Yeah. I've been waiting for a very long time for a new and improved K4, but it doesn't look good. I love that open MTL draw that K4 offers (2.4 mm airhole) and the ~4 ml capacity, but hate the overall design. Looks like SM has abandoned that perfect (for me) airflow and is going wider and/or tighter. Nothing for us "in the middle" folks. I'm so sad.
Hmm- I never tried either tank, but I'd have thought that the K5, with all its settings and inserts, could've replicated (or come close) to one of their previous models, so that surprises me.
Makes me think: Since airflow is maybe the first criterion used to choose a tank (I'd never pick a wide open DTL, and cloud chasers won't choose a Nautilus 2), why isn't airflow measured, rated, and published for atty's? Everyone talks about the dia. of the chimney, but that isn't the only factor that determines the airflow. I mean, airflow isn't subjective- it is measurable. Attach a device, measure the resistance at each setting. Then, when an atty is released, they publish: "This device settings allow for airflow of (whatever the numbers would be) 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 lbs.", etc. Or "has a range of x to xx lbs." Seems the vape equip. manufacturers would welcome and promote a standard like this. I'd love it myself.
Just a thought. And the more I think about it, I'm sure it'll eventually come. As the industry and product development mature, standards will come. Might cut down on some posts in ecf, though - "how does the airflow compare..." And I guess a lot of equipment
wouldn't be sold that otherwise would. A lot of hobbyist vapers probably have a graveyard of tanks that didn't have the right airflow for them.