Dynavap M 2018

Really good ideas

 

Why is everyone so hellbent on the Omni?

I have a NonaVong, and I love it, especially as a morning piece, but I didn’t pay full price for it and if I had I would have been disappointed by it if I had.

If I’m gonna spend $200 on a vape, it needs to be really special. And since the only real difference seems to be “airflow control,” and I have pretty good control using the carb on my vong, I just don’t see the reason to spend an extra $100 on titanium and “airflow control.”


Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum

 

I agree I've got a "M" and I love it but for the price I'd rather have that then an omni. The biggest reason I'd want an omni is that the adjustable bowl size. The air flow control doesn't seem like a big deal to me either when I've already got a carb to help control air flow.

 

I love my Omni. For near 200 bucks, I find it IS special. Yes, I could potentially get similar performance by feathering the carb as normal or partially blocking it off... And if you're fine with doing it, thats fine.

However, I had the money on a gift card so I decided to grab the Omni xl, and I am extremely happy with my decision. I much prefer setting the airflow to my setting for the circumstances, and then not worry about it at all while vaping.

It cartainly isn't necessary, but I find it very nice knowing I have the option to adjust the airflow in any manner I please without having to do so manually during the act of vaping.

Also, you seem to be ignoring materials. Titanium is a superior material than stainless steel in many regards, and it costs more and is more of a pain to machine than stainless. All of these things factor in to the cost.

If you feel it isn't worth it, thats perfectly reasonable. I just happen to think otherwise IF one has the money to spend.

Hell, I would have spent 25 more for the green one if it we're listed the day I ordered mine

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

Salutations CrazyCory564,

Hummm... I'm afraid it is "IH-driving" that's really "special" with DynaVap these days. Was that near 200 $ Omni XL acquired with Induction Heat compatibility in mind, or else??

No doubt material selection performed early during the conceptual stage shall often prove determining.

There are no "perfect" materials in the real world, only near-perfect contraptions (juxtapositions, etc.), for near-200 $ in your case apparently. One aspect to consider, should IH-driving happen to be among desired options (...), is that even the most performing DynaVap IH scenarios remain wasteful in terms of energy, which is no trivial detail and most specially in a portable application.

Quite frankly i believe the DynaVap is slave to its clicking feature and this is a major bottleneck as it must translate into a relatively heavy metal assembly. Consequently the electro-magnetic injection of a "Heat Charge" into such mass requires a power output to match or a trade-off on pre-charging time shall need to be considered... If "Pulse" or "Flash" vaporisation is part of the plan then less mass becomes synonymous of enhanced portability and/or a more convenient (shorter) IH injection time. Starting from there the trick is to optimize a significant mass reduction while simultaneously keeping an eye on bowl size/weight, because the "Heat Charge" should match its associated "WorkLoad" or the wasted energy is sure to cause issues of its own... On another hand who wants a bowl that's too tiny for practical purposes?

...

Too bad the DynaVap main feature remains its click because this seems to directly interfere with portability at the end of a day. M'well, at least in principle. Who knows about future models with more glass/ceramic and less metal! Down to 0.75 grams i'd say. YMMV.



Yet, even with a juicy IH driver i wouldn't exchange my Customized VaporGenie Pipe for a near-200 $ DynaVap. If i did i'd need to justify the extra cost, which i find difficult to reduce to numbers though i still find my daily tool offers the most affordable best cost-to-value ratio imaginable, probably as a result of an early potent strategy initiated by VG's inventor Dan Steinberg over a decade ago, actually. His patented selection of Silicon Carbide and clean-butane burning was very potent to begin with, and his forgotten (non-implemented) Fig. 11/12 feature most specially. Now that it's been integrated into a "Bi-Energy" scenario the cannabic value is only expanded despite material cost staying relatively unchanged, or at least nearly as economic i'm sure.

In all honesty DynaVap is lucky that such competition won't stress the owner to trim down his metal mass faster, possibly having to wave his click feature good-bye. Then one has got to ask what's left of a DynaVap concept without its click?



But the conclusion isn't mine to make, maybe the material selection and resulting mass are going to be just fine. Keep us posted in any case!...

Good day, have fun!!