delta_9
Bluelighter
wow, I need to move to Oregon 

euro9097 said:One of the reasons why vaporizers are better is because you aren't combusting the plant matter. By combusting, you lose a lot of THC which you can save by using other methods. I also don't really understand how you come to the conclusion that vaporizers use more plant matter.
Also, I have a vaporizer and only use on average 0.3 grams per packing. Each packing gives me 3 bags (regular turkey size bags) and it only takes me 1 bag to feel satisfied. My tolerance is also moderately high as I use daily.
peaked said:I guess what I'm trying to say is that the vaporizers CAN use more plant matter. Whether you choose to do this or not is another story. I don't doubt that a small amount of material will still work fine for most people. Ultimately I was extrapolating the experiences of myself and friends with the vape, assuming that most people used it in similar, over the top manner (like half an oz into the party bag of the "Volcano" between a few people). Obviously not everyone is going to use such extreme amounts but I merely wanted to point out that people can and do use up to an ounce a day.
I've never heard the claim that vapes produce a stronger effect given the same weight of plant matter. Maybe in the Volcano, but many of the cheaper units definitely do not produce all the vapor possible from the plant material, due to the uneven heating of it.
clamjuice said:If you are using a half o for a few people you most definitely might be using it wrong.
clamjuice said:And vaporized weed is not harsh at all. You must have the temperature too high.
clamjuice said:Maybe you are getting bad weed man, not trying to insult you, but everything you have claimed about the vaporizer i have had the complete opposite experience.
page6 said:There was a large variance in the percentage
of THC recovered in the three different vaporizer test runs, ranging
from 36% to 61%. This suggests that the efficiency of vaporization is
highly sensitive to variations in the sample and micro-conditions in its
environment.
These results compare favorably to the delivery efficiencies of marijuana
cigarettes as measured in other studies. THC efficiencies of 34%
to 61% were reported in studies of marijuana cigarettes smoked via a
smoking machine under varying conditions of puff duration and air
speed (Fehr and Kalant 1971).
page8 said:Theoretically, the vaporizer might have been expected to realize a
higher THC delivery efficiency than combustion, since it should have
avoided loss of THC by pyrolysis. That this was not observed indicates
that there were other inefficiencies in the vaporization process. The
most likely explanation would seem to be incomplete vaporization, due
to lack of uniform thorough heating and ventilation of the sample.
page9 said:For CBN, there was no significant change under vaporization. In
contrast, the level of CBN was twice as high in all three combusted samples,
with little variance.
page17 said:a few refractory
individuals say they prefer the savor of smoke or claim not to feel the
same impact from vapor.
veRGe said:Yay Oregon!
Carl Landrover said:Not sure what kind of vaporizer you're using, but that's just flat-out incorrect. If you're using more than you did when smoking, you're not using it right.
ziddla. said:does that shit even get you high bro?