A PBusardo Review – The Series B Tilt by JacVapour<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
Jac Vapour<\/a> Innokin email addresses:<\/p>\n support@innokin.com Post Review Follow-Up:<\/strong><\/p>\n Hi Phil<\/p>\n Hope you are well.<\/p>\n Thanks for the very in depth review Phil and it\u2019s a shame you did not like it more, The design principles for the SERIES-B, were to develop a product with superior We could incorporate a $40 branded chip but obviously this would have significant The mod is priced at \u00a352.99 in the UK, this takes into account the high tax rates we The screen being squint is unfortunate, I have never seen this before, and hopefully I understand your points concerning the settings memory, however we wanted to keep I have also passed your concerns over the firing delay to our chip engineers, I am Once again thanks very much for the review, there\u2019s lots of useful info in there, Regards www.jacvapour.com<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Video<\/strong>:
\nCigGo<\/a>
\nHorizone-Cig<\/a>
\nKanger<\/a>
\nSmok<\/a>
\nInnokin<\/a><\/p>\n
\ninfo@innokin.com<\/p>\n\n
\nhowever it has given us some really useful insight which we will use in future
\nproduct development. I hope you don\u2019t mind but I would like to respond with regard
\nto some of the choices we made regarding the design and would really appreciate any
\nfurther feedback you have for us. The SERIES-B was the first box mod we have
\ndesigned and therefore we are keen to learn for future development.<\/p>\n
\nbuild quality and a simple to use reliable feature set targeting the mainstream user
\nand in particular those wanting to upgrade from Ego style devices and obtain the
\nbenefits of higher power, increased battery capacity and sub ohm capability in a
\ndiscreet, compact form, whilst ensuring the product\u2019s longevity through a
\nreplaceable 18650 battery at a reasonable price point. Our research indicated that
\nusers in this segment want a simple package and that 40 watts of power and no temp
\ncontrol would meet the majority of users needs, however we felt simple features
\nshould not mean cheap build quality or run of the mill looks.<\/p>\n
\nprice implications which we feel would miss the point, however it would be really
\nuseful to hear your views on this in terms of whether you think this would be a good
\napproach? I think Vaporshark have already done a really good job of this in the
\nhigher price bracket devices.<\/p>\n
\npay, to put it into perspective the sub-box here is \u00a354.99 in most stores, we also
\ndo a price including the Samsung 25R for \u00a359.99. The US RRP of the device is
\n$65-$69. At this price point we believe there are very limited, if any, other
\noptions that offer higher build quality in terms of materials used on devices with
\nreplaceable 18650s. I know our looks are subjective, but I do believe the finish is
\nat the top end and we do offer a 1 year warranty, the Vaporshark is only 6 months,
\nso the package also represents good value for somebody that needs a reliable
\nwell-built device with entry level box features.<\/p>\n
\nyou can see this on the second device we sent, also out of 20 or so we have here in
\nthe office I can\u2019t find an un-level screen, I can say though, if somebody found such
\na fault we would instantly replace the device.<\/p>\n
\nthe device small and all we could fit is a capacitor that allows a 6 second battery
\nchangeover, you need to be quick and also 5 click the device off for it to work. I
\nagree that this it is not ideal, but we made this choice as 95% of our users are
\nmaking one or less than one battery change a day and we believe for our market the
\nunit being small was our primary concern.<\/p>\n
\nnot an engineer myself, but could this have anything to do with you using the
\ninitial batch unit, this batch was predominantly made for beta testing and
\nreviewers, and during the beta we discovered a firing issue which was subsequently
\nfixed by replacing a component and a software update. I see in your review you are
\nusing batch number 19710727, the Beta and review batch, but I know you were sent an
\nupdated one from the corrected batch once we realised the issue, did you use the
\nupdated one for the firing test? It would be greatly appreciated to know this if
\npossible.<\/p>\n
\nand we will take a lot away from it, so we can improve the device in the larger
\nwattage TC versions currently under design.<\/p>\n
\nRobert Patrick
\nRetail Director
\n+44 7967 920583<\/p>\n
\n