Turbocad's finally selling mods :)
- Thread starter turbocad6
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
anything that has to curve in any way, or has any kind of radius at all including even silicone tubing will take up more space than a sharp 90deg bend here. a cross drilled block with a sharp 90deg transition will be the most compact solution. the shortest radius is no radius. this is especially necessary for the first bend right below the 510, the second return bend may be able to accommodate a radius if it is a tight radius
the 2 sharp 90deg bends do not affect flow in any way other than velocity, which is not a factor at all when it comes to squonking
and yeah, the connection does have to be solid and electrically conductive since that center pin still does need to be provided with power. this is one benefit of brass, in that brass to stainless threading is a slightly better electrical connection than stainless to stainless. brass to stainless threading is also a better seal at the threading too, which is why I say there are benefits and drawbacks to each choice between brass and stainless here. personally I'm leaning more towards brass as being ideal for this transitional piece in most cases. the actual brass to juice contact in this path is extremely minimal, it's only ~1/8th of an inch internally, but I know that a few may possibly be opposed to even that, which is why I'm also considering alternatives.
building the block from silver is one good possible alternative. gold plating a brass block after it is machined may be another, although I think that brass alone should be fine for most. brass has been used in plumbing for many years for water that will actually be consumed directly into your body. its use here as just a 1/8" section of the juice path, especially after it is pickled to remove all surface lead, I think it should really be a non issue for most, but I also do want an alternative for anyone it actually may concern.
speaking of which, who would be opposed to this fitting being brass? I'm guessing tom/catfish, but anyone else? I of course could build a stainless fitting for anyone that's overly concerned but would hate to have to do this for each and every one unless there was a real reason to which I am not seeing tbh...
the 2 sharp 90deg bends do not affect flow in any way other than velocity, which is not a factor at all when it comes to squonking
and yeah, the connection does have to be solid and electrically conductive since that center pin still does need to be provided with power. this is one benefit of brass, in that brass to stainless threading is a slightly better electrical connection than stainless to stainless. brass to stainless threading is also a better seal at the threading too, which is why I say there are benefits and drawbacks to each choice between brass and stainless here. personally I'm leaning more towards brass as being ideal for this transitional piece in most cases. the actual brass to juice contact in this path is extremely minimal, it's only ~1/8th of an inch internally, but I know that a few may possibly be opposed to even that, which is why I'm also considering alternatives.
building the block from silver is one good possible alternative. gold plating a brass block after it is machined may be another, although I think that brass alone should be fine for most. brass has been used in plumbing for many years for water that will actually be consumed directly into your body. its use here as just a 1/8" section of the juice path, especially after it is pickled to remove all surface lead, I think it should really be a non issue for most, but I also do want an alternative for anyone it actually may concern.
speaking of which, who would be opposed to this fitting being brass? I'm guessing tom/catfish, but anyone else? I of course could build a stainless fitting for anyone that's overly concerned but would hate to have to do this for each and every one unless there was a real reason to which I am not seeing tbh...
Would need to be Navel Brass Turbo
I am already using c464 naval brass for this, but even naval brass is said to still have trace amounts of lead
Turbo wouldn't you solder the connection at the ring of the 510? Why would the material of the piece matter? I guess I'm not understanding how you are wiring this 
the ground connection is at the ring of the 510, the positive would normally be to the nut at the base of the pin right under the 510, but here a nut will just take up more space so in effect, the elbow takes the place of the nut. the positive electrical connection therefore would have to be on the elbow itself(another benefit of brass), or it would have to be right after the elbow, to a nut on the second shaft that extends down after the elbow in the case of an ss elbow...
a brass nut is on the outside of the pin, no juice flow, the brass elbow will carry juice through it
Last edited:
Hmmmm naval brass and pickled would be ok.... Although I do try to avoid brass in the juice path. Maybe it's psychological but I do seem to notice it. Maybe I'm just hyper sensitive to it. Personally silver would be a good alternative in my mind. Stainless would be my preference for the juice path but I hate to reduce conductivity. Silver might be the best of both worlds??
how much difference in conductivity would that affect on a regulated device? are we talking 1-2 minutes of vape time?
Personally I never wait until the device is depleted to be recharged when talking regulated. Then again i dont care if i have brass in my juice path
Personally I never wait until the device is depleted to be recharged when talking regulated. Then again i dont care if i have brass in my juice path
well, even though technically there are differences, realistically the reduction of electrical conductivity is extremely minor and relatively insignificant, I mean the worse offender in any mod is of course the connection between the atty center pin and the 510 itself, the affect of an ss block would be nothing to be overly concerned about tbh and would easily be compensated for in calibrating the mod resistance in escribe... lets not forget that the center pin itself is stainless so really were talking about small imperceivable differences that are compensated for by the chip itself with calibration
I figured it wouldn't be much difference. I'm would be fine with SS block but silver would be fine also
^^^^This^^^^^
I ordered some more material from online metals for this, don't have any c464 in stock in an appropriate size and I also had to order some material for the 510 flange. will get delivery next week. because the 510 is now requiring me to add a little to the height I'm thinking of doing a flange like I had to do on my first prototype, to avoid having to make the whole box taller.
what do you guys think of this look?
it's either that or make the whole mod taller by the same amount to maintain the flush look. I'm also playing with maybe building that flange right into the wood body itself, instead of the whole box being taller
what do you guys think of this look?
it's either that or make the whole mod taller by the same amount to maintain the flush look. I'm also playing with maybe building that flange right into the wood body itself, instead of the whole box being taller
I like the flush look....however you have to do it. Would prefer to keep the dimensions to the minimum size but height doesn't bother me as much as width and depth
It's really subjective. Do people care more for box height or they actually measure the height til the drip tip. In the latter case it doesn't matter what you do since it is the minimum you can get.
I guess the way I look at it, with the flange it just makes for the equivalent of a slightly taller atty instead of a taller box overall, the end result measurement to the drip tip is exactly the same, but with the flange the overall box itself winds up being a little shorter. I guess I'll machine one tomorrow with the whole box having the extra height and see what it looks like. right now I'm machining a few dna75's to show and even hopefully sell this weekend here...
Guess it's safe to assume the DNA 75's aren't bottom feeders
- Status
Similar threads
