I saw that as well Willy and it said the positive pole is 304 stainless now if that inner tube is as well then voices were heard back east. ; )
I'm looking at purchasing a couple of one or two of these on your site, as I have a Provape-1 coming in the mail, and it's really hard to get specific info on Provape-1 compatibility because search results always get overwhelmed with Provari stuff, which has a longer diameter.
Is the Tiamat "too fat"? Or between Hydra, Griffin and Satyr, which would be best, simplest solution for basic RBA vaping on a constant voltage device? I just want to find one that fits and works OK in terms of both size and approx. 2.0 OHM resistance, holds a couple mls of juice, and then learn what I need to learn to rebuild it competently. (I'm new at this but a fast study once I can hone in on what I need to do), and get a few drip tips or whatever.
It's so confusing. I have an Eternity from another vendor on its way, and am already sorry I bought it because subsequent reviews to PBusardi's initial one show a pattern of problems.
Any advice would be welcome.
I'm looking at purchasing a couple of one or two of these on your site, as I have a Provape-1 coming in the mail, and it's really hard to get specific info on Provape-1 compatibility because search results always get overwhelmed with Provari stuff, which has a longer diameter.
Is the Tiamat "too fat"? Or between Hydra, Griffin and Satyr, which would be best, simplest solution for basic RBA vaping on a constant voltage device? I just want to find one that fits and works OK in terms of both size and approx. 2.0 OHM resistance, holds a couple mls of juice, and then learn what I need to learn to rebuild it competently. (I'm new at this but a fast study once I can hone in on what I need to do), and get a few drip tips or whatever.
It's so confusing. I have an Eternity from another vendor on its way, and am already sorry I bought it because subsequent reviews to PBusardi's initial one show a pattern of problems.
Any advice would be welcome.
Yes Eric they were said to be limited run as new AGA-T2 is suppose to come out shortly .Just got info on the AGA-W
manufacturer says only 500 were made for "German Market" and it is not perfect, he said they are merging the two designs "T" and "W" into a more "perfect" product all parts stainless, so... I must wait a bit to see what they have.
Not sure about the whole German bit but I don't see it around anywhere here?
Yes Eric they were said to be limited run as new AGA-T2 is suppose to come out shortly .
I was fortunate to get the AGA-W but it had a leakage problem with its threaded screw in tank as the o-rings were not thick enough but new thicker o-rings solved that problem for me. Airhole lines up as its a push on top cap and there is no knurling on it as its all smooth polished stainless.
The AGA-T2 is similar but suppose to have a un threaded tank and the wick hole is suppose to be drilled closer to the positive post when it comes out.
Yes the 510 connector should be attached their either machined as hunk of metal 1 solid piece with the bottom cap or there machine press fitted in.Can anyone tell me if the 510 connector is supposed to stay attached to the base of the aga-t atomizer. I got mine last week and have been trying to set it up, but the connector is not attached to the base, and when I try to tighten it down it messes up the coil and wick and pulls it into the center post. It is not like this in my Griffin and I wanted to see if this unit is broken or it is just user error.
Yes Eric they were said to be limited run as new AGA-T2 is suppose to come out shortly .
I was fortunate to get the AGA-W but it had a leakage problem with its threaded screw in tank as the o-rings were not thick enough but new thicker o-rings solved that problem for me. Airhole lines up as its a push on top cap and there is no knurling on it as its all smooth polished stainless.
The AGA-T2 is similar but suppose to have a un threaded tank and the wick hole is suppose to be drilled closer to the positive post when it comes out.
Eric um is one of those yes es to the wick hole being closer to the positive center post?
I see the response yes and yes etc just not sure if its related to that wick being closer.
Thanks