• CD Moderators: nepalnt21
  • Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

Smoking with maximum efficiency

Vapes are a more clean high.

I have an Arizer Extreme Q. I've found that the trick to getting thicker vapor clouds, and subsequently a more hazy high is to inhale gently and steadily. You're not supposed to hit it very hard. Each toke for me now takes around 15 seconds to fill my lungs.

I typically set it at around 175-180 Celsius. For a more hazy retarded high, I will first take a few hits at 175, then crank it up to around 190, take a couple more hits, crank it up to 210, a couple more hits, then crank it up to 230 for a final couple of hits. Seems to work for me.
 
Gravity bong is high school status. Invest in a fat glass tube, take a gigantic snap.

Meh. I used to have a nice, quality bong (about 3.5ft) but i found it a pain to keep clean.. and when i finally realized the water was soaking up THC, i stopped bothering with it

It really is a waste, from an economic standpoint. But it is nice to have for social occasions / to get fucked up as quickly as possible

Now i prefer the high from joints..(that is, well-rolled ones that don't waste any smoke) I don't fiend as much because the high is more gradual and so i don't waste/go through as much in a session
 
you can smoke the vaped weed bro. works in bongs. 3 bongs of avb is about 1.2 bongs of normal bud. cooking you need to use a LOT more avb (already vaped bud).

more of a stone than a high when smoked though as the majority of the THC is already gone. delta 9 and 8 anyways.
THCV doesnt vape til about 220* apaprently.
 
Does anyone have any evidence to prove using a vaporizer is more efficient than other methods of smoking/inhaling? Or is this just based on anecdotes?

Who's to say using a short stemmed pipe isn't more efficient, for example? Maybe it's more unhealthy than a vaporizer but that's not to say it's less efficient.

I'm not saying it is less efficient, but I would like to see evidence if anyone can provide it (just out of curiosity).
 
it is common science.

when you combust cannabis you are straight away burning a SHITLOAD of the chemicals that would have got you high.
gone. poof. nowhere to be found. you my friend thanks to the magic of fire have just not got the full whack from your bowl.

now Jimmy mcWeed over there with a vapouriser, he gets the full bang for his buck.
because he vapourises his cannabis, he gets 100% of the active constituents.
none is wasted due to pyrolization (spellin?), as the plant material is only heated to the respective points where the chemicals found within boil off and are released as a misty vapour.

also, a part of what you feel when you smoke herb is a mild poisoning,
as your body sends out antibodies etc to fight the carcinogens etc that you are consuming due to inhaling combusted plant matter.

depending on what temp you first set your vape at for a bowl, you can make ur weed last wayy longer,
and you also get a different type of high with the different temp ranges-
ie 160* will be a very light uppy high as d9-THC is vaped at 157*C. at 190*C it gets more cloudy and feels slightly more crazy to me.
ie mind races more. this is my personal experience, everyones different but thats what you can expect with a vape.
CBD and CBN are vaped before 190*C btw.


get how its less efficient now?
 
a blunt is the least effective you idiot.
its so wasteful.

seriously are you retarded?

That used to be my stance till i smoked a professionally-rolled joint from the dispensary. That thing was wrapped so tightly, no smoke was lost.. and it went out / i had to re-light it if i stopped hitting for a few seconds.. That way, i didn't waste any, i could stop smoking at any time and save the rest for later

I admit it isn't easy to roll a good joint like that tho and definitely takes skill / practice..

It's too easy to waste your shit if you don't know what you're doing
 
Does anyone have any evidence to prove using a vaporizer is more efficient than other methods of smoking/inhaling? Or is this just based on anecdotes?

Who's to say using a short stemmed pipe isn't more efficient, for example? Maybe it's more unhealthy than a vaporizer but that's not to say it's less efficient.

I'm not saying it is less efficient, but I would like to see evidence if anyone can provide it (just out of curiosity).

Vapes (even good ones) have never gotten me remotely high.. and i've tried and tried
 
it is common science.

when you combust cannabis you are straight away burning a SHITLOAD of the chemicals that would have got you high.
gone. poof. nowhere to be found. you my friend thanks to the magic of fire have just not got the full whack from your bowl.

now Jimmy mcWeed over there with a vapouriser, he gets the full bang for his buck.
because he vapourises his cannabis, he gets 100% of the active constituents.
none is wasted due to pyrolization (spellin?), as the plant material is only heated to the respective points where the chemicals found within boil off and are released as a misty vapour.

also, a part of what you feel when you smoke herb is a mild poisoning,
as your body sends out antibodies etc to fight the carcinogens etc that you are consuming due to inhaling combusted plant matter.

depending on what temp you first set your vape at for a bowl, you can make ur weed last wayy longer,
and you also get a different type of high with the different temp ranges-
ie 160* will be a very light uppy high as d9-THC is vaped at 157*C. at 190*C it gets more cloudy and feels slightly more crazy to me.
ie mind races more. this is my personal experience, everyones different but thats what you can expect with a vape.
CBD and CBN are vaped before 190*C btw.


get how its less efficient now?

If a vaporizor allows you to get 100% of the active constituents, then why does smoking weed that's already been vaporized still get you high?

I think that a short stemmed one hitter and a smoldering heat source (car lighter or something, or just very carefully lighting the bowl so as to not burn it too much) is the most efficient method of using weed, followed by a vaporizer. Vaporizers win for health, although I find their high to be somewhat lacking due to the fact that they don't vaporize all the cannibinoids. It seems to be more of a head high, lacking in some of the physical aspects that I find very enjoyable. And not as hazy and fucked up feeling, which I also tend to enjoy.

I think blunts are probably more efficient then joints, because even though they use more weed they burn much more slowly and can be put out and relit a couple times.

^Same with me.
Alot of you guys are forgetting the humble hotknifing method. (one canadian dude mentioned it)...

We all know glass bongs cannot be beat though...Unless you're really skilled with them knives.

Meth pipe > Hot knives in terms of hash smoking.
 
Vaporizers win for health, although I find their high to be somewhat lacking due to the fact that they don't vaporize all the cannibinoids. It seems to be more of a head high, lacking in some of the physical aspects that I find very enjoyable. And not as hazy and fucked up feeling, which I also tend to enjoy.

perhaps vaporised highs are similiar to sativa highs due to the cannabinoids the vaporiser extracts??

vaporiser makes weed go furthest, but you lose all the flavour and the other cannabinoids which contribute to the overall high

i'd say bongs are the way to go; but do remember weed takes a while to kick in so you might not feel "as high" as if you were smoking in a joint

but it might be worth investigating vaporising more from a subjective approach to see if it produces a more "get shit done" kind of vibe
 
Top