NEW IN THE QUEUE – THE J WELL ONYX
I’ve been a bit of a closet J Well fan for some time now. Here’s their new ONYX.
It has a unique user interface and doesn’t look or operate like anything else out there.
The dial is easy to work with and make adjusting a pleasure.
I do, however, feel they need to protect the finish in shipping a little better. Mine came complete with some scratches.
From the site:
Onyx™ represents the future of vaping! This smart box delivers up to 50W and offers two modes for temperature control. The first one is called ‘temperature limit’ and allows not to go above a certain value set by yourself even if the desired power has to go above. We have added an exclusive mode called ‘Temperature Control’. With this mode, you will only need to take into consideration the temperature at which you need to vape. Onyx™ will take care of the rest.
Furthermore, in case you forget to fill in the tank, no more risk to burn your coil. Onyx™ is here to protect you! Used with NI200 resistance, Titane for temperature control mode or even with Kanthal with variable power, the vaping possibilities are limitless.
NEW IN THE QUEUE – THE REULEAUX RX200
You know what I hate most about the Reuleaux? It’s typing the word “Reuleaux”. Takes me forever. Such an odd word with odd letters for this odd American to type. 🙂
Anywho, I’ve heard your requests for me to take a look and I will. Just have a couple more to get to before this one.
So Wismec has taken the Reuleaux design, took out the DNA-200, put in another board (which I believe to be a modified eVic VTC board) and has given you a much more cost effective version.
I’ve also noticed that the battery door isn’t as slidy as the DNA-200 version.
Product Features:
- Triple 18650 Platform
- New 200W Chip Set
- Reverse Polarity Insert
- Allows for Easy Exchange and Replacement
- Batteries Sold Separately
- Please Note: Batteries must be matched in brand and model at all times. Discharge and recharge batteries within the same grouping of three.
- RX200 Chipset
- 1 to 200W
- 0.1 to 3.5 ohms
- Full Temperature Control
- Titanium
- Ni200 Nickel
- Stainless Steel
- 200 to 600 Degrees Fahrenheit
- 0.05 to 1.0 ohm
- 0.69 Inch OLED Screen
- Upgradeable Firmware
- Designed By Jay Bo
- Engraved with Jay Bo on Firing Button
- Modern and Sleek Look
- Magnetized Battery Bay
- Ergonomic Shape and Feel
- Recessed Control and Display Face
- Gold Plated Contact
NEW CONFUSION IN THE QUEUE – THE KANGER TOPBOX NANO STARTER KIT
THE KANGER TOPBOX NANO STARTER KIT
There are times when I think it’s Kanger’s goal to confuse the hell out of their customers. I believe this is one of those times.
So I receive the Kanger Topbox Nano Starter Kit. In looking quickly at it, I think it’s a Subox Nano in new packaging with a new topfill tank.
- I look all over the box and I still think the same.
- I take is out of the box and still think the same.
- I compare it to a Subox Nano and still think the same.
(the one of the left is the “Topbox Nano” with TC, the one of the right is the “Subox Nano” without.
Imagine my surprise when I click the fire button three times and it switches over into temp control.
So apparently they’ve taken the Subox Nano body, didn’t change a thing about it, and put a new temp control brain in it.
At least when Innokin released the MVP Pro it did say “Pro” on it. 🙂
Now I have 3 coils that come with it and I think they have not supplied a TC coil to work with their new TC board…
But I dig a little deeper and come to find out the SSOCC .15 Ohm is a NI200 coil. But doesn’t the SS stand for Stainless Steel? Very confusing IMHO.
NEW BUT MAYBE NOT IN THE QUEUE – THE APOLLO RELIANT
A couple of things bothered me right out of the box on this one. The first thing I noticed that it was pretty uncomfortable to hold with a rather sharp bottom edge that digs into your hand.
The second thing, once I put a battery in and fired it up, I noticed that the DNA-200 interface has been duplicated pixel for pixel. Is that necessary?
Sure I’ve looked at a bunch of gear with extremely similar interfaces, but is a pixel for pixel copy necessary?
Suggestion… set yourself apart, have your own look and feel, be creative and innovative.
From the site:
Reliant + Phazer: Complete Control of Your Vaping Experience
Introducing the all new Reliant 60W Pro Kit by Apollo. This kit features the Reliant 60W Mod + Phazer Tank. The Reliant is Apollo’s newest mod featuring Temperature Control + TCR, the most advanced technology in the vaping industry. The Phazer is the ONLY Sub-Ohm Tank that allows you to control your liquid and air flow for the perfect vape every time. The Reliant Kit – Total Control in the palm of your hand!
3 Firing Modes for Vaping Precision – Temperature Control, Wattage, and Mechanical
In Temperature Control Mode, you choose from 200°F up to 600°F (100°C to 300°C) with up to 60W of maximum power. The Reliant is compatible with all nickel, titanium, stainless steel and future temperature readable wires by using the built-in TCR (Temperature Coefficient of Resistance) Settings. With the Reliant’s exclusive Temperature Control functions, the ultra-portable mod will sense how fast the atomizer heats up and prevent firing when your coil is dry, making sure you don’t experience any burnt or dry hits.
In Wattage Mode, the Reliant is compatible with traditional kanthal coils or any wire that is not temperature control compatible. A range of 5W – 60W provides you with great vaping power and the flexibility you need to work with any atomizer or clearomizer.
In Mechanical Mode, the Reliant will provide direct power from your battery to the coil while maintaining the built in safety features the ultra-portable device has to offer.
Dual Charging Options – USB Pass-Through or Swap Out
The Reliant offers flexibility in charging as well. Remove the rechargeable 18650 battery (not included) or use the USB Pass-Through Charging to charge your battery and use the device at the same time.
Integrated LED Display
With its bright and easy to ready display, the screen shows you all your vaping specs in real time so you know exactly what your Reliant is doing. Tired of the Lights? Try Stealth Mode for vaping in the dark.
Ultra-Portable Ergonomic Mod
The Reliant’s ultra-portable size and ergonomic shape give it a great hand feel, making it one of the most compact mods on the market!
Phazer Sub-Ohm Tank – Control Your Flow
Our Phazer tank is the ONLY Sub-Ohm Tank that allows you to control your liquid and air flow with a simple twist. The innovative design optimizes vapor production and provides an intense amount of flavor for the best vaping experience possible. The 3.5ml Tank features all glass and stainless steel construction that easily comes apart for convenient and quick cleaning. The wide bore glass drip tip provides a great feel along with an elegant look. The clearomizer comes with our exclusive coil heads in 0.2 ohm (Ni200) and 0.5 ohm (Kanthal). The replacement coil heads feature our proprietary e-liquid flow control ring, while the air flow control is built into the bottom of the Sub-Ohm Tank housing.
Pro Kit includes:
- (1) Black Reliant Mod
- (1) Phazer Sub-Ohm Tank
- (1) 0.5 Kanthal Coil (pre-installed)
- (1) 0.2 Ni200 Coil
- (1) USB Charging Cable
- (1) Kit Manual
NEW IN THE QUEUE – THE NJOY DAILY
I still contend that the C-Store (convenience store) e-cig/disposable is one of the most important out there. Why? Because on a whim, as a smoker buys their pack of cigarettes they may say, “Hmmm… I’ve heard of e-cigs, let me give one a try.”
At that point, you either satisfy them, or potentially lose them forever.
The receipt of the NJoy Daily has rekindled a desire to do a review I’ve thought about for a long time. A C-Store cig-a-like shootout, and another review geared totally to the smoker.
I’m quite sure it’s been done before, but I’ve never done it and would like to see for myself what’s good and what’s junk or hype.
This will take some time to do, but I think it important and worth the time.
This will be one of my first projects of 2016.
SOME OF MY OWN THOUGHTS ON THE DI/AP ISSUE
I’m sure this post will get some flames, but I need to rant a little bit anyway, so here goes…
I guess I’m just a little surprised and disappointed that the Harvard report on DI/AP has taken so many people by surprise when it’s been a known issue for so long now and discussed at length in so many different forums.
The biggest thing I’m hearing is… well, we don’t watch those shows, or follow the forums and the online community, so we didn’t know.
Sorry to be harsh here, but IMHO – Ignorance is no excuse. You’re putting this stuff into your body. You don’t have the due diligence to research it and know what’s going on with it? Be adult and take some responsibility.
When I THOUGHT about vaping back in 2009 I researched the piss out of it, learning everything I could before trying it. At least what was available back then. There is far more research and resources available for you today.
What are my own feelings on the DI/AP issue? Am I even educated on the subject enough to comment? Maybe not, but I’m going to anyway. 🙂 I’ve also tried to gather some links to information and invite you to make up your own mind.
From a high level, it’s very simple… If it’s an avoidable risk, let’s avoid it. Might as well do it ourselves before someone tells us to.
- Do I think it’s being blown WAY out of proportion? Yes I do.
How The Media Totally Exaggerated Study On Risk Of ‘Popcorn Lung’
New Study Finds that Average Diacetyl Exposure from Vaping is 750 Times Lower than from Smoking
A new study finds diacetyl in e-cigarettes but exaggerates risks and fails to discuss about smoking
Public Panic – Researchers Push to Skew Vaping Regulation – Reg Watch
Media Bias Exposed: ‘Popcorn Lung’ Chemical 750 Times Greater In Tobacco Vs. E-Cigarettes
- Do I think vaping is far safer than smoking? Yes I do.
- Even with the DI/AP? Yes I do.
But I also think there are some legitimate concerns brought up by people who are far more intelligent than I when it comes to this topic.
For example, From Dr. Farsalinos:
If you talk about the case for tobacco cigarettes not causing popcorn lung disease, we have responded to this through our study last year. I quote:
“A recent study raised doubts about the association between DA and AP exposure and development of bronchiolitis obliterans (Pierce et al., 2014); high levels of these chemicals were found in tobacco smoke while smoking is not a risk factor for development the disease. However, cigarette smoke contains many respiratory irritants, which probably act synergistically and cause a different pattern of lung disease. The prevalence of chronic obstructive lung disease in active smokers is estimated to be 15.4% (Raherison & Girodet, 2009), by far higher than the prevalence of bronchiolitis obliterans in patients exposed to diacetyl. Moreover, it is quite common that the condition is often misdiagnosed (Kreiss et al., 2002). Finally, post-mortem examinations have shown that many smokers have histopathological features of respiratory bronchiolitis (Niewoehner et al., 1974).”
Finally, let me note that diacetyl is indeed generally recognized as safe for ingestion because the damage is coming from direct contact of diacetyl with the lung epithelium (lung surface) and not by the presence of diacetyl in blood after it is absorbed!
What does that mean? It means the DI/AP contained in cigarettes when combined with the other toxins could lead to something other than popcorn lung, which could still potentially be… popcorn lung.
What else does this mean? It means we don’t know for sure.
But just because we don’t know and some may feel it’s being blown out of proportion, brushing it off, IMHO is irresponsible given the research we have.
- Do I think vaping DI/AP is going to kill you overnight? No I don’t.
- Do I think vaping DI/AP at the levels we do even from the biggest offenders has the potential to be of no concern at all? Can’t answer that one. Time and research will tell.
- Do I still think there is cause for concern? Yes I do.
Respiratory Toxicologic Pathology of Inhaled Diacetyl in Sprague-Dawley Rats
HAZARD COMMUNICATION GUIDANCE FOR DIACETYL AND FOOD FLAVORINGS CONTAINING DIACETYL
Necrosis of Nasal and Airway Epithelium in Rats Inhaling Vapors of Artificial Butter Flavoring
Fixed Obstructive Lung Disease in Workers at a Microwave Popcorn Factory — Missouri, 2000–2002
FLAVORINGS-RELATED LUNG DISEASE
A new study verifies the lower risk-potential of e-cigarettes but identifies an avoidable risk
So is this a call to remove all AP & DI from all liquids? No… maybe, well yes… kinda, but not really. No because we as adults should be able to decide for ourselves what we use and how we use it, and what harm level we may want to expose ourselves to. Yes to protect the very same people who sparked this post. Those people who have no idea what AP & DI is. The seventy year old grandma who goes into a vape shop and buys a super tasty flavor not knowing the contents and potential risk and not given that information by the shop owner or the liquid vendor, thinking they are being as safe as possible. Should the industry sell these products to that person responsibly and ethically, protecting that person to the best of it’s ability? I think so. Maybe you can see my dilemma here.
- Do I think regulations will require it to be removed if being sold to the public no matter how we feel about it? Absolutely.
We at least need proper testing done on the liquids and the results clearly and publicly presented, giving vapers the information they need to make up their own minds. You always have to remember, what may not be important to you may be extremely important to someone else.
It’s up to us as adults to choose the level of risk we are willing to subject ourselves to whether or not that risk is even founded… If you don’t feel comfortable using it or doing it, don’t!
Just as important, research needs to continue in using AP/DI in the way we do. Perhaps someday we’ll find out that at our exposure levels, there are no concerns at all and we can go on happily vaping our deliciously creamy & buttery AP/DI laden flavors with no worries at all, but we’re not there yet and may never be.
The same can be said for the materials we use…
- Is using kanthal any safer than using nichrome or titanium or nickel or stainless steel or greekmantium?
- Is using organic cotton any safer than using rayon or silica or hemp or mesh or ceramic?
That goes for how we vape as well…
- Is vaping at lower temperatures safer than higher temperatures?
- Is a shorter draw safer than a longer draw?
- Is vaping lower nicotine levels, but consuming more liquid safer than higher nicotine levels and less liquid?
We don’t know, but we need to, and studies need to continue using all of these materials in all of the different ways we use them.
Vaping is a very interesting game folks. It’s not like smoking (no shit Phil). I believe, at this point, we know that it’s far safer than smoking. I’ve read as much as 95% safer than smoking. With vaping, however, you also have control over how much safer than smoking it is. I personally would love to know how that 95% number changes based on what we use and how we use it.
I truly believe we’re going to come to find out that vaping in different ways increases or decreases risks to your health. Some will be happy with “who cares, it’s all still safer than smoking”. Others will not and continue to look for the safest ways to vape. Some will accept potential risks associated with their style of vaping, others will not.
It’s similar to my current feelings on NI and TI. I continue to use the materials and I’m comfortable using them at temperatures I do. However, if research into using these materials the way we do presents a legitimate concern, I may very well re-think my ways.
But remember what I said before… “If you don’t feel comfortable doing it or using it, don’t!”
Research is needed!
Issues with vaping need to be identified. When they are identified we need to not freak out, solve the problem, learn from it, and move forward. They need to be made public. Mainstream media blowing these issues out of proportion is something we’re going to have to get used to and deal with.
I feel worst for the smoker in this situation. Those people who may be swayed by what they see and hear in mainstream media pushing them away from a potentially lifesaving or extending product. We need to continually educate those people and guide them to the truth.
They are being given only one side of the story. These mainstream news articles, when presenting the ills of vaping MUST compare them to the ills of smoking. Doing anything less is completely irresponsible.
We have a long way to go before we get the answers everyone is looking for, but in the meantime it’s very important to understand that vaping is about harm REDUCTION not harm ELIMINATION. Use these products at your own risk, but do your best to educate yourself on potential issues and concerns. And always remember, that the safest way to vape is to not vape at all… but don’t smoke either! 😉
Here endeth my rant!
Vape happy everyone and have a great weekend.
How The Media Totally Exaggerated Study On Risk Of ‘Popcorn Lung’
Read the article HERE!
THE HARVARD AP/DI REPORT
I’m still getting emails and Facebooks about this, so I though I post it here as well. It’s already on my Facebook…
The report…
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2015/12/popcorn-lung-seen-in-e-cigarette-smokers/
So this report comes out and all of a sudden I’m getting a ton of emails with all of your concerns.
With no offense meant… where the hell have you been?
This has been a well known issue for some time now and discussed numerous times by numerous people in numerous posts, shows, podcasts, videos, stories, lawsuits, etc and NOW you’re going to freak out?
Here’s the response from Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos…
http://www.ecigarette-research.org/…/…/whatsnew-2015/236-da2
And here’s another reason to question the results…
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/business/03medschool.html…
I’ve said it many times before, if this is a concern for you, ask your shop or liquid supplier if they’ve been tested. If the answer is “yes” and that’s still not good enough for you, ask to see the results.
At this point, any reputable liquid supplier should have had their liquids tested and be willing to share the AP/DI results with you. If they can’t produce the results, find yourself another vendor who can.
Some liquids will still have AP/DI but that information should be presented up front for you to make the decision as to whether or not you want to continue to vape it.
Some have identified these compounds and are working to reformulate.
Some have already done just that.
And if it’s still bothering you, perhaps you should think about not vaping down 50+mls of e-liquid per day with your “Patented Octuple Fused Clapton Core” sub-ohm tank. Just saying.
THE JACVAPOUR SERIES-B TILT
A PBusardo Review – The Series B Tilt by JacVapour
In this video we add to the stocking again (it’s really straining now!), we do some happy and cranky post review follow-up on the Smok XCube Mini and the Innokin Endura, and we take a full look at the JacVapour Series-B Tilt.
Jac Vapour
CigGo
Horizone-Cig
Kanger
Smok
Innokin
Innokin email addresses:
support@innokin.com
info@innokin.com
Post Review Follow-Up:
- 12/18/15: I love getting a quality response from a vendor or a manufacturer following a potentially not so favorable review. IMHO it says a lot about the people behind the product. This is one such response that they’ve allowed me to share with you:
Hi Phil
Hope you are well.
Thanks for the very in depth review Phil and it’s a shame you did not like it more,
however it has given us some really useful insight which we will use in future
product development. I hope you don’t mind but I would like to respond with regard
to some of the choices we made regarding the design and would really appreciate any
further feedback you have for us. The SERIES-B was the first box mod we have
designed and therefore we are keen to learn for future development.The design principles for the SERIES-B, were to develop a product with superior
build quality and a simple to use reliable feature set targeting the mainstream user
and in particular those wanting to upgrade from Ego style devices and obtain the
benefits of higher power, increased battery capacity and sub ohm capability in a
discreet, compact form, whilst ensuring the product’s longevity through a
replaceable 18650 battery at a reasonable price point. Our research indicated that
users in this segment want a simple package and that 40 watts of power and no temp
control would meet the majority of users needs, however we felt simple features
should not mean cheap build quality or run of the mill looks.We could incorporate a $40 branded chip but obviously this would have significant
price implications which we feel would miss the point, however it would be really
useful to hear your views on this in terms of whether you think this would be a good
approach? I think Vaporshark have already done a really good job of this in the
higher price bracket devices.The mod is priced at £52.99 in the UK, this takes into account the high tax rates we
pay, to put it into perspective the sub-box here is £54.99 in most stores, we also
do a price including the Samsung 25R for £59.99. The US RRP of the device is
$65-$69. At this price point we believe there are very limited, if any, other
options that offer higher build quality in terms of materials used on devices with
replaceable 18650s. I know our looks are subjective, but I do believe the finish is
at the top end and we do offer a 1 year warranty, the Vaporshark is only 6 months,
so the package also represents good value for somebody that needs a reliable
well-built device with entry level box features.The screen being squint is unfortunate, I have never seen this before, and hopefully
you can see this on the second device we sent, also out of 20 or so we have here in
the office I can’t find an un-level screen, I can say though, if somebody found such
a fault we would instantly replace the device.I understand your points concerning the settings memory, however we wanted to keep
the device small and all we could fit is a capacitor that allows a 6 second battery
changeover, you need to be quick and also 5 click the device off for it to work. I
agree that this it is not ideal, but we made this choice as 95% of our users are
making one or less than one battery change a day and we believe for our market the
unit being small was our primary concern.I have also passed your concerns over the firing delay to our chip engineers, I am
not an engineer myself, but could this have anything to do with you using the
initial batch unit, this batch was predominantly made for beta testing and
reviewers, and during the beta we discovered a firing issue which was subsequently
fixed by replacing a component and a software update. I see in your review you are
using batch number 19710727, the Beta and review batch, but I know you were sent an
updated one from the corrected batch once we realised the issue, did you use the
updated one for the firing test? It would be greatly appreciated to know this if
possible.Once again thanks very much for the review, there’s lots of useful info in there,
and we will take a lot away from it, so we can improve the device in the larger
wattage TC versions currently under design.Regards
Robert Patrick
Retail Director
+44 7967 920583www.jacvapour.com
The Video:
The Photos:
LOOKS LIKE SMOK LISTENED…
Looks like SMOK listened to my issue with the delay on the XCube Mini! Their new firmware for the device addresses the issue:
V1.030 – IMPROVED FEATURE
1. Improved vaping delay,you can enjoy vaping instantly once you fire the button .
2. Enhanced vaping experience on TC mode with continuous vapor.
You can find the update HERE.
This will be added to the post review follow-up on the device’s review post.
Store
