Na, I took my own advice (see signature)
New studies find carcinogens in vg and pg at high temps, even in tootle puffers
- Thread starter mikepetro
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Na, I took my own advice (see signature)
I wish to thank you all for convincing me to just stick with the Kanthal wire that I KNOW what I'm doing.
something something about pigs and lipstick.... you can learn how to apply that lipstick like a pro, but it's still a pig.
Understood, one thing thats is required is motivation.
As long as you are motivated off the analogues then all is good.
I think much depends on an individual's vaping style.
Am I the only one who noticed there is no time scale on the X axis of the charts that showed the temp rising into the danger zone during puffs?
We know we have 30 seconds of time between puffs, but we have no idea how long the puffs themselves are!
Without TC, there's no doubt that temps will rise as the wick becomes less than saturated. The question is, how long does that take with a given build, at whatever power level it's being operated at?
People talk about the hot last second of a puff that TC tends to prevent. Well, I've never had that problem, probably because my puffs are in the 1.5 to 2 second range, which simply isn't long enough to produce that effect. I also squonk after every puff.
Someone who's doing 5+ second long DL hits likely has an entirely different risk profile without TC than someone who's only pulling in a mouthfull of vapor at a time.
the United States government should supply tc mods to all who request one and supply only ss316L and of course be contracted out to evolv.
oh wait Trump is president
oh wait Trump is president
Last edited:
^^ that
Smoked my last one on April fools day 2011. That was the day that I first tried dripping on a 510 atomizer sitting on a mechanical mod (Mako Midi), and FINALLY vaping was better than smoking.
The only thing that has changed sense that day is that I now use a RDA instead of that old 510 atomizer.
(was also the day that I went back to making tea with the tea bags)
Last edited:
something something about pigs and lipstick.... you can learn how to apply that lipstick like a pro, but it's still a pig.
Yeah, but would you know one if you saw one?
Been here a few years and I've never bought a loser. Which is to say (for me) that if you have some control of the fundamentals you can make anything work. Perform to its best potentials? Now that's a horse of a different color. That requires mastering the basics (regardless of device).
Good luck all.
I also don't like to max out my TC wattage, I do set it 5 or so watts higher than I would in power mode though.
Like right now in my tgt3 with tootlepuffer insert. This is what it's running at...
GF's cloudyfecker single coil Aromamizer with a fused 316Lclapton...
Like right now in my tgt3 with tootlepuffer insert. This is what it's running at...
GF's cloudyfecker single coil Aromamizer with a fused 316Lclapton...
Dual contact 26G 316SS 13 wraps @ 2.5mm ID on a Velocity Mini at 70W with Rayon wicking.
In VW mode this is a standard build for me using kanthal so I know what it's supposed to vape like, and it vapes beautifully. Engaged TC and matched the vape with 540 degrees F.
The point being I know how to use TC, it just does not have any bearing on avoiding the temps in the study and providing the way I like to vape.
Last edited:
I think much depends on an individual's vaping style.
Am I the only one who noticed there is no time scale on the X axis of the charts that showed the temp rising into the danger zone during puffs?
We know we have 30 seconds of time between puffs, but we have no idea how long the puffs themselves are!
Without TC, there's no doubt that temps will rise as the wick becomes less than saturated. The question is, how long does that take with a given build, at whatever power level it's being operated at?
People talk about the hot last second of a puff that TC tends to prevent. Well, I've never had that problem, probably because my puffs are in the 1.5 to 2 second range, which simply isn't long enough to produce that effect. I also squonk after every puff.
Someone who's doing 5+ second long DL hits likely has an entirely different risk profile without TC than someone who's only pulling in a mouthfull of vapor at a time.
When we smoked we all intuitively learned to employ vapor constriction (liping), density and temperature control by our draw (vacuum, variation), length of draw, and inter-drag intervals. Yes we can dissect this technically. Yes, we can prejudice our thinking that we aren't using these techniques anyway and most often subconsciously to achieve the vape we like even with TC.
Good luck.
That's really a case where I'd love to see that sort of scenario in person, as at that temp. that would be crazy hot on my builds and tanks.
Even on my RDAs, I get nowhere close to over 500 since I've refined my SS builds.
I knew there had to be a way of doing it, why has it not been done ????
I think much depends on an individual's vaping style.
Am I the only one who noticed there is no time scale on the X axis of the charts that showed the temp rising into the danger zone during puffs?
We know we have 30 seconds of time between puffs, but we have no idea how long the puffs themselves are!
Without TC, there's no doubt that temps will rise as the wick becomes less than saturated. The question is, how long does that take with a given build, at whatever power level it's being operated at?
People talk about the hot last second of a puff that TC tends to prevent. Well, I've never had that problem, probably because my puffs are in the 1.5 to 2 second range, which simply isn't long enough to produce that effect. I also squonk after every puff.
Someone who's doing 5+ second long DL hits likely has an entirely different risk profile without TC than someone who's only pulling in a mouthfull of vapor at a time.
Yes, I noticed. The test is inconclusive due to lack of information....just like every test I've seen to date.
Yeah... The Leidenfrost Effect is a special case of the general concept of Film Boiling. And something that most people have seen if they drip Water onto a Hot Clothes Iron or into a Heated Pan on the stove.
It is also seen when you Quench a Very Hot Metal into a Liquid cooling medium like Water or Oil.
But One thing usually needs to present for Film Boiling to significantly occur. And that is a Significant Temperature Differential between the Heat Source and the Liquid. Or a Very Rapid Increase in the Temperature of the source with respect to the Temperature of the Liquid.
If I put some Drops of Water in a Pan and heat the Pan Slowly, the drop of Water is heated via Convection and the Film Boiling may Not be noticeable. But if the Pan is Heated Very Rapidly, then I can make the Droplets Dance.
On the last point, there was a study way back on 1st generation ecigs (CE4's etc.) where they used a standard puffer machine to test emissions. This led to very high %'s being found and subsequent scaremongering headlines. Dr. F etc. argued that this was not viable as it didn't replicate actual vaping conditions. His position, I believe, is he can produce as high a level of emissions as required providing he can increase temperatures to the level necessary but this doesn't illustrate emissions from vaping. He did one study where he got experienced vapers to vape third generation tanks i.e. KFL at various temperatures etc. and then replicated on the aforementioned puffer machine and found that the vapers could not continue to vape once temperatures reached a point where high levels of emissions were registered (but the puffer machine happily carried on puffing). He believed then (and as far as I know still believes) that at the point where emissions are at a worrying level the vaper will identify a burnt taste (dry puff) and will not continue to vape and that relevant research should not be conducted without using actual vapers/ vaping equipment or a recognised puff protocol. I think the other studies referred to on the Dr Kurt video (subtank etc) were similar experiments. These basically showed you will experience 'dry puff' before you encounter any levels of concerning emissions in third generation tanks. These were done from around the beginning of 2015 , watts not TC, so of course what was mainstream then is now old fashioned - as I still vape circa or probably pre - 2015 (third generation tanks, at under 8.5w and with no 'dry puffs') I am satisfied I am vaping as safely as I can & I have long since lost links and haven't followed up subsequent research as closely but you can find more info on E-cigarette Research. (Clive Bates is someone else I subscribe to as he also helps challenge studies or opinions on vaping which are undertaken without proper information/ protocols in relation to testing.) I believe Dr F is currently looking at a study which showed no emissions at all but only with unflavoured juice - and he thinks this seems odd as it isn't replicated in any other study (i.e. there should be some if they are found in flavoured juice with same conditions).
My problem with the Wang et al study is that I don't think it gives any info other than if you heat PG & VG at high enough temps it will give off emissions (something that was already demonstrated by the previous study and which Dr F certainly agrees with) - or rather if you heat up glass wool (?) saturated in PG &/or VG at above 450 (?no coil or tank of liquid to replenish the glass wool) in a reactor you will find high levels of formaldehyde etc. Nothing to do with how we vape - so whilst some might assume that glass wool (no coil or tank?) in a reactor at 450 is the same as vaping with a tank/coil/ cotton or rayon wick at 450 I personally can't see the correlation. To me it is similar to 'CE4 in puffer machine/ 3rd generation used by actual vapers' comparison. I can see why a producer of temp control boards may point to it as an indicator to support the value of their product but other than that it appears to me to be an apple & pears situation?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
