Basically was more of a hedge than it needed to be. It LITERALLY turns the atomizer into a thermometer.
If you quit smoking for better health, your mod choices just went down from 1000's to about 5
- Thread starter Angel Eyes
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Basically was more of a hedge than it needed to be. It LITERALLY turns the atomizer into a thermometer.
Exactly what do you think "variable temperature" would do? Evolv themselves hedge and call their devices temperature protecting/limiting, but make no mistake. There very well is control of temperature. It doesn't automatically go to a fixed temperature but you wouldn't want that in an ecigarette.
Set the watts high and the temperature low, and for all practical purposes you've got temperature regulated device.
By the way, I have charred my wick in temperature mode. Premise of thread busted.
By the way, I have charred my wick in temperature mode. Premise of thread busted.
Fixed it.
Look, I have several very high end Thermometers - Surface, Air, fluid, Thermal to mention a few. All have some very sophisticated internal components. The Probe tip is the END Game, not the casing. The Coil is the working component in the DNA Temperature Control, not the Atomizer.
To say otherwise is simply sales hype. Fire a coil directly off the DNA +/- connections, even without an Atomizer and the DNA should attempt to control Temperature of the coil. Agreed?
Last edited:
What I think variable temperature would do would be to allow me to nudge coil temp up or down like I currently can nudge voltage or watts up or down. What the DNA chip does is REDUCE power IF the coil reaches the MAXIMUM temperature you've set (which it calculates by measuring the resistance and doing a conversion based on the properties of Nickle wire - not by directly measuring temperature).
There IS a difference.
Let's say I want to vape at 400 degrees.
On a DNA, I set the temp to 400 degrees. But I'm at 20 watts. And my 20 watts is only producing 350 degrees. The DNA chip is happy with that - I am SETTING the watts, and LIMITING the temperature.
Variable Temp would (hopefully) adjust power as necessary to quickly reach and then maintain my 400 degrees.
You can simulate this with a DNA chip I suppose, by always having your power setting too high - so that the temp limit always kicks in...I'm not sure if that's how people are using it, but I don't think so. I think people who like it are just happy when the temp kicks in and protects them from burning a wick.
That is a nice feature. It's just not the same as selecting a coil temp to run at.
There IS a difference.
Let's say I want to vape at 400 degrees.
On a DNA, I set the temp to 400 degrees. But I'm at 20 watts. And my 20 watts is only producing 350 degrees. The DNA chip is happy with that - I am SETTING the watts, and LIMITING the temperature.
Variable Temp would (hopefully) adjust power as necessary to quickly reach and then maintain my 400 degrees.
You can simulate this with a DNA chip I suppose, by always having your power setting too high - so that the temp limit always kicks in...I'm not sure if that's how people are using it, but I don't think so. I think people who like it are just happy when the temp kicks in and protects them from burning a wick.
That is a nice feature. It's just not the same as selecting a coil temp to run at.
Last edited:
Missed that - but YES, that IS exactly what I'd like to at least TEST in an e-cig!
I don't KNOW that it would be a better vape, but it sounds like a good approach to try.
Andria,
You've been doing it wrong all these years!
When you inhale the whipped cream, the objective is to not get any of the cream.
Just saying!
this is because you set your temperature limit too high, thereby defeating its purpose, try 400 or below and you will NEVER char a wick!Set the watts high and the temperature low, and for all practical purposes you've got temperature regulated device.
By the way, I have charred my wick in temperature mode. Premise of thread busted.
I think we will be OK with the nickel toxicity at 400 F or below, but I am anxiously awaiting other metal choices that work with DNA 40 temp limiting
You need to re-think your sources.
That is an article, not a study and all linked information below is to the Negatives of electronic cigarettes.
Also about using E-cigs, not High Power Vaping.
i.e. one sided campaigning.
ANTZ anyone?
That is an article, not a study and all linked information below is to the Negatives of electronic cigarettes.
Also about using E-cigs, not High Power Vaping.
i.e. one sided campaigning.
ANTZ anyone?
Thanks for the warning, but I smoked for 35+ years and the surgeon general had all kinds of warnings on every pack I bought for years. I liked it, now I like vaping, is it safe?? Probably not, I'll risk it anyway. We're all gonna die of cancer if something else don't get us first!!
That is a very general article that cites no specifics and offers nothing new. It is, in fact, chock full of "could," "may," "might" and " possibly."
The study citations listed are from known, vocal opponents of Vaping. None of the article actually lends credibility to your dire assertions.
About the only thing said in the article that I can fully accept and agree with is the comment that vaping is likely not totally benign. But, we all are aware of that already.
Science News is not a peer-reviewed scientific journal. It is a popular science magazine that picks and chooses items that it finds in other science publications. If you link to the journal articles they used for this "hit piece", you will note that Science News often conveniently ignores the conclusions of the originals authors. For instance, one of the journal article they cite for evidence of their positions actually states this as their conclusion:
"Scientific evidence regarding the human health effects of e-cigarettes is limited. While e-cigarette aerosol may contain fewer toxicants than cigarette smoke, studies evaluating whether e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes are inconclusive. Some evidence suggests that e-cigarette use may facilitate smoking cessation, but definitive data are lacking. No e-cigarette has been approved by FDA as a cessation aid. Environmental concerns and issues regarding non-user exposure exist. The health impact of e-cigarettes, for users and the public, cannot be determined with currently available data."
Next time try linking to the journals themselves and determine whether you are reading a "consolidation piece" that picks and chooses statements out of context designed to promote a specific position.
Using this type of non-peer reviewed piece shows that you don't understand how legitimate scientific evidence is published.
A couple notes from that article -
1 - They didn't ACTUALLY test temperature impact - just voltage. And the increased carbonyls appear mostly at the highest 4.8 volt runs. It's reasonable to assume that temperature is the issue - but we don't know if they were at 400 or 500 or what. They just adusted their spinner to the highest voltage.
2 - The real news from the test is that it seems to be that PG is the issue. Since the high-watt crowd leans towards VG anyway, that's great news
3 - All the tests were done with this, which I'd suspect as a possible source of toxicity, too
That's a GLANTZ article for god's sake. He's on some kind of twisted all-out campaign to make vaping illegal. And he doesn't care if you've got a Flask or not.
1 - They didn't ACTUALLY test temperature impact - just voltage. And the increased carbonyls appear mostly at the highest 4.8 volt runs. It's reasonable to assume that temperature is the issue - but we don't know if they were at 400 or 500 or what. They just adusted their spinner to the highest voltage.
2 - The real news from the test is that it seems to be that PG is the issue. Since the high-watt crowd leans towards VG anyway, that's great news
3 - All the tests were done with this, which I'd suspect as a possible source of toxicity, too
That's a GLANTZ article for god's sake. He's on some kind of twisted all-out campaign to make vaping illegal. And he doesn't care if you've got a Flask or not.
Ugh, indeed
Your assertion is bogus here, as any climate scientist who makes a statement contrary to the AGW narrative is immediately ostracized. That isnt science, it's peer pressure
It's funny because to use TP mode you need to use nickel wire.
We all know the associated risks with long term exposure to trace nickel intake.
I had two DNA 40 devices, didn't like them much.
We all know the associated risks with long term exposure to trace nickel intake.
I had two DNA 40 devices, didn't like them much.
You think???
After the "world is ending" premise you posted, I'd think you'd only post what is proved.
Oh, that's right, all of what you've presented thus far falls into the " I think" category.
Thank you for your deep concern. I have no doubt that you are well meaning. However...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
