Was I the only one that saw the bob poster behind the kid and expected him to go from all serious to "Duuuude this thing is awwwesome"
The Ploom is Here.
- Thread starter Michelle M
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I saw one of these in a tobacco shop today down the street from Stanford, apparently some Stanford guys are behind this? I was at the shop for the Swedish snus. I had never heard of the "ploom". The device and the pods looked just like the one pictured in this thread and in that video (apparently they sell to minors too). I wish I had asked the shop keeper to give me a vaping demo. He did fire up the butane burner, but did not put a pod in. He did comment about the amount of vapor I got out of my P16 plus a std KR8 carto. I briefly explained that he ain't seen nothin' yet compared to higher power setups.
Note that you will be inhaling carbon monoxide, CO, with this device, as it burns butane, a fossil fuel. All fossil fuels produce CO and water when burnt, and this problem seems to be exacerbated with butane and propane heating devices. It's why you can't use a butane heater in a confined area such as a room with closed doors and windows, or in an RV or a boat. The catalytic heaters are just the same - no difference. Many people have been killed by using these in an area with no ventilation, due to the carbon monoxide. Actually it makes the use of a catalytic heater fairly pointless, since unless you open a window the room (or RV interior or whatever) becomes a damp enclosed space full of toxic CO.
Like a cigarette, these devices will generate CO, so as a 'healthy' alternative to tobacco combustion, there are some negatives. The fact they employ a catalytic heating element makes no difference.
Like a cigarette, these devices will generate CO, so as a 'healthy' alternative to tobacco combustion, there are some negatives. The fact they employ a catalytic heating element makes no difference.
I am still laughing from reading some of the posts on this thread! Thanks for the bright spot in my day! In all seriousness, though, I appreciate those who receieved a Ploom and took the time to do a write up. I was interested in the device when I first saw it several months ago in a TV spot. It actually is what started my curiosity about analog alternatives. I saw some possible areas of concern for this first iteration of the Ploom, then I got into vaping and didn't give it much thought. I just bought a new mod recently, so I don't have the money for a Ploom now, but I am enjoying your posts about it. I may give it a go later - esp if they improve on it.
Ordered a Ploom and all the flavors today. (April 2011) Let's see if they have cleaned the thing up after a little over a year. I will let everyone know in a week or so after it arrives.
I got a Ploom a few days ago. My intention was that it might satisfy tobacco cravings as the vapor should include more than just nicotine. I wonder if there are other chemicals in tobacco that add to the hit of an analog. For better or worse.
My impressions echo the others here: this is not going to give plumes of vapor; the effect is subtle and more akin to smoking a pipe or cigar rather than a cigarette; the pods do not last long for the cost; the igniter is finicky, especially when warm ("chain vaping"); the off switch is also poorly designed, needs some fiddling to press it and then you still need to manually pop the bottom "on" switch to the fully "out" position.
At first I was unimpressed and was going to return it, but figured I need to give it more of a chance. Also, once your expectations are tempered and you realize this is not intended to be like an e-cig, the experience improves.
The flavors grow on you. The more I Ploom them, the more I like them. Not all of them though. I got the started kit with Gold, Cafe Noir, Rocket and Kick-... Mint. Gold and Cafe are preferred right now. I am using this in conjunction with the e-cigs, and if not relying on this to replace an analog or compare to an e-cig, it has it's own personality and merits.
Although some had issue with the heat of the device, I kind of like that aspect. It gives it a unique experience. The hot vapor, inhaled slowly or just into the mouth has a pleasant effect that keeps me wanting to give it another pod. I almost see this device as a wine vs. beer approach, where one is going for taste and subtlety, as opposed to volume
In regards the the vapor production, unless I am mistaken the vapor production on a PV is the result of the glycol in the liquid. Since Ploom pods have very little of this, it makes sense that one does not see vapor on exhale as it it mostly likely absorbed, cooled down and dissipated in the lungs and throat. Mouth puffs prove that this does produce vapor, but I don't think it's intended to give monster throat hits. I do however believe they should offer pods with more glycol in them for those desiring more pronounced vapor clouds.
I find the pods last a decent period of time, equivalent to a single analog. But the low vapor production and throat hit give one a diminished satisfaction when the pod is spent. This can and should be tweaked.
Overall, I like the device. I think I want to like it more than I actually like it as-is. You can tell they are on to something here. I like the unique experience. The flavors are growing on me. The downsides to the device all seem like things that can be improved upon: fix the ignition to be more consistent; fix the buggy Off switch; offer pods with more glycol for those who desire more vapor; make the pods less pricey, or offer them in bulk at a discount; tweak the mouthpiece for a slower drag.
The "beta" label is embossed into the device, and rightly so. It's a promising start, but it needs some fine-tuning and some reconsiderations or expansion of the approach to vapor production. The Ploom will not replace my Halo G6 or my Vmod XL, but it has earned its place as a unique alternative now that I approach it for what it is and not how it compares to an analog or e-cig. I look forward to seeing how the Ploom evolves.
My impressions echo the others here: this is not going to give plumes of vapor; the effect is subtle and more akin to smoking a pipe or cigar rather than a cigarette; the pods do not last long for the cost; the igniter is finicky, especially when warm ("chain vaping"); the off switch is also poorly designed, needs some fiddling to press it and then you still need to manually pop the bottom "on" switch to the fully "out" position.
At first I was unimpressed and was going to return it, but figured I need to give it more of a chance. Also, once your expectations are tempered and you realize this is not intended to be like an e-cig, the experience improves.
The flavors grow on you. The more I Ploom them, the more I like them. Not all of them though. I got the started kit with Gold, Cafe Noir, Rocket and Kick-... Mint. Gold and Cafe are preferred right now. I am using this in conjunction with the e-cigs, and if not relying on this to replace an analog or compare to an e-cig, it has it's own personality and merits.
Although some had issue with the heat of the device, I kind of like that aspect. It gives it a unique experience. The hot vapor, inhaled slowly or just into the mouth has a pleasant effect that keeps me wanting to give it another pod. I almost see this device as a wine vs. beer approach, where one is going for taste and subtlety, as opposed to volume
In regards the the vapor production, unless I am mistaken the vapor production on a PV is the result of the glycol in the liquid. Since Ploom pods have very little of this, it makes sense that one does not see vapor on exhale as it it mostly likely absorbed, cooled down and dissipated in the lungs and throat. Mouth puffs prove that this does produce vapor, but I don't think it's intended to give monster throat hits. I do however believe they should offer pods with more glycol in them for those desiring more pronounced vapor clouds.
I find the pods last a decent period of time, equivalent to a single analog. But the low vapor production and throat hit give one a diminished satisfaction when the pod is spent. This can and should be tweaked.
Overall, I like the device. I think I want to like it more than I actually like it as-is. You can tell they are on to something here. I like the unique experience. The flavors are growing on me. The downsides to the device all seem like things that can be improved upon: fix the ignition to be more consistent; fix the buggy Off switch; offer pods with more glycol for those who desire more vapor; make the pods less pricey, or offer them in bulk at a discount; tweak the mouthpiece for a slower drag.
The "beta" label is embossed into the device, and rightly so. It's a promising start, but it needs some fine-tuning and some reconsiderations or expansion of the approach to vapor production. The Ploom will not replace my Halo G6 or my Vmod XL, but it has earned its place as a unique alternative now that I approach it for what it is and not how it compares to an analog or e-cig. I look forward to seeing how the Ploom evolves.
Tropical Bob did a video on the ploom where he used some nasal snuff and vg to reuse the cartridges. I think its on YouTube. I've been contemplating trying a ploom. Where did you buy yours?
SUGAR!
When you burn sugar you get acetaldehyde.
Aside from claims I've read that carbon monoxide can have a hand in "shutting down" the brain and adding to the calming effect of cigarettes, I remember a story in the 80's about Phillip-Morris researchers conducting studies on rats using nicotine as well as acetaldehyde. These rats were set up to press levers for nicotine doses, and the addition of acetaldehyde to the nicotine increased their self administered dosing fourfold. Upon realizing this, cigarette manufacturers supposedly started adding more sugar to their tobacco blend.
I don't know how much truth is there but it makes sense if they're in it for the money, considering how much they spend on marketing, and considering the very nature of what it is they do for a living. They are funding addiction research for some reason.
I'm sure there's a tone of info about this online now, a quick google brought this link up first.
Cigarettes: are they doubly addictive? - tobacco smoke constituent acetaldehyde may be addictive - Brief Article | Science News | Find Articles
FIGHT THE POWER
Last edited:
I saw TBob's video, which convinced me to add it to the arsenal and also to lower my expectations as far as comparing it to e-cigs.
I got mine from the site directly, do some searching you can find coupon codes for the starter kits, I think 10% off. I think this one worked for me: ECR10%OFF
I am curious what gets vaporized in tobacco if one assumes nothing was added. I've done zero research on this.
I assume vaporizing sugar would simply make liquid sugar. Even if it were added to plume blends or similar, I personally doubt it would have the same result as it would being combusted. I'm no chemist though, just working off of my basic understanding of combustion vs vaporization. Apparently there is no CO either.
I would assume that e-cig juice flavors contain some sort of sweetener that gets vaporized. Perhaps not sugar, but definitely more than just the nicotine.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
