VZ 100 mg/ml PG, diluted to 33mg/ml 33% PG 67% VG
RTS 100 mg/ml VG, diluted to 33mg/ml 33% PG 67% VG
I have unfortunately ripped through my 30 ml sample of ECX, so I cannot mix it straight and have it here for 'real time' comparison, so I'm relying on memory and my previous comparison of ECX, VZ and MFS. MFS nic I know like the back of my hand by this point, so its likewise not on the table in the flesh at the moment.
Both were transferred to amber glass bottles, heated indirectly with water for a few minutes while intermittently shaken, then allowed to cool to room temp and transferred into two separate plastic dropper bottles for dripping.
One poorly controlled variable here is the VZ nic obviously uses their PG, and my VG, while the RTS nic uses my PG, and their VG. That said, I don't think its an issue.
Vaped On: Two phoenix, both washed, stem removed and set up for dripping, stock wick and coils. Both Ohming in at 2.2. V4L eGo fresh off the charger.
Time: Intermittently, last night through now.
Clarity of Odor: Before I hurt anyone's feelings, let me say I have a sensitive nose. I can smell nicotine, period.
Uncapping the bottle of RTS that I got on Friday, I was able to smell nic. Not overwhelming or gross per se, but yes, odor. More than ECX, more than VZ, less than MFS which has the strongest alkaline pungency of the 4.
In terms of clarity of odor, I'd say its VZ = ECX >> RTS > MFS
What about when vaped? No odor on the RTS (or the VZ) unless I TRY to smell it. Meaning, if I stick my nose in my steaming atty and inhale through the nose, I can smell it. Here the RTS is more stinky as well. But in normal vaping conditions, effectively no odor.
So again it would be VZ= ECX >> RTS > MFS
Clarity of Color: Ever read all those posts about how crystal clear RTS nic is? Well it's not. It arrived with a nice yellow tint, on par with the appearance of aged MFS nic. Its not gross or bad looking, its slight, but its there. Not a big deal necessarily, as nicotine will oxidize with time and yellow a bit, there's nothing we can do about it. So color doesn't necessarily mean anything per se. But it's still off putting.
I tried to take pictures side by side with the VZ nic, which after some time is absolutely crystal clear...when I say clear, I mean *clear* (as was the ECX). Problem is the lighting in my room was actually making the yellow tint look significantly worse than it is, and I didn't want to misrepresent my eyes, so I skipped posting it. Let's just say I'd normally make labels for this kind of a test, and I didn't have to, as the RTS is readily identifiable by its appearance.
In terms of clarity of color, I'd say its VZ = ECX > MFS > RTS
Clarity of Flavor: The dominant note with both solutions is PG, likely because I'm not a huge fan of the taste and overly aware of it. The PG is a bit more prominent on the RTS (see below). I'm not tasting much of anything on either: mouth inhales and exhales, mouth inhales and nose exhales, or mouth inhales with nose/mouth exhales. I don't get the peppery/pungent note that I taste in MFS.
In terms of clarity of flavor I'd say its RTS = ECX = VZ >> MFS
TH: RTS has a reputation for being a 'smooth' nicotine. I would phrase it differently. The TH is subdued, maybe even weak. This maybe why I can pick up the PG more clearly with the RTS vs. the VZ.
I can see this nicotine possibly lending itself to 'cute' juices that are sweet, fruity, etc. That said, I have it mixed at 26 nic in a tobacco juice and I'm still getting a rocking "TH" which I'd ascribe to the flavor, and the juice, which I've also mixed with VZ, ECX and MFS nic, is no more flavorful or alive with the RTS nic than it is with the others...just a bit less TH.
So I don't think there is any clarity gained for flavor, just a weaker throat hit. That could be a good thing if its what you want, but it may really annoy you if you enjoy the throat hit. I'm not sure exactly how I feel about it yet, time will tell.
Another possible variable here is the *actual* nic content. If VZ was 3% high, and/or RTS was 3% low, it could lead to a difference in final nic concentration of the solutions, explaining the subdued TH. I dunno.
All in all, this is a stellar nicotine. I have my reservations about the color. I don't like to get nic that is already yellow, albeit slightly. Just hasn't happened to me with the other three vendors. In particular I'm concerned it won't hold up so well with time. We'll see.
I'm also a little uneasy with the subdued TH. Either its lower than advertised concentration, pilot error, or its just...weird. Something's not right. I'm guessing this lack of TH has generated quite a few fans; if this is what you're looking for RTS is for you.
Quality Control and Company, Customer Service: RTS and MFS make their lab data readily available, which is a huge plus. To date I don't think VZ or ECX have done this. I don't really doubt people until they give me a reason to (naive on my part, I know). And given the excellent customer service and respectable conduct of ECX linnx, VZ louie and leah, and MFS Chris, I don't doubt the purity of their product at all.
MFS would thus seem to have the edge in the QC department.
I wouldn't grant that edge to RTS, simply because of Randy's attitude. Perusing the RTS thread didn't really give me the info I was looking for, but instead encumbered me with navigating through pages upon pages of ECF members (some of whom I hold in *high* regard), being flamed and alienated. These pages were punctuated with gratuitous "proof is in the pudding" kind of logic that consists of profit and sales quotes, often cited as a justification, or "I don't care" kind of response to people that felt so insulted they felt the need to threaten withdrawal of their business.
What's my point, and how is this relevant?
If this is the way someone runs things, they could hand me a hard copy of a lab certificate signed by Jesus Christ and I wouldn't wipe myself with it. That's to say nothing of their purely verbal claims. Character and attitude radiate and emanate from a person like rays from the sun, impregnating their surroundings, activities, products, etc. I have no reason to suspect anything 'shady' from RTS, but given the way they *act* I'm forced to suspend, and reverse my 'innocent until guilty' naivete and instead operate on the principle: "If you can screw me, you probably will."
I personally don't want a "screw you, I'm always right, look at my sales" kind of person mixing my poison.
So in summary, subjectively speaking this is a great product, a little stinky, a little weak, and a little yellow.
But its not worth dealing with sub par professionalism for, and its 'not as good' as VZ and ECX in my opinion. As it stands now, my money goes to VZ and ECX, with some MFS here and there.
RTS 100 mg/ml VG, diluted to 33mg/ml 33% PG 67% VG
I have unfortunately ripped through my 30 ml sample of ECX, so I cannot mix it straight and have it here for 'real time' comparison, so I'm relying on memory and my previous comparison of ECX, VZ and MFS. MFS nic I know like the back of my hand by this point, so its likewise not on the table in the flesh at the moment.
Both were transferred to amber glass bottles, heated indirectly with water for a few minutes while intermittently shaken, then allowed to cool to room temp and transferred into two separate plastic dropper bottles for dripping.
One poorly controlled variable here is the VZ nic obviously uses their PG, and my VG, while the RTS nic uses my PG, and their VG. That said, I don't think its an issue.
Vaped On: Two phoenix, both washed, stem removed and set up for dripping, stock wick and coils. Both Ohming in at 2.2. V4L eGo fresh off the charger.
Time: Intermittently, last night through now.
Clarity of Odor: Before I hurt anyone's feelings, let me say I have a sensitive nose. I can smell nicotine, period.
Uncapping the bottle of RTS that I got on Friday, I was able to smell nic. Not overwhelming or gross per se, but yes, odor. More than ECX, more than VZ, less than MFS which has the strongest alkaline pungency of the 4.
In terms of clarity of odor, I'd say its VZ = ECX >> RTS > MFS
What about when vaped? No odor on the RTS (or the VZ) unless I TRY to smell it. Meaning, if I stick my nose in my steaming atty and inhale through the nose, I can smell it. Here the RTS is more stinky as well. But in normal vaping conditions, effectively no odor.
So again it would be VZ= ECX >> RTS > MFS
Clarity of Color: Ever read all those posts about how crystal clear RTS nic is? Well it's not. It arrived with a nice yellow tint, on par with the appearance of aged MFS nic. Its not gross or bad looking, its slight, but its there. Not a big deal necessarily, as nicotine will oxidize with time and yellow a bit, there's nothing we can do about it. So color doesn't necessarily mean anything per se. But it's still off putting.
I tried to take pictures side by side with the VZ nic, which after some time is absolutely crystal clear...when I say clear, I mean *clear* (as was the ECX). Problem is the lighting in my room was actually making the yellow tint look significantly worse than it is, and I didn't want to misrepresent my eyes, so I skipped posting it. Let's just say I'd normally make labels for this kind of a test, and I didn't have to, as the RTS is readily identifiable by its appearance.
In terms of clarity of color, I'd say its VZ = ECX > MFS > RTS
Clarity of Flavor: The dominant note with both solutions is PG, likely because I'm not a huge fan of the taste and overly aware of it. The PG is a bit more prominent on the RTS (see below). I'm not tasting much of anything on either: mouth inhales and exhales, mouth inhales and nose exhales, or mouth inhales with nose/mouth exhales. I don't get the peppery/pungent note that I taste in MFS.
In terms of clarity of flavor I'd say its RTS = ECX = VZ >> MFS
TH: RTS has a reputation for being a 'smooth' nicotine. I would phrase it differently. The TH is subdued, maybe even weak. This maybe why I can pick up the PG more clearly with the RTS vs. the VZ.
I can see this nicotine possibly lending itself to 'cute' juices that are sweet, fruity, etc. That said, I have it mixed at 26 nic in a tobacco juice and I'm still getting a rocking "TH" which I'd ascribe to the flavor, and the juice, which I've also mixed with VZ, ECX and MFS nic, is no more flavorful or alive with the RTS nic than it is with the others...just a bit less TH.
So I don't think there is any clarity gained for flavor, just a weaker throat hit. That could be a good thing if its what you want, but it may really annoy you if you enjoy the throat hit. I'm not sure exactly how I feel about it yet, time will tell.
Another possible variable here is the *actual* nic content. If VZ was 3% high, and/or RTS was 3% low, it could lead to a difference in final nic concentration of the solutions, explaining the subdued TH. I dunno.
All in all, this is a stellar nicotine. I have my reservations about the color. I don't like to get nic that is already yellow, albeit slightly. Just hasn't happened to me with the other three vendors. In particular I'm concerned it won't hold up so well with time. We'll see.
I'm also a little uneasy with the subdued TH. Either its lower than advertised concentration, pilot error, or its just...weird. Something's not right. I'm guessing this lack of TH has generated quite a few fans; if this is what you're looking for RTS is for you.
Quality Control and Company, Customer Service: RTS and MFS make their lab data readily available, which is a huge plus. To date I don't think VZ or ECX have done this. I don't really doubt people until they give me a reason to (naive on my part, I know). And given the excellent customer service and respectable conduct of ECX linnx, VZ louie and leah, and MFS Chris, I don't doubt the purity of their product at all.
MFS would thus seem to have the edge in the QC department.
I wouldn't grant that edge to RTS, simply because of Randy's attitude. Perusing the RTS thread didn't really give me the info I was looking for, but instead encumbered me with navigating through pages upon pages of ECF members (some of whom I hold in *high* regard), being flamed and alienated. These pages were punctuated with gratuitous "proof is in the pudding" kind of logic that consists of profit and sales quotes, often cited as a justification, or "I don't care" kind of response to people that felt so insulted they felt the need to threaten withdrawal of their business.
What's my point, and how is this relevant?
If this is the way someone runs things, they could hand me a hard copy of a lab certificate signed by Jesus Christ and I wouldn't wipe myself with it. That's to say nothing of their purely verbal claims. Character and attitude radiate and emanate from a person like rays from the sun, impregnating their surroundings, activities, products, etc. I have no reason to suspect anything 'shady' from RTS, but given the way they *act* I'm forced to suspend, and reverse my 'innocent until guilty' naivete and instead operate on the principle: "If you can screw me, you probably will."
I personally don't want a "screw you, I'm always right, look at my sales" kind of person mixing my poison.
So in summary, subjectively speaking this is a great product, a little stinky, a little weak, and a little yellow.
But its not worth dealing with sub par professionalism for, and its 'not as good' as VZ and ECX in my opinion. As it stands now, my money goes to VZ and ECX, with some MFS here and there.
