GP Series by VapourArt - Official Thread for GP Spheroid, GP PAPS, X, GP Piccolo, GP SnP and more - Part 3

[perseas]

TY, Perseas! I've not yet owned a PV that takes batteries, only egos, so I have no way to use it yet- most days I pick it up tho and marvel at the smooth threads.

TY again, it's wonderful.

Thanks for this. I used that method to quickly take my switch out to compare those insulators again. You are right, there is a difference, but it is so small it could probably be measured in microns. I can't imagine that a difference this small fixes anything that the spring loaded GPin couldn't adapt for already.

The bottom of the AW batteries is different from others and the insulating coating is thinner. The spare insulator protects the switch from auto-firing with these batteries and even tenths of millimetre matter

 

[DaveSignal]

The bottom of the AW batteries is different from others and the insulating coating is thinner. The spare insulator protects the switch from auto-firing with these batteries and even tenths of millimetre matter

ah ok. So the extra insulator is included to make a non-standard battery work.

I actually just did a google image search to see what you were talking about:

That is out of spec, just like the 510 threading on some atomizers.

 

[qorax]

There is another method to remove the switch from the PAPS 4, which is indeed a very clever and handy way to do it.

Timbozero Method

You set the locking ring in the locked position and push the button with your finger and at the same time unscrew the switch; no need to remove the negative contact beforehand.

However with the handmade polishing and the goal of having a seamless look, the edge of the ring has become a bit sharp. Since for this way of opening the switch the user has to apply force to unlock, if they don't have enough experience or force in their hands, and if the switch is over tightened, there is a possibility to scratch their hand in the process. For that reason our official recommendation continues to be to open it like we show in the reference video. So, an experienced user can unscrew the switch with the aforementioned method in 3 seconds.

Nice and easy one there by Tim, but I see a problem with this method. You see for unthreading the switch this way the user has to apply excessive pressure over the locking ring. Both times, while unthreading it, as well as while assembling it back.

And that could gradually deform the ring, even if it is ever so slightly. And eventually it'll start binding. Gone will be that sweet, smooth, one-flick lock / unlock operation.

Just my opinion.

 

[DaveSignal]

Yay! Working well

When you put the top cap down right with the SS mesh in the bottom notched openings, aren't you shorting your coil? I mean the SS creates a small short anyway just being through the coil, but its not much different from having all the wraps touching. But with it right up and touching the top cap, there are now multiple negatives. So the current is not exactly going from positive to negative post... its going from positive to all over the place.

 

[qorax]

When you put the top cap down right with the SS mesh in the bottom notched openings, aren't you shorting your coil? I mean the SS creates a small short anyway just being through the coil, but its not much different from having all the wraps touching. But with it right up and touching the top cap, there are now multiple negatives. So the current is not exactly going from positive to negative post... its going from positive to all over the place.

I have discussed this before. Couple of times over two years back. The moment you make a "wick" out of the stainless steel Mesh ~ it's no more a "conducting" metallic object ~ the "oxidation and quenching processes" make it non-conducting thru-n-thru.

 

[Firestorm]

Nice and easy one there by Tim, but I see a problem with this method. You see for unthreading the switch this way the user has to apply excessive pressure over the locking ring. Both times, while unthreading it, as well as while assembling it back.

And that could gradually deform the ring, even if it is ever so slightly. And eventually it'll start binding. Gone will be that sweet, smooth, one-flick lock / unlock operation.

Just my opinion.

It is a nifty method, although it can be tough to apply pressure on the button and hold it in place and there is the potential to cut yourself if you're not careful. Nonetheless, I really like this method and will definitely employ it. I'm not sure why there's any difference when re-assembling the button as this method is only needed to remove it, and you must have super-human Canadian lumberjack strength if you're worried about deforming the 316SS locking ring.

 

[qorax]

It is a nifty method, although it can be tough to apply pressure on the button and hold it in place and there is the potential to cut yourself if you're not careful. Nonetheless, I really like this method and will definitely employ it. I'm not sure why there's any difference when re-assembling the button as this method is only needed to remove it, and you must have super-human Canadian lumberjack strength if you're worried about deforming the 316SS locking ring.

Dear respected Sir, it is an 'opinion', of mine ~ and only time can verify it's tenability. But, I'm sticking with it ~ and the screwdriver.

 

[Augmented Dog]

Nice and easy one there by Tim, but I see a problem with this method. You see for unthreading the switch this way the user has to apply excessive pressure over the locking ring. Both times, while unthreading it, as well as while assembling it back.

And that could gradually deform the ring, even if it is ever so slightly. And eventually it'll start binding. Gone will be that sweet, smooth, one-flick lock / unlock operation.

Just my opinion.

I was thinking the same thing!
A few extra minutes preserves the integrity and life of a beautiful device.

 

[Augmented Dog]

My Dear Fellow Denizens of the Asylum,
If you live in the U.S. And have not yet visited the Change {dot} org thread, followed the link and signed the petition to defeat the Deeming regs, Please Do So!
Our lives, our rights and our community are at stake.
Thank you for doing the responsible thing!

 

[Zbeast08]

I would like some opinions please!! After reading alot of the posts about battery sizes, rattles, fitment etc., I realized that i need to order a few 18490/18500 size batteries. Most of my batteries are AW IMR 18490 but want to get a couple of 18500 batteries to use in my new PAPs v4 upon arrival, what are other battery brand options that are high quality and dependable?
On the website that I buy all my batteries...RTD.....they offer a AW "protected" battery that is black in color....is this a good battery for vaping or are we to use "unprotected" batteries??
All suggestions are welcomed!
Thanks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[qorax]

I would like some opinions please!! After reading alot of the posts about battery sizes, rattles, fitment etc., I realized that i need to order a few 18490/18500 size batteries. Most of my batteries are AW IMR 18490 but want to get a couple of 18500 batteries to use in my new PAPs v4 upon arrival, what are other battery brand options that are high quality and dependable?
On the website that I buy all my batteries...RTD.....they offer a AW "protected" battery that is black in color....is this a good battery for vaping or are we to use "unprotected" batteries??
All suggestions are welcomed!
Thanks

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Protected batts work fine in mechs, until you try sub-ohming. Besides, the protected ones also are [usually] a tad longer ~ making it a Pita [sometimes] in certain mods. Those protected ones are [usually] ICRs, not suitable for hi-drain ops.

IMRs or Hybrids are your best bet. In 18500 size the new AWs (hi-Amp ones) and the Purple Efests are pretty nice to go about. And prolly the only ones in that form factor besides Tenergy and the 'yellow' ones (ah, forgot the name!).

 

[DaveSignal]

I don't use 18500, but these batteries generally aren't designed to push super low ohms anyway.

 

[Augmented Dog]

I don't use 18500, but these batteries generally aren't designed to push super low ohms anyway.

It's all about continuous discharge in Amps.
To figure the Amps you need to be safe:
Battery Voltage divided by Ohms = Amps.
Eg: 4.2 V/0.5 Ohms = 8.4 Amps
Most batteries are rated at 3.7V, but run at 4.2V when fully/newly charged.
I realize most of you already know this, but for newer mech users, it is important.

 

[qorax]

I don't use 18500, but these batteries generally aren't designed to push super low ohms anyway.

*The new AW IMRs are 18A CD: AW 18490 IMR 1200 MAh High-Drain Battery NEW
*The Purple Efests are 15A CD: Test/Review of Efest IMR18500 1000mAh (Purple) 2014

Both good enough for [normal] sub-Ohming

 

[DaveSignal]

*The new AW IMRs are 18A CD: AW 18490 IMR 1200 MAh High-Drain Battery NEW
*The Purple Efests are 15A CD: Test/Review of Efest IMR18500 1000mAh (Purple) 2014

Both good enough for [normal] sub-Ohming

Well this is what @Zbeast08 should get then.

 

[qorax]

Well this is what @Zbeast08 should get then.

This is what I use in my Mechs. And I only use 18500 Mechs. I avoid the 18650 size.

 

[Zbeast08]

Thanks for the responses. I will order my usual 18490's and hope with the 18500 tube with the new Paps that I will not have any issues. I haven't had any issues with v3 Paps as far as pins,springs,rattles,etc. !!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Augmented Dog]

Experiencing a near conflict in loyalty.
I'm in love with my v4, however...
Call me crazy, my dearest PAPS has always been my 2.5 Lux in 650 mode.
I have a v3 Lux 500 And an additional 350 tube. I have an X 1.5 Lux (omg, gorgeous and etc.)
But,
The v4 is exceptional! It currently wears my Heron v1 (my 1.5 lives on my 2.5 due to favoritism).
I think my least favorite is the v3 (am I allowed to say that?) because of the switch. That switch seems to have been an evolutionary transition. The v3 tubes are gorgeous! I'm using my v3 350 Lux tube with the v3 switch and a 2.5 flat top cap right now. The serialized 500 is placed away, for now ([HASHTAG]#185[/HASHTAG]).
Anyhow, the v4 woos my attention and affection like a newly adopted kitten, while my 2.5 demands its due as alpha mech.
:sigh: what's a boy to do!?!
Lol@me!

 

[anavidfan]

Experiencing a near conflict in loyalty.
I'm in love with my v4, however...
Call me crazy, my dearest PAPS has always been my 2.5 Lux in 650 mode.
I have a v3 Lux 500 And an additional 350 tube. I have an X 1.5 Lux (omg, gorgeous and etc.)
But,
The v4 is exceptional! It currently wears my Heron v1 (my 1.5 lives on my 2.5 due to favoritism).
I think my least favorite is the v3 (am I allowed to say that?) because of the switch. That switch seems to have been an evolutionary transition. The v3 tubes are gorgeous! I'm using my v3 350 Lux tube with the v3 switch and a 2.5 flat top cap right now. The serialized 500 is placed away, for now ([HASHTAG]#185[/HASHTAG]).
Anyhow, the v4 woos my attention and affection like a newly adopted kitten, while my 2.5 demands its due as alpha mech.
:sigh: what's a boy to do!?!
Lol@me!

Funny how we place "sentient feelings" to our inanimate "objects of affection". Its how I feel about my first real atomizers. THey held the throne for years, now they are not used much. Not because they dont perform, but due to my stupid hands. For about 3 years they just could not be matched.

 

[Augmented Dog]

Funny how we place "sentient feelings" to our inanimate "objects of affection". Its how I feel about my first real atomizers. THey held the throne for years, now they are not used much. Not because they dont perform, but due to my stupid hands. For about 3 years they just could not be matched.

Who's to say that they don't live and express emotional energy of their own!
Just 'cause they can't walk across the room?