Hello to all,
Kind of new to the forum (long time lurker). Since I can only post to the New Member Forum, I am adding it here. I think this is post 3 out of the 5 required.
The Kanger MT3 is a bottom coil clearomizer. It holds about 3 ml of eliquid. It is slightly taller than the Vision CE5, Innokin Dual Coil & Kanger T2 clearomizers. There are 3 different resistance coils available (Low, Standard & High). Essentially it is a Kanger T3 with a metal tube tank cover with two sight glasses to view the liquid level. This makes the clearomizer very rugged. One of the good attributes is that it treads on the eGo outer threads not the inner 510 threads. The outer threading makes it much more rugged than the typical 510 inner threads. The tip (most refer to them as drip tips, but I do not know of a single clearomizer that can be a Drip tip, they are all just mouthpiece tips) does not come off, it is sealed making this unit even more rugged. In fact I think my tank is much more rugged than my eGo battery now, I am more worried about the top of my battery coming apart than anything else. The fit and finish are flawless. I have tried to think of some negative things to say about the physical build, but can not think of any.
Now to the performance. Being a bottom coil it does cool down the vapor to let in more flavor without a burning sensation in your mouth. The amount of vapor is better than other clearomizers with similar resistance that I have tried (Visions CE4 & CE5 & Kanger T2) but not as much as the Innokin dual coil clearomizer (not to be confused with the dual coil cartomizers) which is a slightly lower resistance, the Innokin is 2.0 ohm as compared to the Kanger which is 2.5 ohm. In fact to get the same amount as with a CE5 I vape half as long of a draw. The draw is loose meaning that it lets in air easily, so if you draw hard allot of air is going to come in unlike the Visions clearomizers which will just whistle more if you draw hard.
The leak test. I have had no issues with leaking of any kind no mater how I carry the PV (e-Cig setup, AKA personal vaporizer). I have had problems with other clearomizers in the past flooding the tubes and getting the dreaded gurgle along with wasted eliquid; the Kanger MT3 doesnt have this issue (this might be because it is a bottom coil). I have never had problems with any clearomizers cracking because of the type of eliquid used (such as cinnamon) but know others that have; I do not think the Kanger MT3 will have this problem since it is covered by metal. I have had problems with tanks breaking because of the stress put on them by being in my pockets; I do not think I will EVER have this problem with the Kanger MT3.
Finally the fill. To fill this tank you must detach it from your battery, remove the base and fill to the side and avoid getting eLiquid in the center tube. It is a little more difficult to fill in low light because the tank doesnt let much light in; there is no way to change this unless you remove the ruggedness, which is what this tank is for. Also, because of the ruggedness the amount of space between the center tube and side of the tank is tight so you must use extra caution when filling. While it is more difficult to fill than most top coil clearomizers the ruggedness, performance & being near leak proof more than make up for this and it is just slightly harder to fill.
Overall, I would not change anything. I have now permanently switched to this setup and almost do not want to try anything else. This makes it a 5+ out of 5 stars clearomizer for my needs. The only things might make it better for others is to make a dual coil version for those who need even more vapor similar to the Innokin but keep it a bottom coil unlike the Innokin. I have not tried the low resistance coil; this might make more vapor than a two coil system. Also if they make a shorter tank I would be the first to go for it, since I like smaller PVs. BTW, it might seam like I am bashing the Visions, Innokin and Kanger T2, I am not, the Visions, Innokin and Kanger T2 perform well, are easier to fill, smaller, lighter and are cheaper.
NOTE: Testing was done using a standard eGo 650. I have not reached the end of the first coils life and will let others know how long the coils last (should be the same as the Kanger T3). Replacement coils are around $3 to $4 each.
My Preference in clearomizers:
Kind of new to the forum (long time lurker). Since I can only post to the New Member Forum, I am adding it here. I think this is post 3 out of the 5 required.
The Kanger MT3 is a bottom coil clearomizer. It holds about 3 ml of eliquid. It is slightly taller than the Vision CE5, Innokin Dual Coil & Kanger T2 clearomizers. There are 3 different resistance coils available (Low, Standard & High). Essentially it is a Kanger T3 with a metal tube tank cover with two sight glasses to view the liquid level. This makes the clearomizer very rugged. One of the good attributes is that it treads on the eGo outer threads not the inner 510 threads. The outer threading makes it much more rugged than the typical 510 inner threads. The tip (most refer to them as drip tips, but I do not know of a single clearomizer that can be a Drip tip, they are all just mouthpiece tips) does not come off, it is sealed making this unit even more rugged. In fact I think my tank is much more rugged than my eGo battery now, I am more worried about the top of my battery coming apart than anything else. The fit and finish are flawless. I have tried to think of some negative things to say about the physical build, but can not think of any.
Now to the performance. Being a bottom coil it does cool down the vapor to let in more flavor without a burning sensation in your mouth. The amount of vapor is better than other clearomizers with similar resistance that I have tried (Visions CE4 & CE5 & Kanger T2) but not as much as the Innokin dual coil clearomizer (not to be confused with the dual coil cartomizers) which is a slightly lower resistance, the Innokin is 2.0 ohm as compared to the Kanger which is 2.5 ohm. In fact to get the same amount as with a CE5 I vape half as long of a draw. The draw is loose meaning that it lets in air easily, so if you draw hard allot of air is going to come in unlike the Visions clearomizers which will just whistle more if you draw hard.
The leak test. I have had no issues with leaking of any kind no mater how I carry the PV (e-Cig setup, AKA personal vaporizer). I have had problems with other clearomizers in the past flooding the tubes and getting the dreaded gurgle along with wasted eliquid; the Kanger MT3 doesnt have this issue (this might be because it is a bottom coil). I have never had problems with any clearomizers cracking because of the type of eliquid used (such as cinnamon) but know others that have; I do not think the Kanger MT3 will have this problem since it is covered by metal. I have had problems with tanks breaking because of the stress put on them by being in my pockets; I do not think I will EVER have this problem with the Kanger MT3.
Finally the fill. To fill this tank you must detach it from your battery, remove the base and fill to the side and avoid getting eLiquid in the center tube. It is a little more difficult to fill in low light because the tank doesnt let much light in; there is no way to change this unless you remove the ruggedness, which is what this tank is for. Also, because of the ruggedness the amount of space between the center tube and side of the tank is tight so you must use extra caution when filling. While it is more difficult to fill than most top coil clearomizers the ruggedness, performance & being near leak proof more than make up for this and it is just slightly harder to fill.
Overall, I would not change anything. I have now permanently switched to this setup and almost do not want to try anything else. This makes it a 5+ out of 5 stars clearomizer for my needs. The only things might make it better for others is to make a dual coil version for those who need even more vapor similar to the Innokin but keep it a bottom coil unlike the Innokin. I have not tried the low resistance coil; this might make more vapor than a two coil system. Also if they make a shorter tank I would be the first to go for it, since I like smaller PVs. BTW, it might seam like I am bashing the Visions, Innokin and Kanger T2, I am not, the Visions, Innokin and Kanger T2 perform well, are easier to fill, smaller, lighter and are cheaper.
NOTE: Testing was done using a standard eGo 650. I have not reached the end of the first coils life and will let others know how long the coils last (should be the same as the Kanger T3). Replacement coils are around $3 to $4 each.
My Preference in clearomizers:
- Kanger MT3 (2.5 ohm)
- Innokin Dual Coil (2.0 ohm)
- Kanger T2 (1.8 ohm)
- Kanger T2 (2.5 ohm)
- Vision CE5 (2.4 ohm)
- Vision CE4 (2.4 ohm)
