole in the side (instead of the bottom could be used to aim the airstream across the bottom of the beaker towards the front of it after leaving the down-stem (sorry, no pic). This would be especially good for 'tilters' like me--I am actually usually 45 degrees back and slightly towards my right, hand from the days I used to use lighters roll . SM during your tests did most 'subjects' tend to tilt the beaker back/leave it flat/etc.?

If you can provide me a picture of the type of downstem you are describing, it could help me picture it. I would say most of the people held it in their hands with a slight tilt. Not 45 degrees, more like between 15-30 degrees.

The upper intake on the right actually doesn't work, its one of the many lemons that were made but I thought it made for a better visual this way.

So that wouldn't affect the performance in your comparison, or am I misunderstanding?

I used the same upper intake for the testing but just put the faulty one on for the sake of the picture. Sorry for the confusion

 

[vtac]

I used the same upper intake for the testing but just put the faulty one on for the sake of the picture. Sorry for the confusion

My fault for not understanding how the connection works. Soon hopefully.

 

[youdontknowme]

I would think its not how far up through water the rising bubbles travel that determines this but instead how far down into water you have to pull air to get it to bubble up... make sense? depends on whether you want less drag or your air/smoke/vapor traveling through more water to determine what you mean by "efficiency" when it comes to percs. but regardless a well conceived design can tolerate many different angles and water levels

 

[Progress]

YDKM - I would think its not far up through water the rising bubbles travel that determines this but instead how far down into water you have to pull air to get it to bubble up... make sense? depends on whether you want less drag or your air/smoke/vapor traveling through more water to determine what you mean by "efficiency" when it comes to percs. but regardless a well conceived design can tolerate many different angles and water levels

More distance to travel through water + more contact. Many factors too (shapes of vessels/miniscus at the top, size/shape of original bubbles, blah, blah, blah...). We seem to mostly CI2I. Personal preference (drag/filtration/etc.) is everything (plus the actual conceptualization and production of the piece).

We stand on the shoulders of giants. Keep seeking and sharing the knowledge!

Toke it easy

 

[youdontknowme]

Yeah, and drag can help for not drawing too fast on a vape... hopefully the VHW can handle the speed anyway though. and insane filtration is nice but not key for a vape. even when smoking i tend to say more than two percs is just for show. diffuse, percolate, and ice, thats all ya need really.

 

[Progress]

A'ight, I have a little more time to post, SM/You.

First and foremost, thank you for the reply .

SM - The jetflo has less drag and produces fatter clouds. Other than that, I don't think there are many other distinctions as to why most preferred the jetflo. I think they like that it took less lung power to produce larger clouds

Cool. Sorry for all the ?'s :/ . Could you get the same clouds using the reg with longer (yogic) drawing to fill the chamber? Can you think of any advantages to the reg.

SM - If you can provide me a picture of the type of downstem you are describing, it could help me picture it. I would say most of the people held it in their hands with a slight tilt. Not 45 degrees, more like between 15-30 degrees.

Oh yeah, the mouthpiece tilts too.
I hang with 'tilters' as well (not tilting usually means standing/sitting/standing/sitting).
Sorry, SM. I can't draw very well, and (on my planet) there is no light and, therefore, no pictures Instead of light they have given us soulshine and lovelights (hope that's cool) .
But this is a simple one to visualize (I think). A regular (non-diffused) down-stem closed at the bottom (like a test-tube). Instead of a hole on the bottom there is a hole (or multiple holes/slits) just before the closed end on one side, so that (when you spin the down-stem to point in the right direction) it points towards the front of the bottom on the beaker, directing the air that travels down the down-stem across the bottom of the beaker to the other side (where it travels up the opposite wall and has to get around the down-stem--even better with the pocket in the front of the ProVWT).
^Kinda wordy, but hopefully clear.

You - Yeah, and drag can help for not drawing too fast on a vape....

I like things to be fairly drag free (clearing/inhaling feels similar to breathing free. I also like the efficient cooling of vapor to room temperature (not much past for flavor IMO) and significant particle filtration.

You - Hopefully the VHW can handle the speed anyway though

I hope so too (with all of that hot glass and the corkscrew/Venturi effect, I don't see how not )

You - insane filtration is nice but not key for a vape even when smoking i tend to say more than two percs is just for show. diffuse, percolate, and ice, thats all ya need really.

'Insane filtration' is not nice . I think the PC term is mentally ill and they deserve to live freely like the rest of us .

Seriously, I understood what you meant. There is no tar. I prefer filtration that mixes the vapor and water efficiently (inlines/trees/creations beyond my time limit for explanations ) because it does two things: 1) filters the tiny amount of particulate matter mixed in throughout the vapor (<easier to do) and 2) cools the vapor (<harder to do) manually (no ice) to the temperature of the water (ranges from very cold-to-warm due to preference/mood--variety... ).

Gotta go oil my head.

Lettameknowhattayouthink...

 

[stonemonkey55]

I think the yogic breather can definitely leverage the standard but the jet flo just seemed to produce more consistent result. I prefer the jetflo, less drag, bigger clouds - less work to get bigger drags.

A regular (non-diffused) down-stem closed at the bottom (like a test-tube). Instead of a hole on the bottom there is a hole (or multiple holes/slits) just before the closed end on one side, so that (when you spin the down-stem to point in the right direction) it points towards the front of the bottom on the beaker, directing the air that travels down the down-stem across the bottom of the beaker to the other side (where it travels up the opposite wall and has to get around the down-stem--even better with the pocket in the front of the ProVWT).
^Kinda wordy, but hopefully clear.

Do they make this style stem like this? So what you're saying is depending on how you tilt, you can adjust the downstem directionally to get the right type "glug glug" sound from the water? I guess these things are just easier to see. Based on your suggestion, what improvements is it supposed to bring?

I like things to be fairly drag free (clearing/inhaling feels similar to breathing free. I also like the efficient cooling of vapor to room temperature (not much past for flavor IMO) and significant particle filtration.

I had thought you liked more drag, isn't that why you added the beads for resistance? Anyhow, thanks for all the feedback guys, I pointed Mark to take a look at the last couple of threads.

Yeah, and drag can help for not drawing too fast on a vape... hopefully the VHW can handle the speed anyway though.

Definitely, the VHW has enough thermal mass where you can hit it super hard and not worry about it cooling off too much and then having to wait for it to warm up. I am happy, as a matter of fact, I will go practice some yogic breathing with the standard to see if I can find anymore diffference to share with you guys

 

[Progress]

Good to hear from you SM!

SM - I think the yogic breather can definitely leverage the standard but the jet flo just seemed to produce more consistent result. I prefer the jetflo, less drag, bigger clouds - less work to get bigger drags.

Cool. Sounds like the options could have been (may become) a remnant of the VHG due to forced air/manual draw difference (IMO).

SM - Definitely, the VHW has enough thermal mass where you can hit it super hard and not worry about it cooling off too much and then having to wait for it to warm up. I am happy, as a matter of fact, I will go practice some yogic breathing with the standard to see if I can find anymore diffference to share with you guys

Cool. How would it compare to the Herborizer w/ dimmer in this respect (could it transfer heat fast enough to cloud a 6 footer well in 3 seconds (hypothetically), a 20 footer in 3 seconds, etc.)?
I responded to the rest in CD's fancy glass thread (http://www.fuckcombustion.com/viewtopic.php?pid=14752#p14752).

 

[stonemonkey55]

Cool. How would it compare to the Herborizer w/ dimmer in this respect (could it transfer heat fast enough to cloud a 6 footer well in 3 seconds (hypothetically), a 20 footer in 3 seconds, etc.)?

Hypothetically, I think the 6 footer is definitely possible, the 20 footer, I have no idea. I can hit it non stop for several bowls without a problem so I think it could be plausible that you could milk a 20 footer, but 3 seconds seems really fast.

Progress, I have another update for you us as well in regards to the jetflo/standard compare and contrast. I had a couple of other buddies over the weekend and let them try out the two different versions and the results were consistent that the jetflo seemed to produce larger overall clouds while the standard produced slightly stronger taste.

 

[Progress]

SM - Hypothetically, I think the 6 footer is definitely possible, the 20 footer, I have no idea. I can hit it non stop for several bowls without a problem so I think it could be plausible that you could milk a 20 footer, but 3 seconds seems really fast.

Thank you for your reply. I probably shouldn't have included the part at the end about the 6/20 footers.

I was mainly wondering 2 things:
1) Which heating mass seems to have better heat retention (be less likely to run out of heat if drawn on hard and consistently--beyond what's humanly possible)?
2) Which heating mass seems to have better heat delivery (which do you think you could draw on harder (beyond what's humanly possible) before you force the air through to fast to get it hot enough)

I realize you do not have access to a dimmer for the comparison (if I am wrong, that would be the best for the comparisons)

Progress, I have another update for you us as well in regards to the jetflo/standard compare and contrast. I had a couple of other buddies over the weekend and let them try out the two different versions and the results were consistent that the jet-flo seemed to produce larger overall clouds while the standard produced slightly stronger taste.

Cool. From what you are saying, I am imagining that the jet-flo could be better for uprights and the standard for hand-helds (uprights tend to benefit from more flow to fill smoothly, while hand-held pieces tend to benefit from slightly more drag (no one likes accidentally getting water in their mouths :/ . How exactly is the intake different (just smaller?...how much smaller?...)

I hope you don't mind me keeping you busy with experiments . Hope Ur week is starting off well

Can't wait to hear what you have to say!

 

[stonemonkey55]

Thank you for your reply. I probably shouldn't have included the part at the end about the 6/20 footers.

I was mainly wondering 2 things:
1) Which heating mass seems to have better heat retention (be less likely to run out of heat if drawn on hard and consistently--beyond what's humanly possible)?
2) Which heating mass seems to have better heat delivery (which do you think you could draw on harder (beyond what's humanly possible) before you force the air through to fast to get it hot enough)

I realize you do not have access to a dimmer for the comparison (if I am wrong, that would be the best for the comparisons)

I'm assuming you are asking for a comparison between this heating element and the heat injector for the Herbo. If that is the case, then the fact that I don't have the dimmer makes the comparison a bit tougher. I think the VHW has more thermal mass but the Herbo has stainless steel to better retain heat. The VHW does employ 5 marias and two intakes that should be the air swirling for better vapor extraction so based on that, I think the VHW has a slight edge over the Herbo. The air from the herbo goes straight down, although there are 4 tiny outlets where the air exits. I think the final verdict would be, both of these would be able to handle the lung power of whoever had the world's most powerful lungs. Maybe if you had a vacuum that could continuously suck, you could lower the temp enough where the solid was no longer changing to a gas.

Cool. From what you are saying, I am imagining that the jet-flo could be better for uprights and the standard for hand-helds (uprights tend to benefit from more flow to fill smoothly, while hand-held pieces tend to benefit from slightly more drag (no one likes accidentally getting water in their mouths . How exactly is the intake different (just smaller?...how much smaller?...)

You hit the nail on the head, as we've done more testing, I think that the jetflo would be suited for more apparatus's and the standard would be better suited for something smaller. I guess a good comparson would be if you compared a hit from a PD versus a hit from a SSV. The SSV is overall larger, but the PD seems to produce denser hits. Hope this description made some sense but I think the PD/SSV analogy holds true here, except the extremes are much smaller!

No worries, I am happy to do more experiments, just gotta remember to write everything down LOL!

 

[Acolyte of Zinglon]

before i forget to ask, what exactly is the handle made of? is it plastic or glass?

 

[stonemonkey55]

The handle is made of some type of clear plastic but are completely seperated from the intakes