The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

510 vs. 901 vs. 510-808 [vs...]

Discussion in 'LiteCig' started by Mammal, Aug 5, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. Mammal

    Mammal Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Feb 25, 2010
    Connecticut, USA
    Wow, haven't logged in here in a while - got busy with RL and, oddly (but as others have described), I think I hit a point where I kicked a major chunk of the habit and stopped feeling quite as much urgency about the whole subject. Snuck two actual cigs over my week off and all they've done is wreck my sinuses and make me sick, oops.

    So.. I started with the 40x and KR808D-1... still rather like the 40x but never really got into cartomizers [I should still try one of those carto+cartridge mods, but if I can use something without having to mod it, I've got better things to do than bodge things together]... Then I ended up with a bunch of Q-cig 510s, which are nice but can be a touch fiddly with the automatic battery... or maybe I do just demand more battery life than they can provide.

    Back around May, I was getting my wisdom teeth yanked* and knew I was going to need something with a lighter draw than the 40x. So I got a 808-battery-to-510-atomizer adapter, and with the Q-cig atomizer on a "shorty" 808 battery, with a 901 cartridge for maximum juice storage... hey, that was really something! Just a hair warmer and more consistent, but it made the 510-style atomizer taste more 'realistic' and less 'foggy.'

    I've been using this combo at home for a while and I'm pretty taken with it, although the draw could actually go even lighter for my tastes right now. But my two 808 batteries aren't going to last forever, so now I'm trying to figure out what to try next, and Shawn has such a selection of 510 and 901 atomizers that I'm asking here before diving in. :)

    If the somewhat-rare Qcig-on-*shorty*-808 battery combo is my 'baseline', and I'm hoping for the same vapor with at least the same battery life, do I want:

    *A 901? Or do these have a reputation for being even 'colder' and 'foggier' than the standard 510?

    *A plain-old 510 kit?

    ...and where are subjective comparisons of the 3 or 4 different atomizer styles for each lurking? :) Particularly compared to the Qcig ("Expert?") as a baseline.

    Or do y'all think I'd be better off sticking with the frankencig and holding off for an eGo? [Still hoping Joye will implement a suggestion I sent them, but apparently that's unlikely for now.] Even then, I've got to figure out which style of atomizer to home in on...

    [FWIW, I burnt or gummed up one Qcig atomizer after about a month of solid use, and I'm back to the first I was using, which probably has 2+ months on it and is still going, though starting to feel like it's liable to go in another week or three.]

    ...and as far as 510 bits, are the Hello batteries with the USB charging port known to be particularly 'stronger' or 'weaker' in longevity and voltage? I like that design in concept, but I'm not sure if the economics are there for my usage.

    (Oh, and for those keeping track - I've killed all of 3 402 batteries since March; the one that 'stuck on' out of a PCC for no obvious reason, one where the auto mechanism just kept getting touchier until I gave up, and one that simply gave up the ghost one day - though that was used to start with. So I guess I'm averaging slightly less than 1 'consumed' per month.)

    *For other wisdom-tooth victims - at least as-of-then, the 808 adapters are 'solid' on the 510 side, and the Q-cig atomizers have a single vent hole, so for the absolute lightest draw you need to be careful about lining up the vent with the notch in the adapter. I'm not sure how the draw on this compares to an actual 510.. it could easily still be lighter as long as the same vapor gets through, but with a manual battery it was a lot easier to 'sip' from than an automatic 40x when I had to worry about things like that. :)
  2. Mammal

    Mammal Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Feb 25, 2010
    Connecticut, USA
    Okay, I'm going to start adding 'reviews' and tidbits piecemeal here, and then I'll summarize it all in one of the main forums when I'm done...

    I usually use the m402 at work and I'd been using the Q-Cig 510 atomizer adapted to a 'shorty' KR808D-1 battery at home. Just before my big 'missing link' package arrived (enough bits to try the 510 and 901 'properly'), I pulled out an old cartomizer and tried it on the 808 again and was surprised how 'warm' it was - and, also, how much better the battery life was, which could probably be explained with a multimeter. Still messy to fill, IMHO, but I just might start cutting down a few 901 cartridges for that 'mod' and fill them like cartridges...

    So, I've just piled on:
    * A Hello Sit'n'Go, which I'll pretend is a 510 battery;
    * 510 SLB atomizer;
    * 510 Joye atomizer;
    * 901 kit

    ...and some odds'n'ends for the stuff I already have.

    So far, I've tried the 510 SLB atomizer on the Hello, and the 901 put together like a 901.

    First impression of the 510 SLB on the Hello: "Wow, this is.. warm and nice!" Not quite as hot as a carto, but 'warmer' than the recently-cleaned Q-Cig piece was being, at least with my half-charged shorty 808 batts the previous night. I definitely need to do a side-by-side on this, but the first impression is 'worth trying.' Looking into the atomizer, the bridge is wide like the Q-Cig's but the build quality might be a little different - looks better-formed and less 'mushed.'

    [Peering into the official Joye one, untested as of yet, the bridge is surprisingly narrow in comparison. This is my first look at the 'real' part.]

    The 901, meanwhile, has a narrow and very pointy bridge inside... and also works well; subjectively, there's not really a *ton* of difference, but if anything, it's even 'warmer' just now, which is welcome. The nice thing, which I managed to forget/get confused about, is that the 901 threads are the same as the KR808D-1 threads, so if you have a bunch of KR808D-1 stuff but prefer atomizers, this would be the most convenient way to keep using all your batteries and chargers without buying more new equipment or getting hackety with carto mods.

    The 901 kit comes with an AC wall-charger, if anyone was wondering. And a "901 to 901" extension adapter that goes into the charger, since they designed the charger with a deep well that can't take manual batteries, oops.

    Quirkily, the 901 batteries have a bicolor LED setup, simply so they can blink green at you when they're charged. I haven't killed one yet, or read the manual (bad mammal!), so I don't know if they do anything fun when they're dead yet. Otherwise, they're basically shorty 808 batteries minus the vent-holes to allow cartos. [To repeat: 808 batteries are 'universal' between cartos and 901 atomizers; 901 batteries only work with 901 atomizers.] This is because DSE puts the vent on the atomizer in the form of a single hole (so watch your thumb), while I guess Kanger decided it was easier to drill and machine their battery connectors than drill a hole in every carto.

    This is an interesting quirk, because a hole in the "901 spot" on a carto would probably make cartos a lot easier to fill out of the box. Although I guess, if you're buying needle-tip bottles, you could still go in through the mouth hole without removing them from the battery anyway.

    901 batteries have a rubbery button, but the same "clicky" feel as a 808 or the Hello 510. 808 batteries have basically the same button, but in 'solid' goldtone plastic. I used to be an auto fan, but I got used to manuals while having to be very careful 'sipping' with the teeth pulled, so it's not a priority anymore.

    The 901 certainly doesn't seem 'cold' right now - I read that somewhere but it seems to be a myth - though I guess I've yet to try the official 510 - and I guess the draw is a hair lighter than the SLB-510 and a whole lot lighter than the 40x. So unless performance is going to drop suddenly, or the "not-disposable" 510 bits are going to turn out to stay at peak performance forever in comparison [used only 2 Q-Cig atomizers over 4 months, and after dry-burning one, I think the other just needs that treatment too], this certainly seems like a way to go.


    More on the build/design of the Sit'n'Go: I really like the concept, and performance seems great thus far, but having the connector stand 'bare' seems a little fiddly, as does the cap you therefore have to fit over it. I'd rather have two permanent half-moons of plastic or silicone wedging it in place and an exposed connector (maybe with a regular 'pen cap' to protect that, if it's really a concern). It's a little thing, but on something you're going to touch every day until it breaks...

    However, having the blue 'smorking' LED on the thumbswitch (the red tip LED is only exposed, and only operates, to indicate charging) does make this a little more friendly for driving, probably. I'm always concerned about who I'm flashing blue LEDs at, especially when my commute takes me past a police station or two. :)


    Note that I've been and will continue using 901 cartridges with everything 510 and 901, simply because they work with both, seem to have the largest capacity/best wicking, and are easy to fill.
  3. Mammal

    Mammal Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Feb 25, 2010
    Connecticut, USA
    I'm gonna have to move this to a real forum sooner than later... Feel silly bumping it here, but maybe it's getting some eyeballs on a good vendor!

    Just a minor update to say that I may see where some 901 annoyance comes from... After a week or so of alternating, the 901 feels a little 'gummed' on the pull while the 510 SLB is still going strong. I'm still planning a relatively-scientific side-by-side-by-side, but I suspect that's down to something about the relatively limited ventilation arrangement on the 901, and the 510 SLB maybe being particularly good about that in comparison.

    Nothing a cleaning won't fix, but with 'so much' equipment flopping around it's hard to remember I need to do that. And either I've been overdoing it or both the Hello 510 and standard 901 batteries have a capacity ramp from 'utterly awesome' the first few days down to more of a 'Where'd those last 15 minutes go?' now that I've broken them in.

    I'm not sure how well the 901 battery really likes the 808D PCC, either - when I started, with two 808D-1 batteries purchased 'loose' during the February China's-on-vacation lull, one of the 808s has been 'quiet' in the charger, and the other has always liked to 'wake up' and blink like it was freshly inserted every 10 minutes or so. The 901 battery was doing the same 'wake up and blink' thing in there, but stays 'quiet' after the initial blinks in the 901 wall charger. So maybe my particular 808D-1 PCC is being a little rough on it, over-cycling or over-charge-wise (though not badly enough to make anything the slightest bit warm, and I tend to be paranoid about Li-battery safety).
  4. Mammal

    Mammal Senior Member ECF Veteran

    Feb 25, 2010
    Connecticut, USA
    One more update [going to have to find time to cut-and-paste-and-edit on the weekend] ... Maybe I'm too quick to call flooding 'gumming.' The 901 takes quite nicely to a dry sizzle, and after a couple seconds the excess quickly starts wafting out the 'uni-vent.' It's possible to blow this through by 'tailpiping' it or playing it like a piccolo, and the performance recovers.

    This also means you can do a Popeye-the-sailor-man impression with it, if you've been dying to.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page