These Keeppowers look the same, and perform almost the same, as the good performing YDL 18350D. The average performance for these Keeppowers is not quite as good as the average performance of the 10A-rated YDL cells so I am giving this cell a 9A continuous current rating. They all run at about the same temperature. It’s the differences in voltage sag that affects their current rating.

To extend cell life, minimize voltage sag, and increase your safety margin, I recommend staying at 7A-9A or under for these Keeppowers. That’s about 20W-27W per cell. This is a good performing 18350 but all 18350’s are a poor choice for anything above low power levels.

The two cells I tested delivered 1062mAh and 1086mAh. This is decent consistency but they do not meet Keeppower’s 1200mAh rating. I am rating this cell at 1000mAh.

Like all 18350’s I’ve tested the cell-to-cell performance consistency for these Keeppowers is not good. There’s not a huge difference between cells but you might notice it if you have one of the better ones and one of the worst ones.

Two cells were were purchased by me for the purposes of testing.

Ratings graphic: https://imgur.com/a/LiCmEOX

Test report: https://bit.ly/33K2B7h

I want to work for the vaping community full time! If you feel what I do is worth a couple dollars a month and you would like early access to battery availability, battery and charger testing and news, and a say in what I test, then please consider becoming a patron and supporting my testing efforts: https://www.patreon.com/batterymooch.

These tests only note the ESTIMATED ratings for these batteries at the time I tested them. Any battery that is not a genuine Samsung, Sony, Murata, LG, Panasonic, Molicel, or Sanyo can change at any time! This is one of the hazards of using “rewrapped” batteries or batteries from other manufacturers so carefully research any battery you are considering using before purchasing.

Misusing or mishandling lithium-ion batteries can pose a SERIOUS RISK of personal injury or property damage. They are not meant to be used outside of a protected battery pack. Never exceed the battery’s continuous current rating and keep the plastic wrap and top insulating ring in perfect condition.

Any rating in my ratings tables can change at any time as different grade cells appear on the market, we get swamped with fakes, or new information becomes available to me. Please, never assume that the ratings in the tables are permanent and will never change! Always download the latest version before considering any cell purchase.

To see how other cells have tested check out this link: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

A PBusardo Review – The Aspire Breeze NXT

In this video we take a look at the new Aspire Breeze NXT, the successor to the Breeze 2. I’m very impressed with this piece. We also find out who won the last 2 “Not A” Contests and kick off a new one with a chance to win your very own Aspire Breeze NXT! Enjoy!

The links:
Aspire
Element Vape
Kaees
Innokin
Eleaf

Thank you to and please support the Premiere Taste Your Juice Sponsor…

The Video:

*NOTE: Any use of these videos in part or in their entirety without Phil Busardo’s expressed written consent is strictly prohibited.

The Photos:

• Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • StumbleUpon

• Like

• Previous
• Next

Share

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Pinterest
• StumbleUpon

Like

Download

Open Link

Close Full

Description

Keyboard Shortcuts Dismiss

• SSlideshow
• MMaximize
•  Previous
•  Next
• escClose

Vapcell has two versions of this cell. The 9A-rated version is the newer one but the older 10A-rated version can still purchased since everyone has not sold out their stock of the older cell yet.

These Vapcells look the same, and perform almost the same, as the good performing YDL 18350D. The average performance for these Vapcells is not quite as good as the average performance of the 10A-rated YDL cells so I am giving this cell a 9A continuous current rating. They all run at about the same temperature. It’s the differences in voltage sag that affects their current rating.

To extend cell life, minimize voltage sag, and increase your safety margin, I recommend staying at 7A-9A or under for these Vapcells. That’s about 20W-27W per cell. This is a good performing 18350 but all 18350’s are a poor choice for anything above low power levels.

The two 9A-rated cells I tested delivered 1042mAh and 1054mAh. The two 10A-rated cells I tested delivered 1013mAh and 1053mAh. This is decent consistency but they do not meet Vapcell’s 1100mAh rating. I am rating this cell at 1000mAh.

Like all 18350’s I’ve tested the cell-to-cell performance consistency for these Vapcells is not good. There’s not a huge difference between cells but you might notice it if you have one of the better ones and one of the worst ones.

Two cells were donated for the purposes of testing by Vapcell and two were purchased by me.

Ratings graphic: https://imgur.com/a/X1gvBHm

Test report: https://bit.ly/31DXt2O

I want to work for the vaping community full time! If you feel what I do is worth a couple dollars a month and you would like early access to battery availability, battery and charger testing and news, and a say in what I test, then please consider becoming a patron and supporting my testing efforts: https://www.patreon.com/batterymooch.

These tests only note the ESTIMATED ratings for these batteries at the time I tested them. Any battery that is not a genuine Samsung, Sony, Murata, LG, Panasonic, Molicel, or Sanyo can change at any time! This is one of the hazards of using “rewrapped” batteries or batteries from other manufacturers so carefully research any battery you are considering using before purchasing.

Misusing or mishandling lithium-ion batteries can pose a SERIOUS RISK of personal injury or property damage. They are not meant to be used outside of a protected battery pack. Never exceed the battery’s continuous current rating and keep the plastic wrap and top insulating ring in perfect condition.

Any rating in my ratings tables can change at any time as different grade cells appear on the market, we get swamped with fakes, or new information becomes available to me. Please, never assume that the ratings in the tables are permanent and will never change! Always download the latest version before considering any cell purchase.

To see how other cells have tested check out this link: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

I’m 63 and cigarette free for six years now. Your channel was one of the first vaping channels I started watching. I’ve always loved building RTAs and I have enough wire and cotton to last a lifetime. My old tank broke the other day and I decided to see if I could find an Ares. It came in the mail today and I couldn’t be happier. Awesome vape, unparalleled flavor and so easy to build. Thanks for a fantastic product. And thanks for being an advocate. What you do makes a difference.

VAPOR TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION AND VAPOR STOCKROOM

FILE LAWSUIT AGAINST FDA

WASHINGTON D.C. – August 14, 2019 – Today, the Vapor Technology Association (VTA) and Vapor Stockroom (VSR) filed a lawsuit in federal court against the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA), amongst others, over its unreasonable and arbitrary Pre-Market Tobacco Application (“PMTA”) process and the recently grossly accelerated PMTA filing deadline.  Plaintiffs are taking action to require FDA to publish and complete the long-promised “foundational rules” describing the specific requirements for PMTAs. In addition, Plaintiffs are asking the court to enjoin FDA from enforcing the May 2020 PMTA deadline or taking enforcement action against companies that do not have a PMTA on file until a reasonable period of time after the actual foundational rules are finalized.

With over 3 million vapor products registered with FDA, the arbitrary May 2020 PMTA deadline which FDA is currently enforcing is simply impossible to meet for thousands of small and mid-sized vapor businesses, particularly in the absence of a draft or final PMTA Rule. Any final PMTA Rule must allow sufficient time to conduct the many complex and time-consuming tests and studies currently being required by FDA.

Since 2016, FDA has provided five different PMTA submission deadlines: August 8, 2018; November 8, 2018; August 8, 2022; August 8, 2021; and now May 12, 2020. The most recent deadline was only just established on July 12, 2019 – leaving a scant ten months for vapor industry manufacturers to attempt to comply, which is now 27 months earlier than previously set by FDA.

“FDA’s constantly shifting regulatory process is wholly unreasonable, unfair and unlawful. The Agency has failed to provide advance notice or an opportunity for public comment as required by the Administrative Procedure Act. Grossly accelerating the deadlines and then repeatedly changing the already onerous requirements is unacceptable under any regulatory regime, but this is especially true for vapor products when FDA itself warns that ‘it is likely that there would be a mass market exit of ENDS products’ that ‘could adversely affect the public health,’” said Tony Abboud, Executive Director of the Vapor Technology Association.

The PMTA application is by far the most arduous of the many regulatory requirements governing ENDS products, and requires a complex, multi-year, multi-million-dollar process that FDA has still failed to fully articulate despite its repeated promises to do so.  “To be clear, no business could rationally have been expected to start conducting complex PMTA testing before FDA finally published its PMTA guidance document on June 11, 2019, the day before it asked the Court to impose a 10-month PMTA deadline,” said Abboud.

The stark facts set forth in the Complaint are that, even with unlimited resources, there are not enough labs, there are not enough subjects, and there are not enough hours in the day to properly conduct the scientific inquiries that FDA only just laid out on June 11, 2019, by the May 2020 deadline.

Our company complied with every regulation imposed by FDA and invested in our business while waiting for FDA to deliver on all of the promised PMTA rules, guidance and standards.  We never thought that FDA would wait so long to provide any direction and then immediately shrink the deadline so that we had no chance to stay in business,” said Tony Florence, President of Vapor Stockroom, LLC. “It’s a devastating one-two punch to small businesses all over the country,” he added.

“It is time for FDA to stop moving the goalposts and changing the rules in the middle of the game to the detriment of our manufacturers and small businesses,” said Abboud. “FDA’s actions, if unchecked, will shut down an entire industry that has developed to challenge the combustible cigarette. Whatever FDA calls its ‘rules of the road’ simply cannot be relied upon in the absence of a real PMTA rulemaking process that gives all stakeholders the opportunity for notice and comment, not just those interested parties that file lawsuits,” he added.

The plaintiffs in the case are Vapor Technology Association and Vapor Stockroom, LLC.  The plaintiffs are represented by Thompson Hine LLP as counsel. The case, titled Vapor Technology Association, et al. vs. Food & Drug Administration, et al. has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.  The case number is not yet assigned but a link to the filing can be found here.

XXX

The Vapor Technology Association is the leading U.S. non-profit industry trade association whose 800+ members are dedicated to innovating and selling high quality vapor products that provide adult consumers with a better alternative to traditional combustible cigarettes. VTA represents the industry-leading manufacturers of vapor devices, e-liquids, flavorings, and components, as well as the largest wholesalers, distributors, importers, and e-commerce retailers, in addition to hundreds of hard-working American brick-and­ mortar retail store owners throughout the United States.

Vapor Stockroom is a Lexington, Kentucky manufacturer of nicotine-containing e-liquids and currently manufactures 40 distinct lines. It employs thirteen people and sells its products in local retail stores, online, and through distribution to vape shops and tobacco specialty stores nationwide.

Here’s the latest from Brent Stafford at Regulator Watch:

If your house is on fire, is it worth it to worry, about the fire-resistance rating of your living room sofa set?
It might be, depending on which room the fire is burning and whether your escape route runs past the living room couch. This type of calculation now besets both the U.S. and Canadian vaping industries.

In this episode of RegWatch hear how an alliance of vaping associations from north and south of the border are working to establish a unified set of standards for Good Manufacturing Practices, ready-made, for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada to embrace.

Could manufacturing standards that are fit for purpose, help douse the cross-border fire which currently engulfs vaping?

Find out! Only on RegWatch, by RegulatorWatch.com.

Produced by: Brent Stafford
Released: August 16, 2019

If you’ve tapped open a newspaper app or tuned into the evening news in the past three weeks then you’ve probably heard reports of teens and young adults being hospitalized due to a mysterious and severe lung disease. Hospitalizations are being reported in seven states, including WI, MN, OH, IL, IN, NY, and CA.

Warnings posted by state departments of health are making the very general claim that these illnesses are a result of “vaping.” But we know that different people vape different substances (other than nicotine) and that nearly all of these cases are attributable to consuming adulterated or poorly manufactured THC products or synthetic cannabinoids like K2 and Spice.

While this issue deserves a much larger discussion about how federal and state drug laws are creating this situation (even in states where recreational cannabis is legal–but expensive), the most practical advice to consumers is to purchase products from legal and reputable retailers. While fear of prosecution might lead some people to hide their k2 or cannabis use, anyone experiencing respiratory issues after vaping anything needs to clearly notify doctors of what they were consuming. This is crucial both for treatment and accurately alerting the public. In almost all of the recently reported cases, cartridges were purchased on the underground market.

We are likely to see many more reports of hospitalizations due to “fake pot” vaping before this is through.
Please be safe.
 

• Leafly – “Illicit Cannabis Vape Carts Hospitalized 7 in California, Doctors Say (Aug. 15)

Active Calls to Action:

• CO – Glenwood Springs – “Stop a Flavor Ban!”
• WY – Cheyenne – “Stop an indoor vaping ban!”
• CO – Boulder – “Stop a flavor ban, Taxes, and Tobacco 21”
• CA – Richmond – “Richmond, CA Is Moving Toward the New Vaping Prohibition.”
• CA – Sacramento County – “Stop a Flavor Ban!” (Testimonials Needed)
• MA – “Stop a Flavor Ban!” (S 1279)
• NY – Albany County – “Stop a Flavor Ban!” (Local Law “E”)

The More You Know:

• Progressive Policy Institute – “The Impact of Electronic Cigarettes on Cigarette Smoking By Americans and Its Health and Economic Implications.”(Aug. 1)
  • Don’t let the long title fool you. This is a well balanced report based on data from CDC and other sources covering the last ten years.
• Chadi, N.; et al – “Association Between Electronic Cigarette Use and Marijuana Use Among Adolescents and Young Adults.” (Aug. 12)
  • What Advocates should know (about this and other “gateway” studies)
    • Association doesn’t prove causation. There’s no way to know that person wouldn’t have used a drug in the absence of vaping products. Indeed, many youth used drugs before vaping ever existed. Additionally, those already at risk of substance abuse are likely to start with legal substances before crossing the line to criminal behavior.
    • Cross-sectional studies included drug use PRIOR to vaping and those clearly aren’t a case of vaping as the gateway to drug use.
    • Just one puff of drug counted subject as “user,” even if never used again.This clearly could have inflated the statistics of “users.”
    • Gateway theories have never been proven and claims are highly controversial.
• PR Newswire – Vapor Technology Association and Vapor Stockroom File Lawsuit Against FDA.” (Aug. 14)
• Clive Bates – “Vaping risk compared to smoking: Challenging a false and dangerous claim by Professor Stanton Glantz.” (Aug. 14)
• U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) – Supplemental Information on Liquid Nicotine Packaging for Rigid Containers (Aug. 15)

• If you’re on Facebook, please be sure to join your CASAA state group to help prevent anti-harm reduction laws like these from spreading through your state! Click here to find your state group: CASAA State Facebook Group List
• Find your state information here: Find My State Info – CASAA
• And remember to officially join CASAA. Membership is FREE.

CASAA is made stronger with every voice we can count!

I’m testing this cell because I believe it’s the one rewrapped by other companies.

The Yong De Li New Energy Co. (YDL) rates this cell at 15A “max. discharge current” in the datasheet. But at 15A continuous it only delivers about 60mAh down to 3.2V (a common cutoff voltage for vapers). The voltage sag is huge if you go above about 10A with this cell.

I am giving this cell a 10A continuous current rating. To extend cell life, minimize voltage sag, and increase your safety margin, I recommend staying at 7A-10A or under per cell. That’s about 20W-30W per cell. This is one of the best performing 18350’s but they are a poor choice for anything above low power levels.

The two cells I tested delivered 1101mAh and 1121mAh. I am rating this cell at 1100mAh.

Like all 18350’s I’ve tested the cell-to-cell performance consistency for this YDL cell is not good. There’s not a huge difference between cells but you might notice it if you have one of the better ones and one of the worst ones.

Two cells were donated for the purposes of testing by a source that prefers to remain anonymous. Thank you!

Ratings graphic: https://imgur.com/a/Ce7Ql4v

Test report: https://bit.ly/2Z0EzGE

I want to work for the vaping community full time! If you feel what I do is worth a couple dollars a month and you would like early access to battery availability, battery and charger testing and news, and a say in what I test then, please consider becoming a patron and supporting my testing efforts: https://www.patreon.com/batterymooch.

These tests only note the ESTIMATED ratings for these batteries at the time I tested them. Any battery that is not a genuine Samsung, Sony, Murata, LG, Panasonic, Molicel, or Sanyo can change at any time! This is one of the hazards of using “rewrapped” batteries or batteries from other manufacturers so carefully research any battery you are considering using before purchasing.

Misusing or mishandling lithium-ion batteries can pose a SERIOUS RISK of personal injury or property damage. They are not meant to be used outside of a protected battery pack. Never exceed the battery’s continuous current rating and keep the plastic wrap and top insulating ring in perfect condition.

Any rating in my ratings tables can change at any time as different grade cells appear on the market, we get swamped with fakes, or new information becomes available to me. Please, never assume that the ratings in the tables are permanent and will never change! Always download the latest version before considering any cell purchase.

To see how other cells have tested check out this link: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This cells looks and performs identically to the great performing Molicel P42A.

Xtar rates this cell at 30A continuous and 45A “max pulse discharge”. While both ratings are spelled out on the wrap in tiny text a different larger “45A” is much more clearly seen on another part of the wrap. I prefer to just see the continuous current rating shown this way to allow for direct comparison between cells.

The Molicel datasheet for the P42A only lists a 45A “maximum discharging current” rating with a max temperature cutoff of 85°C. This means you can use the P42A at up to 45A as long as the cell stays below 85°C. This should be easy to do as 85°C is frakkin’ hot. Just realize that this cell in an autofiring device, or a mech that accidentally has its button being pressed, could easily exceed this temperature by a LOT if you are set up to vape at 45A.

I am giving this cell a 30A continuous current rating since that is as high as you can go while not exceeding the 85°C cutoff. This matches Xtar’s 30A continuous rating. To extend cell life, minimize voltage sag, and increase your safety margin, I recommend staying at 25A or under per cell. That’s about 75W.

The two cells I tested delivered 4073mAh and 4145mAh. This is not very good consistency. While it meets Molicel’s 4000mAh minimum capacity rating for the P42A it does not meet Xtar’s 4200mAh rating. I am rating these Xtar’s at 4000mAh.

Two cells were donated for the purposes of testing by Xtar (http://www.xtar.cc). Thank you!

Ratings graphic: https://imgur.com/a/zPQzs9d

Test report: https://bit.ly/2N5qkc9

I want to work for the vaping community full time! If you feel what I do is worth a couple dollars a month and you would like early access to battery availability, battery and charger testing and news, and a say in what I test then, please consider becoming a patron and supporting my testing efforts: https://www.patreon.com/batterymooch.

These tests only note the ESTIMATED ratings for these batteries at the time I tested them. Any battery that is not a genuine Samsung, Sony, Murata, LG, Panasonic, Molicel, or Sanyo can change at any time! This is one of the hazards of using “rewrapped” batteries or batteries from other manufacturers so carefully research any battery you are considering using before purchasing.

Misusing or mishandling lithium-ion batteries can pose a SERIOUS RISK of personal injury or property damage. They are not meant to be used outside of a protected battery pack. Never exceed the battery’s continuous current rating and keep the plastic wrap and top insulating ring in perfect condition.

Any rating in my ratings tables can change at any time as different grade cells appear on the market, we get swamped with fakes, or new information becomes available to me. Please, never assume that the ratings in the tables are permanent and will never change! Always download the latest version before considering any cell purchase.

To see how other cells have tested check out this link: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This cells looks and performs identically to the good performing Molicel INR20700A.

Xtar rates this cell at 30A continuous and 35A “max pulse discharge”. While both ratings are spelled out on the wrap in tiny text a different larger “35A” is much more clearly seen on another part of the wrap. I prefer to just see the continuous current rating shown this way to allow for direct comparison between cells.

The Molicel datasheet for the INR20700A only lists a 35A “maximum discharging current” rating with a max temperature cutoff of 85°C. This means you can use the INR20700A at up to 35A as long as the cell stays below 85°C. This should be easy to do as 85°C is frakkin’ hot. Just realize that a malfunctioning or autofiring device could easily exceed this temperature by a LOT if you are set up to vape at 35A.

I am giving this cell a 30A continuous current rating since that is as high as you can go while not exceeding the 85°C cutoff. This matches Xtar’s 30A continuous rating. To extend cell life, minimize voltage sag, and increase your safety margin, I recommend staying at 25A or under per cell. That’s about 75W.

The two cells I tested delivered 2932mAh and 2964mAh. This is decent consistency and meets Molicel’s 2800mAh minimum capacity rating for the INR20700A. It does not meet Xtar’s 3000mAh rating though. I am rating these Xtar’s at 2900mAh.

Two cells were donated for the purposes of testing by Xtar (http://www.xtar.cc). Thank you!

Ratings graphic: https://imgur.com/a/4rqtHq2

Test report: https://bit.ly/2KylH8X

I want to work for the vaping community full time! If you feel what I do is worth a couple dollars a month and you would like early access to battery availability and testing news and a say in what I test then please consider becoming a patron and supporting my testing efforts: https://www.patreon.com/batterymooch

These tests only note the ESTIMATED ratings for these batteries at the time I tested them. Any battery that is not a genuine Samsung, Sony, Murata, LG, Panasonic, Molicel, or Sanyo can change at any time! This is one of the hazards of using “rewrapped” batteries or batteries from other manufacturers so carefully research any battery you are considering using before purchasing.

Misusing or mishandling lithium-ion batteries can pose a SERIOUS RISK of personal injury or property damage. They are not meant to be used outside of a protected battery pack. Never exceed the battery’s continuous current rating and keep the plastic wrap and top insulating ring in perfect condition.

Any rating in my ratings tables can change at any time as different grade cells appear on the market, we get swamped with fakes, or new information becomes available to me. Please, never assume that the ratings in the tables are permanent and will never change! Always download the latest version before considering any cell purchase.

To see how other cells have tested check out this link: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/