mix PG/VG+Nic ahead of time?

[rtbob]

I premix my nic, pg and vg ahead of time in large batches. I keep it in the freezer in a glass bottle just like I do with the rest of my nicotine. Makes it very easy to mix by just adding some of the mixture and flavor when I need to make juice. I am not bothered by the nic, pg or vg being off by a slight % It does not have to be exact pg/vg/nic ratio when you are mixing for yourself

This sounds like the way for me. Thank you.

 

[dannyv45]

I premix my base in 500ml batches. I compensate my NIC base strength assuming 10% total flavoring will be added. My mixes usually range from 8% - 15% total flavoring with most just at 10%. The over/under differences in NIC strength don't bother me and I hardly notice it.

 

[IDJoel]

It's definitely not that I'm a perfectionist, or think the way I mix is THE only way...

I'm in total agreement with ya @JCinFLA , there are lots of different strokes for lots of different folks.

I'm a recipe chaser, and a flavor tweaker, so I benefit from consistency and eliminating as many uncontrolled (or at least unaccounted) variables as I can. I also don't have dedicated refrigeration so I have to be economical about what goes into cold storage. But that is just me.

 

[rootlinux01]

I need to start mixing my own.
Great information here guys.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

 

[Frocket]

I'm in total agreement with ya @JCinFLA , there are lots of different strokes for lots of different folks.

I'm a recipe chaser, and a flavor tweaker, so I benefit from consistency and eliminating as many uncontrolled (or at least unaccounted) variables as I can. I also don't have dedicated refrigeration so I have to be economical about what goes into cold storage. But that is just me.

Do you mix by weight? Best way to get consistent results, IMO.

BOOM!

 

[IDJoel]

Do you mix by weight? Best way to get consistent results, IMO.

I have not tried that method yet. I have read some threads dedicated to it and it sounds interesting; even more than a little intriguing. But looking at scales (and their reviews), as well as some of the comments made in the measure-by-weight threads, I have doubts/questions when it comes to the durability (lifespan), and accuracy (ability to hold calibration) of many of the scales. I keep seeing comments and/or reviews with phrases like "I'm on my 4th, 6th, or 10th scale" and "It worked great for the first month..."

I have no doubt weighing offers the best likelihood for consistency (I'm in my 50's and my eyes ain't what they used to be<which wasn't very good even then come to think of it> and it would be nice to stop squinting at the black lines against the black plunger of the syringe), and I like the thought of not having to clean syringes and needles. It also sounds like it may be faster (that squinting thing again). But I don't have a budget to be replacing a $50-$75 scale every year. $20 worth of syringes is a 5 year supply for me. I know a lot of DIYers are mixing just fine with $20-$25 scales; but that is where I am also seeing the most disappointments/failures. I am also of the school that you usually get what you pay for.

And last, I do question realistic accuracy, verses potential accuracy. Syringes have the inherent potential for inaccuracy due to eyeball-error and increasingly larger graduations as you move up in syringe size. While scale users have the inherent potential for inaccuracy due to using weight estimations (unless you are weighing each and every ingredient, every time you purchase it, and adjusting the g/mL weight of the calculator for that ingredient). Proponents of weighing say this is negligible and won't be noticed in the final flavor of the mix. And proponents of syringes say the same thing about its inaccuracies.

So, for me, it really comes down to cost vs. convenience. And I just don't know. I haven't been able to bring myself to pull the trigger yet. But I certainly understand, and respect, those that choose to mix by weight.

Sorry, I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but you asked an honest question and I tried to give you an honest answer.

 

[philbh]

I mix up a quart at a time, so all I have to do is add flavor. I don't worry about the slight variation and strength either. It's just so much easier throw together recipes when I find something interesting.

Sent from my A1-840FHD using Tapatalk

 

[Frocket]

I have not tried that method yet. I have read some threads dedicated to it and it sounds interesting; even more than a little intriguing. But looking at scales (and their reviews), as well as some of the comments made in the measure-by-weight threads, I have doubts/questions when it comes to the durability (lifespan), and accuracy (ability to hold calibration) of many of the scales. I keep seeing comments and/or reviews with phrases like "I'm on my 4th, 6th, or 10th scale" and "It worked great for the first month..."

I have no doubt weighing offers the best likelihood for consistency (I'm in my 50's and my eyes ain't what they used to be<which wasn't very good even then come to think of it> and it would be nice to stop squinting at the black lines against the black plunger of the syringe), and I like the thought of not having to clean syringes and needles. It also sounds like it may be faster (that squinting thing again). But I don't have a budget to be replacing a $50-$75 scale every year. $20 worth of syringes is a 5 year supply for me. I know a lot of DIYers are mixing just fine with $20-$25 scales; but that is where I am also seeing the most disappointments/failures. I am also of the school that you usually get what you pay for.

And last, I do question realistic accuracy, verses potential accuracy. Syringes have the inherent potential for inaccuracy due to eyeball-error and increasingly larger graduations as you move up in syringe size. While scale users have the inherent potential for inaccuracy due to using weight estimations (unless you are weighing each and every ingredient, every time you purchase it, and adjusting the g/mL weight of the calculator for that ingredient). Proponents of weighing say this is negligible and won't be noticed in the final flavor of the mix. And proponents of syringes say the same thing about its inaccuracies.

So, for me, it really comes down to cost vs. convenience. And I just don't know. I haven't been able to bring myself to pull the trigger yet. But I certainly understand, and respect, those that choose to mix by weight.

Sorry, I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but you asked an honest question and I tried to give you an honest answer.

All very valid points. I posted up in another thread a lot of the same thoughts.

The only way the small increase in accuracy pays off (IMO) is when diluting 100mg nic base and when mixing small batches. Even then, I feel it's a slight increase in accuracy, and I probably wouldn't even notice if my nic level was off by a mg or flavor was off by half a % or so.

So far I've not had any issues with my scale, other than needing to recalibrate now and then. Again, I probably don't gain much by recalibration, since it typically corrects for around 0.03g.

Mostly I just appreciate the convienence. My PG, VG, and nic base all have dropper tops, so the only tools I need are a couple pipettes for flavors. Once the bottle is on the scale, I just add ingredients right from the bottle (except flavors) until it hits the right weight. When I'm done, I give a pipette or two a good rinse, and I'm done.

BOOM!

 

[mhertz]

1. The "inaccuracy" is irrelevant when doing own mixes, only mixes from others, and where it won't matter anyway imho... (Unless inconsistent-issue of course)

2. I haven't heard more than one I think here, having to replace a scale frequently, and I believe it was user failure. As i've said often, i'm still going strong with my original scale for 12-17 bucks or so(can't remember) for over a year. I have 3, never calibrated one of them and all dirt cheap from china...

3. You rarely need recalibration, i've never done it myself... High changes in temperature is the thing that possibly can throw the calibration off, and i've never seen it and I have no AC and have pretty big temp changes. Even if your scale is 0.03 off, it's imho fine... People think that this isn't good, but don't think about in addition to the eye-balling issue, then also miniscus and left-overs issue of using syringes... 0.03 off, is a single freakin' drop! That's atleast the inaccuracy of your syringe-operation anyway... Atleast!

 

[IDJoel]

1. The "inaccuracy" is irrelevant when doing own mixes, only mixes from others, and where it won't matter anyway imho...

I agree. Wholeheartedly!
BUT, if inaccuracy IS irrelevant; why is accuracy always one of the first "benefits" extolled for measuring by weight? (An honest question... not trying to pick a fight.)
To me, as one who has not yet tried measuring by weight, the most attractive benefits of weight, compared to volume, is speed and convenience. But that is just me.
I have no issue whether a person chooses to mix by weight, or volume, or even counting drops. If they are able to mix juice that tastes good to themselves, and it helps them to avoid analogs, that is all that is important to me.

2. I haven't heard more than one I think here, having to replace a scale frequently, and I believe it was user failure. As i've said often, i'm still going strong with my original scale for 17 bucks or so for over a year. I have 3, never calibrated one of them and all dirt cheap from china...

When I was looking at scales I went to Amazon as many ECF folks suggested or linked. Reading user reviews of the suggested/recommended scales frequently (to me) had a significant (to me) number of premature failures and/or complaints. I will be the first to acknowledge that these were not specific to DIY mixing, and may be caused by operator error. The information is absolutely anecdotal.

I am curious as to why you have three. Are the other two just back-ups?

then also miniscus and left-overs issue...

These are issues with Pipettes which have headspace (air above the fluid line), and do not have the rubber stopper to create a fixed (as well as visibly defined) miniscus, and to wipe the walls of the cylinder. You will get an over-dispensing if you "double pump" the syringe into your mixing container. (double pumping = depress the plunger once to evacuate the liquid, then draw it back again taking in air, then depress the plunger a second time to expel the remaining liquid in the tip and needle - this is always incorrect operation.)

 

[mhertz]

I agree. Wholeheartedly!
BUT, if inaccuracy IS irrelevant; why is accuracy always one of the first "benefits" extolled for measuring by weight? (An honest question... not trying to pick a fight.)
To me, as one who has not yet tried measuring by weight, the most attractive benefits of weight, compared to volume, is speed and convenience. But that is just me.
I have no issue whether a person chooses to mix by weight, or volume, or even counting drops. If they are able to mix juice that tastes good to themselves, and it helps them to avoid analogs, that is all that is important to me.

I'm exactly of your mindset too; speed and convenience! Accuracy-improvements are debatable imho... Yes, people should use whatever they like, agreed.

When I was looking at scales I went to Amazon as many ECF folks suggested or linked. Reading user reviews of the suggested/recommended scales frequently (to me) had a significant (to me) number of premature failures and/or complaints. I will be the first to acknowledge that these were not specific to DIY mixing, and may be caused by operator error. The information is absolutely anecdotal.

Ahh, Ok. Of course I cannot speak for all scales or owners of scales, just my own experience with said equipment.

I am curious as to why you have three. Are the other two just back-ups?

Yes and because one is a 500/0.01g which I normally use, and the other a 1000/0.1g for making bigger batches and a 2000/0.1g which I haven't really had much use for yet, but just in case I wanted to make e.g. 1L(1000ml)...

These are issues with Pipettes which have headspace (air above the fluid line), and do not have the rubber stopper to create a fixed (as well as visibly defined) miniscus, and to wipe the walls of the cylinder. You will get an over-dispensing if you "double pump" the syringe into your mixing container. (double pumping = depress the plunger once to evacuate the liquid, then draw it back again taking in air, then depress the plunger a second time to expel the remaining liquid in the tip and needle - this is always incorrect operation.)

Ahh, thanks alot for the correction mate! Of course! I'm a dumbass sometimes, lol

 

[IDJoel]

Yes and because one is a 500/0.01g which I normally use, and the other a 1000/0.1g for making bigger batches and a 2000/0.1g which I haven't really had much use for yet, but just in case I wanted to make e.g. 1L(1000ml)...

I'm glad you mentioned the weight differences. You reminded me of two questions I wanted to ask and never remember when I am talking to someone who might be able to answer.

First question
When you use the tare function do you still have the full rating of the scale available to you? In other words; If I am using a 500 gram scale, and I have a 50 gram bottle on it, and I use the tare function so the scale reads zero again, do I have the ability to add the full 500 grams, or only 450 grams (because there is 50 grams of bottle weight already sitting on it)? I know the display will only show what was placed on the scale after the tare function, but I am asking about actual capacity.

Second question
You mentioned you have scales that read out to one tenth of a gram (0.01g) as well as scale that reads to one hundredth of a gram (0.01g). Have you noticed a difference in performance as far as the physical function of the scale is concerned (I am not asking about the effect on recipes)? Is the 0.01g slower to settle (do the numbers jump around longer)? Is the 0.01g more temperamental (do external influences effect it more... like vibrations, breathing on it, air movement in general)? And finally; do you have any experience with scales calibrated to the one thousandth of a gram (0.001g)?

Ahh, thanks alot for the correction mate! Of course! I'm a dumbass sometimes, lol

Now worries. And you are certainly NO dumb-...; at least not in my book (I have no idea what your family might say. ). I'm just kind of compulsive about accurate info. I'm always worried about newbies reading things and being misinformed. Then it starts getting repeated, and pretty soon it becomes gospel.
I completely understand though; I have unintentionally misstated things myself. And not just once ! I just try to learn from my mistakes, try not to repeat them, and move on.
Please don't give it another thought.

 

[mhertz]

When you use the tare function do you still have the full rating of the scale available to you? In other words; If I am using a 500 gram scale, and I have a 50 gram bottle on it, and I use the tare function so the scale reads zero again, do I have the ability to add the full 500 grams, or only 450 grams (because there is 50 grams of bottle weight already sitting on it)? I know the display will only show what was placed on the scale after the tare function, but I am asking about actual capacity.

Yes, the bottle counts too, and every ingredient henceforth. The tare as you stated resets simply the display so as to add another ingredient, but it cannot undo the scales physical capabilities in regards to supported max weight. I first thought before starting that 500g would be pretty much, and it is, but if using glass bottles and especially bigger ones, then it takes a big leap into that, just as you stated.

You mentioned you have scales that read out to one tenth of a gram (0.01g) as well as scale that reads to one hundredth of a gram (0.01g). Have you noticed a difference in performance as far as the physical function of the scale is concerned (I am not asking about the effect on recipes)? Is the 0.01g slower to settle (do the numbers jump around longer)? Is the 0.01g more temperamental (do external influences effect it more... like vibrations, breathing on it, air movement in general)?

I am a little OCD about most things I care about, so I always mix in the same conditions with all doors and windows closed and without e.g. touching/bumping it, and focused/controlled slow movements, so for me I don't see much of a difference and the 0.01 isn't slow but rather quick to settle atleast with mine and then afterwards don't fluctuate.

And finally; do you have any experience with scales calibrated to the one thousandth of a gram (0.001g)?

No, sorry. I have never felt the need for that accuracy and especially when taking the price into equation + the usual lower max. supported weight with these types scales(unless crazy expensive if I remember right).

Now worries. And you are certainly NO dumb-...; at least not in my book (I have no idea what your family might say. ). I'm just kind of compulsive about accurate info. I'm always worried about newbies reading things and being misinformed. Then it starts getting repeated, and pretty soon it becomes gospel.
I completely understand though; I have unintentionally misstated things myself. And not just once ! I just try to learn from my mistakes, try not to repeat them, and move on.
Please don't give it another thought.

Thanks alot mate, I appreciate that

 

[Frocket]

I'm glad you mentioned the weight differences. You reminded me of two questions I wanted to ask and never remember when I am talking to someone who might be able to answer.

First question
When you use the tare function do you still have the full rating of the scale available to you? In other words; If I am using a 500 gram scale, and I have a 50 gram bottle on it, and I use the tare function so the scale reads zero again, do I have the ability to add the full 500 grams, or only 450 grams (because there is 50 grams of bottle weight already sitting on it)? I know the display will only show what was placed on the scale after the tare function, but I am asking about actual capacity.

Second question
You mentioned you have scales that read out to one tenth of a gram (0.01g) as well as scale that reads to one hundredth of a gram (0.01g). Have you noticed a difference in performance as far as the physical function of the scale is concerned (I am not asking about the effect on recipes)? Is the 0.01g slower to settle (do the numbers jump around longer)? Is the 0.01g more temperamental (do external influences effect it more... like vibrations, breathing on it, air movement in general)? And finally; do you have any experience with scales calibrated to the one thousandth of a gram (0.001g)?

Now worries. And you are certainly NO dumb-...; at least not in my book (I have no idea what your family might say. [emoji38] ). I'm just kind of compulsive about accurate info. I'm always worried about newbies reading things and being misinformed. Then it starts getting repeated, and pretty soon it becomes gospel.
I completely understand though; I have unintentionally misstated things myself. And not just once ! I just try to learn from my mistakes, try not to repeat them, and move on.
Please don't give it another thought.

First question: for my scale, at least - 500g total, regardless of how many times on hits tare. So, with 50g on the scale, 450g remaining capacity, regardless if tare is pressed or not.

#2: again, for my scale, at least (AWS 500gx0.01g). It may vary by a few 0.01g for a few seconds before settling to a steady value. Significant changes in local air pressure, such as opening or closing a nearby door, breathing directly on it, etc, will momentarily affect the reading by a few 0.01g. Again, after a couple seconds, it settles to the same value +/- 0.02g.

Other than a few thousands of a gram, it keeps up with tenths reasonably quickly. When adding PG/VG, I can do a slow pour until getting to within a gram or two, then add the last few drops to reach the target value. I generally don't have to wait for it to catch up.

BOOM!

 

[mhertz]

Yes, for me too about a second to update and I do the same with first fast pouring and then afterwards pour very slowly with drops. I don't even have special spouts on the bottle for VG, as it hinders the quick pouring initially and as I make big batches. It's not that hard to pour drops from VG without special spouts because of it's thickness, but I can't do that with PG or DW and have to use spouts there...

 

[IDJoel]

Thanks @mhertz & @Frocket
I appreciate your answers.

 

[IDJoel]

A follow-up question:
@mhertz, with your higher capacity scales (1,000g & 2,000g), have you tried using them for smaller mixes?
I guess what I am trying to ask is; do you have full range use of the scale? Is it as sensitive when only measuring a total 10g to 30g? Or do you really need to be measuring a larger minimum before the scale starts recognizing the 0.1g changes?
I ask because I am looking at this scale with a 3000g x0.01 rating.
I currently mix mostly smaller batches. As small as 10mL batches for testing new recipes. And up to 120mL batches for tried and true recipes. But I am moving in the direction of mixing larger batches (thinking around 500mL) in glass.
So I would like a single scale that will let me continue making my small batch mixes but also have enough range to accommodate larger batches.

 

[mhertz]

Hmm, that's a good question... I have actually only used the other scales than my 500/0.01g a minimum amount of time, because I didn't really need that big batches anyway and since I liked that my smaller scale had more precision i.e. 0.01g instead of 0.1g, but yours linked to are different I see(0.01g).

My 1000/0.1g are fine for lesser amounts too, as i've tested it, and is not needing more "amounts" to update.

I'm sorry, I forgot to state that my 2000g scale is "retired" as not living up to my testings about precision. It's not good at picking up drops, and needs about 0.05g or more at-once to update, so if you add 30 drops, one at a time, then it won't update at all and states 0.00g!!! If I add e.g. 5 drops fast, then it will update... Sorry, I should've said I had 2 scales and not 3, as the 3'rd I actually not use because of this. I'm sure it's not a normal issue and just a bad scale and it was also very cheap, although the others where too. It was listed on site as a 2000/0.05g scale but did only have that accuracy up to 1000g and from 1000 - 2000g it had 0.1g accuracy, and there's a button for adjusting between these two precision-modes.

I'm sorry for the confusion and not precise statements before about this.

I don't know the scale you linked to, but it does look impressive to me.

I now mostly use my 500/0.01g scale and use a 500ml plastic amber bottle that weighs 35g and as I make max VG which weighs more, then I usually make 350ml at a time and then after mixing I shake it up good and pour into 100ml dripper-bottles afterwards... I personally don't need glass for this, as I use it up in about 3 weeks and where hard amber plastic is fine imho...

 

[IDJoel]

Good info @mhertz
Sounds like I need to do more research.
I appreciate your input!