what makes a vape efficient?

[budballer]

So the PD and HA are probably the two most reputable vapes around here for conservation. I used to have a pd so I can say it has a very small bowl. Could it be that efficiency is more about amount in the bowl than the vape itself? I would like to get DBV or a SSV but I hear the efficiency for the popular whip vapes is terrible. Can anyone give me a break down on bow one vale is more efficient then the other? Where does the rest of the thc go otherwise in less efficient models? Thanks

 

[Nycdeisel]

I dont know how I can give you an exact breakdown, but I will say this:

I own a DBV and had used it daily, regularly, for quite a while. THEN I got my PD, and my usage was cut in half, maybe thirds. Most people working through the same transition find this to be the norm.

Remember that efficiency, and effectiveness are two very different things.

 

[wilf789]

What makes a vape efficient?

In many cases, the user does.

 

[SD_haze]

The most efficient vaporizers like PD & HA, while very efficient, also have the DRAWBACK of constant vaporization over time while you're not hitting it due to partial conduction heating.

So they're efficient if they're getting hit regularly but if you wait a while between hits you're getting much less out of your herb.

 

[WatTyler]

Like NYC says, efficiency depends on the goal.

SSV et al are very efficient at turning buds into vapor.

PD is less efficient at this- reduced airflow and so takes a longer time to do the same to the same quantity of bud, and a longer time to get as medicated also.

MF claims ( i think?) that the delivery speed of the LB is the most efficient as it's closest to the absorption capabilities of the human body- thus minimal wasted THC. Efficient vapor delivery. But actually in terms of vaporisation efficiency over time- as a vaporization tool- it's pretty terrible and one of the slowest (imo). ( I would actually class the LB as inefficient in extraction terms also- i can often get extra hits out of a load with another vape)

Around here often the word efficiency is used for conservation of herb, whilst I think they're pretty distinct in our context.

 

[Nycdeisel]

Thats funny, because I own a PD and a MFLB and find the efficiency to be pretty on par.
for example, I would load a few PD stems throughout the day, or instead I can load just one MFLB trench(about the size of 2-3 PD stems) and have that last all day. as far as effectiveness as producing vapor at the right temperatures, it does that very well too. The AVB can even get a little darker then it can with my PD, and I do notice more of a body high with it. but with the LB there are TOO many variables, the batteries and charger, draw speed, trench load, fineness of grind, and other things. So it really is very user dependent as for the results you get. so is the PD, however a log has no controls, the heat is steady and constant, and ambient air can affect the temp of the PD.

So in the end, with all these different factors to consider that change ones results with any given model, it seems safe to say that a lot of it does come right down to HOW you use it.

not going to start an argument, just wanted to show the other side since you said you didnt think it was very efficient.

 

[VWFringe]

Efficiency, above the draw rates, and how big or small my hits are, has another dimension for me - it's about money at the back-end...

the oil I would recover from this pipe would keep me going for weeks

so, to me, the "whip" is not efficient because i can't recover oil from it

--------------------
i have a simple take on efficiency, if I can ghost my hits I'm being efficient, up to 25 seconds each hit now (consistently!) and often taking it to 30....it's vapor after all, not smoke.

 

[lwien]

The most efficient vaporizers like PD & HA, while very efficient, also have the DRAWBACK of constant vaporization over time while you're not hitting it due to partial conduction heating.

So they're efficient if they're getting hit regularly but if you wait a while between hits you're getting much less out of your herb.

Most people that use the PD do not leave the stem in the vape between hits. I know I don't, therefore, the bud is not being heated between hits.

If we define efficiency as the ability to get higher using less bud, then my experience mirrors what NYCdeisel mentioned. When using a PD versus a Buddha, my consumption was cut in half and the reasons I think this happened is for a few reasons.

One, is that the bowl is very small and therefore, effectively vapes it's contents with very small amounts and produces very satisfying hits. If one were to load the same amount in a Buddha, which doesn't even cover the screen in the wand, the hits are no where near as satisfying.

Secondly, because the bowl is so small, it encourages frugal use. I never fill up a second stem because after one stem, I realize I've had enough. With the Buddha, I could easily vape more than I wanted. I mean, who in the hell wants to fill a Buddha bowl with 0.025gr ? With the Ion, there were times when I just didn't want to finish the bag because I was already high enough..........so that is wasted vapor.

And third, being that the vapor path is so short between the herb and your mouth, versus all that surface are in bags and whips, there is less condensation going on.

Also, with the PD, there is no heat being applied between hits which helps to conserve unlike a hand free whip vape or a vape such as an Iolite

 

[WatTyler]

Thats funny, because I own a PD and a MFLB and find the efficiency to be pretty on par.
for example ............ just wanted to show the other side since you said you didnt think it was very efficient.

I still don't think it is. (I'm just writing, not arguing ) As you point out our techniques will vary and there're lots of variables with this one. Nevertheless I will add I can ALWAYS get another hit from my LB abv in another convection vape (usually my volcano or ssv) no matter how well toasted the lb trench looks (even when it's looked over done with black bits (early days of the PA )). I think this is because the nature of the LB - it is using the minimal amount of energy only on the herb in contact with the trench, and doesn't somehow get as deep into the cellular structure as convection heating (I believe there are still some goodies to be released even within the plant matter, not just the external trichomes, but I'm not certain; someone might correct me). I'm sure there's lot's who will jump in defending the 'extraction efficiency' LB- so don't get me wrong- it is a great vape imo, but this is just what my experiments have found in my circumstances. It's not a lot of vapor ( in the left overs) and certainly not very tasty, but just contributes towards my conclusion.

One, is that the bowl is very small and therefore, effectively vapes it's contents with very small amounts and produces very satisfying hits. If one were to load the same amount in a Buddha, which doesn't even cover the screen in the wand, the hits are no where near as satisfying.

Secondly, because the bowl is so small, it encourages frugal use......

And third, being that the vapor path is so short between the herb and your mouth, versus all that surface are in bags and whips, there is less condensation going on.

But don't One and Secondly really refer to just using less? Nothing to actually do with efficiency i.e. the ratio or percentage of input to output? but more with conservation? As in however stoned you want to be or end up getting, it has no bearing on the material efficiency of the tool and methodology. You've not actually gotten more high off less bud- just been more personally efficient (if that makes any sense). 'Third' I feel is more truly efficiency related.....

Ahh GREAT- I just looked at wikipedia and as always some one else has described it so well, and offered me the mental clarity i was seeking. No more verbal contortions. What I mean is the difference between effectiveness- I think this is minimum bud to be as vaped as you intend to be- and efficiency.

Note that the term "efficient" is very much confused and misused with the term "effective". In general, efficiency is a measurable concept, quantitatively determined by the ratio of output to input. Compare "effectiveness", which is a vague, non-quantitative concept, mainly concerned with achieving objectives

Ahhh, semantics