Become a Patron!
Eleaf iStick ... compact 20w box mod
- Thread starter moecat
- Start date
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
The graph I posted a while back works to translate an istick user's voltage to the rest of the vaping world 
...
Can't make a single graph for wattage, since it varies with resistance.
I reckon just doing the RMS calcs would be 'enough'. One could argue the voltage readout isn't incorrect, and simply telling you the mean, but the wattage readouts are simply incorrect because of it - Vrms has to be used to calculate power.
Spring loaded connector would cost slightly more, and be a little bit larger, so that's perhaps not a trivial change.
There could be room in the market for both a fixed istick at the same price, and a 'plus' version with a higher amp limit costing a bit more. Maybe only the plus gets the sprung 510. That's what I'd do if I was them - many would buy the plus even if they didn't really need it! It would allow it to do 20W over a larger range of coil resistances.
Heck, that 4A limit isn't being properly applied anyway! Setting 4.0V with a 1 ohm coil gets 4.82 Vrms and 4.82 Arms When they change to RMS, let's hope they make it a 5A lmit!
...Can't make a single graph for wattage, since it varies with resistance.
I reckon just doing the RMS calcs would be 'enough'. One could argue the voltage readout isn't incorrect, and simply telling you the mean, but the wattage readouts are simply incorrect because of it - Vrms has to be used to calculate power.
Spring loaded connector would cost slightly more, and be a little bit larger, so that's perhaps not a trivial change.
There could be room in the market for both a fixed istick at the same price, and a 'plus' version with a higher amp limit costing a bit more. Maybe only the plus gets the sprung 510. That's what I'd do if I was them - many would buy the plus even if they didn't really need it! It would allow it to do 20W over a larger range of coil resistances.
Heck, that 4A limit isn't being properly applied anyway! Setting 4.0V with a 1 ohm coil gets 4.82 Vrms and 4.82 Arms When they change to RMS, let's hope they make it a 5A lmit!
The graph I posted a while back works to translate an istick user's voltage to the rest of the vaping world
Can't make a single graph for wattage, since it varies with resistance.
I reckon just doing the RMS calcs would be 'enough'. One could argue the voltage readout isn't incorrect, and simply telling you the mean, but the wattage readouts are simply incorrect because of it - Vrms has to be used to calculate power.
Spring loaded connector would cost slightly more, and be a little bit larger, so that's perhaps not a trivial change.
There could be room in the market for both a fixed istick at the same price, and a 'plus' version with a higher amp limit costing a bit more. Maybe only the plus gets the sprung 510. That's what I'd do if I was them - many would buy the plus even if they didn't really need it! It would allow it to do 20W over a larger range of coil resistances.
Heck, that 4A limit isn't being properly applied anyway! Setting 4.0V with a 1 ohm coil gets 4.82 Vrms and 4.82 Arms When they change to RMS, let's hope they make it a 5A lmit!
Eleaf could make the iStick variable-wattage only, keep the Vavg tuning and use the appropriate formula to determine Watts. Consumers might be a bit confused by the voltage setting on the display (as it wouldn't/couldn't be using Ohm's Law). But the desired power at the coil would be correct. But see how complicated this discussion is getting? If they had simply tuned the iStick to Vrms from the beginning, everything would be fine at the moment. Our biggest complaint would be the 510 connection...
I'm not sure that I trust the Eleaf engineers to make the iStick right, however. First they tuned it to Vavg instead of Vrms. Then they didn't know that plugging the Vavg value into Ohm's Law would provide very inaccurate power settings (Watts)? Then they didn't realize that the Watts shown on the display was not the power dissipating at the coils? They're either incompetent or they don't care and take us for fools. Either is not reassuring.
Lefty
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
They are actively soliciting suggestions for a V2 so that's a good thing. And they did get quite a lot right in the original concept, witness the number of people who love it - accurate or not. I suspect they will do some fine tuning and sell boat loads of them.
Here's your "plus" version... for $175.
http://www.beyondvape.com/store/advanced-ecigs-mods-c-112_121/beyond-vape-solara-dna-30-p-1693.html
kelli
Vapid Vapetress
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
haha, it cost more for the "battery replacement service" than what my iStick cost. no thanks.
kelli
Vapid Vapetress
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Been vaping on mine in rotation (2) and nothing else, week 4, so I guess that says what works for me quite nicely
ditto, chica
voltage schmoltage
kelli
Vapid Vapetress
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
told ya!
kelli
Vapid Vapetress
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
But.....but......Kelli, its so .....pretty!!!!!!
but i can buy 6 iSticks for that price! now that's pretty!!
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Nope. That's a 10A, 30W device, in a premium package, with a 4V minimum output (well, that last spec is just like the current istick!). Totally different market, I suspect.
LOL, I think they are trying to keep up with the supply and demands to worry about making changes. I love this device and everyone that has had there hands on it loves it. So far as burning hotter I just turn it down for 36.00 I won't complain. The battery life is fantastic hate to see that change with setting it like the other mods and it will unless it is some sort of super dooper battery and I don't think it is. I believe the changes will cost battery life. One guy said he would like to see it larger, well for peat sakes if IM not mistaken the size is what made this unit so popular in the first place. As far as using this for a sub ohm REALLY. All I can say I very pleased with this mod and will buy several more and my provari and svd will just have to collect dust.
100% agree @wally, the Size, Price, light weight, and Good quality build, is exactly why its so popular.
It's why I bought one, and now getting another for my wife also.
We just can't use really low ohm'd coils on it for risk of burnt hit. Hell, its VV/VW why would you need anything lower than 1.8ohm anyway?
It's why I bought one, and now getting another for my wife also.
We just can't use really low ohm'd coils on it for risk of burnt hit. Hell, its VV/VW why would you need anything lower than 1.8ohm anyway?
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Sub-ohm is just a number - a technical point - it does not mean cloud-chasing! Fact is, I can put this here 0.8 ohm magma build onto my MVP2 and vape it. No idea what power, must be pretty low, but it works fine.
Size, Price, light weight, Good quality build, great battery life, and built in charger. All great features that shouldn't be messed with.
But with a 1.8 ohm coil you only get a range of 9.2 to 17.7 W - in real Watts. That's not great, far from the 5 to 16.8 W it says it does (and even further from the advertised 2 to 20W). The running hot has caught quite a few vapers out already, and probably many more to come... some cannot turn it down enough to suit them, or are unhappy about having to buy higher ohm coils just to use it. This fact should not be swept under the carpet! It should've been easy for them to get the low-power end of it right!
It needs the RMS fix to be truly great, and some of the other stuff I've talked about is probably also just a software tweak.
Size, Price, light weight, Good quality build, great battery life, and built in charger. All great features that shouldn't be messed with.
But with a 1.8 ohm coil you only get a range of 9.2 to 17.7 W - in real Watts. That's not great, far from the 5 to 16.8 W it says it does (and even further from the advertised 2 to 20W). The running hot has caught quite a few vapers out already, and probably many more to come... some cannot turn it down enough to suit them, or are unhappy about having to buy higher ohm coils just to use it. This fact should not be swept under the carpet! It should've been easy for them to get the low-power end of it right!
It needs the RMS fix to be truly great, and some of the other stuff I've talked about is probably also just a software tweak.
All good points Hermit!
It's fair enough that people are upset that it isn't what was advertised. And you're completely right that it will render the istick unusable for many who have bought on the premise of 2 - 20W range.
I'll have to admit, when I heard about the RMS issue, I myself felt a little irritated, that I did not get what was advertised.
It's a shortcoming, and I'm hoping that some software update or even V2 will fix these issues.
For me, as well as many others, it's not a deal breaker though.
I imagine, the great price is probably what is keeping the majority of people happy with their purchase, as well as the other many advantages it has over the current offerings (in the price range) on the market.
It's fair enough that people are upset that it isn't what was advertised. And you're completely right that it will render the istick unusable for many who have bought on the premise of 2 - 20W range.
I'll have to admit, when I heard about the RMS issue, I myself felt a little irritated, that I did not get what was advertised.
It's a shortcoming, and I'm hoping that some software update or even V2 will fix these issues.
For me, as well as many others, it's not a deal breaker though.
I imagine, the great price is probably what is keeping the majority of people happy with their purchase, as well as the other many advantages it has over the current offerings (in the price range) on the market.
Lefty
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Actually using Vrms would extend battery life not shorten it. As well as make it usable on a wider range of toppers particularly one's that someone moving up from an ego would use.
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Edit: this graph has an error at the low-ohm end of the actual max power trace.
I'd applied the amp and wattage limits incorrectly. See the revised graphs here.
This graph shows power calculations extrapolated from the actual readings.
The 'displayed' traces are what the output would be if it used RMS calculations.
At any ohms, the minimum power is 93% hotter, and the max is 5.5% hotter, than it should be.
The 'actual' min and max traces cross at 1.015 ohms. Quite likely this is why they put in the 1 ohm limit!
It could fire down to about 0.75 ohm if it used RMS calculations, with no change to any other limits.
Limits: on the max traces, you can clearly see (from left to right) the three sections where the amp limit, the power limit, and then the voltage limit are in effect.
Increasing max voltage to 6V (from 5.5V) would allow 20W up to 1.8 ohms. Increasing max current to 4.5A (from 4A) would allow 20W down to 1.0 ohms. Both fairly small increases. If they are thinking of increasing the limits, I'd say that's how they should do it rather than chasing a higher wattage figure. 20W available from 1.0 to 1.8 ohms would be sweet!
I'd applied the amp and wattage limits incorrectly. See the revised graphs here.
This graph shows power calculations extrapolated from the actual readings.
The 'displayed' traces are what the output would be if it used RMS calculations.
At any ohms, the minimum power is 93% hotter, and the max is 5.5% hotter, than it should be.
The 'actual' min and max traces cross at 1.015 ohms. Quite likely this is why they put in the 1 ohm limit!
It could fire down to about 0.75 ohm if it used RMS calculations, with no change to any other limits.
Limits: on the max traces, you can clearly see (from left to right) the three sections where the amp limit, the power limit, and then the voltage limit are in effect.
Increasing max voltage to 6V (from 5.5V) would allow 20W up to 1.8 ohms. Increasing max current to 4.5A (from 4A) would allow 20W down to 1.0 ohms. Both fairly small increases. If they are thinking of increasing the limits, I'd say that's how they should do it rather than chasing a higher wattage figure. 20W available from 1.0 to 1.8 ohms would be sweet!
Last edited:
richardrpsgt
Member For 4 Years
I guess it depends on what power band you're looking for. You lose the top end with higher resistance coils.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
moecat
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Well, less than 2 weeks later, the connector has crapped out on me
Whether or not a tank is screwed on, the LED now shows "Atomizer Short." Fortunately, Vape NW is accepting my return - free return shipping included - and I'll be getting a new one soon enough
Whether or not a tank is screwed on, the LED now shows "Atomizer Short." Fortunately, Vape NW is accepting my return - free return shipping included - and I'll be getting a new one soon enough
From what I am reading it is burning low res coils and works best with the hight ohm coils. Based on the graphs and based on p busardos review this get a thumbs down from him. I am sure they will fix this issue in the future upgrades and it would not surprise me to see a version 2 within the next month
richardrpsgt
Member For 4 Years
I've only used BVCs on it but the 1.6 works Ok, but the 1.8 seems to work nicer IMO. I had some burning earlier that turned out to be wicking issues with some really thick juice. I do wish aspire made a 2 ohm coil for the nautilus. Choices are always good.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
Lefty
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Nice to know. They finally shipped mine today.Well, less than 2 weeks later, the connector has crapped out on me
Whether or not a tank is screwed on, the LED now shows "Atomizer Short." Fortunately, Vape NW is accepting my return - free return shipping included - and I'll be getting a new one soon enough
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Got my battery down to no bars showing. Went through about 5 or 6ml of juice doing that - not bad!
Hooked it up to the 'scope again and found some interesting stuff.
When the battery is low, it switches its boost voltage down to about 4.8V, if it's set to 4.8V output or less. Above that setting it still boosts to 5.8V. So it has no problem maintaining its voltage output as the battery gets low.
However, that's its average voltage. Since the peak voltage of the PWM output changes, the RMS voltage output (and hence the power) also changes. This means there's a gap in the available RMS voltage output between 4.8 and 5.2Vrms. It also means that a lower minimum Vrms is available, of about 3.75V.
I don't know yet at what battery level it changes to this behaviour. [edit: about 3 bars down, so 6 bars left]
Obviously, it makes it even more complicated to work out what you're going to actually get out of it compared to what you set!
4.7V setting (below this just has a lower PWM duty cycle):
4.8V setting (flat!):
4.9V setting (above this just has a higher PWM duty cycle):
Hooked it up to the 'scope again and found some interesting stuff.
When the battery is low, it switches its boost voltage down to about 4.8V, if it's set to 4.8V output or less. Above that setting it still boosts to 5.8V. So it has no problem maintaining its voltage output as the battery gets low.
However, that's its average voltage. Since the peak voltage of the PWM output changes, the RMS voltage output (and hence the power) also changes. This means there's a gap in the available RMS voltage output between 4.8 and 5.2Vrms. It also means that a lower minimum Vrms is available, of about 3.75V.
I don't know yet at what battery level it changes to this behaviour. [edit: about 3 bars down, so 6 bars left]
Obviously, it makes it even more complicated to work out what you're going to actually get out of it compared to what you set!
4.7V setting (below this just has a lower PWM duty cycle):
4.8V setting (flat!):
4.9V setting (above this just has a higher PWM duty cycle):
Last edited:
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
The I-stick is working very well for me with RBA's and a coil around 2.0 But the power is set at minimum for this coil, 3.0 volts and 4.5 watts. Sure don't know what power level is coming out, but it works. Looks sweet too
Does look sweet! About 4.17V and 8.7W. Until the battery gets lower, then 3.75V and 7W.
Lefty
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Hopefully mine will finally arrive. Word is it's "in the mail". Not worried about the one I'll keep as most my stuff are kayfuns and the like that I usually run at 14 or 15w but the other is for a relative who now has all my old ego stuff - mini pro tanks and evods etc.. All the coils are 30ga 1.5 ohm micro's that handle up to 15w and should be fine but not too sure the relative is prepared for how it will hit. Should be interesting to watch that first one.
Alright already. I think I might have to unwatch this thread.
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Edit: these graphs have an error at the low-ohm end of the actual max power trace.
I'd applied the amp and wattage limits incorrectly. See the revised graphs here.
Real power outputs available with a full battery:
Real power outputs available with a low battery (how low? roughly when the power meter has gone down 3 bars, to 6 bars left):
Mind the gap!
If you have it set so the real power output is anywhere inside the gap or below it, you will find the output is reduced (at some point as the battery drains, it switches from one behaviour to the other).
I'd applied the amp and wattage limits incorrectly. See the revised graphs here.
Real power outputs available with a full battery:
Real power outputs available with a low battery (how low? roughly when the power meter has gone down 3 bars, to 6 bars left):
Mind the gap!
If you have it set so the real power output is anywhere inside the gap or below it, you will find the output is reduced (at some point as the battery drains, it switches from one behaviour to the other).
Last edited:
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Alright already. I think I might have to unwatch this thread.
Not 'cos of me, I hope?
Not 'cos of me, I hope?
You're doing a great job, Hermit. Your posts are relevant and spot on. Thanks!
Not 'cos of me, I hope?
Not at all @Hermit.
In fact, I really love this level of analysis and debate. Further, I am totally delighted by the overwhelming attention to this mod. It proves that there is great unmet demand for creatively downsized devices, and for design creativity moving in the opposite direction of the escalating big-box trend.My jest was in part ironic. The heartfelt part is that I am really impatient to see what other manufacturers, assessing the popularity of the iStick, come up with to best it.
Lefty
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Big box mods are a trend for sure but I'm pretty sure the sales figures for this will raise some eyebrows in Shenzhen. I'd be surprised if there weren't something similar being developed all over town.
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Not at all @Hermit.
My jest was in part ironic. The heartfelt part is that I am really impatient to see what other manufacturers, assessing the popularity of the iStick, come up with to best it.
Oh good
I expect some pale imitations will appear first
Not as well built, UI not as slick, not quite as small, the same flaws with non-RMS calcs and unsprung 510. But after that... yes, there will be some to watch out for Tripster
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
And I don't think I would give asite my patronage
After dealing with Beyond Vape, I will be moving on from supporting them as a consumer.
They don't support clones...I get it but they outsource to China for some if not all their products and here is where it gets annoying, since they outsource their manufacturing...they don't have expertise with hands-on troubleshooting there own tank, sad. Plus, they wanted me to take pictures of the complications in which I couldn't/can't document these issues with images since it requires Hands-on Examination. They however are sending me a replacement but damn it, I love this concept of a tank since the Silo Lite fits the iStick like it was designed for it.
Lefty
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
This whole "send pictures" thing seems to have become a rote response from all sorts of vendors. Useful in some cases but requested in ones where even a cursory understanding of the problem would indicate they would be useless.
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
What I've been calling 'low battery' behaviour actually starts quite early, when it's gone down 3 bars (and has 6 left showing). I've edited that into my earlier posts now. I had to get a 10x loupe out to count the bars, lol, tiny tiny!
I'm guessing they switch to a lower peak voltage, when possible, to extend battery life by keeping the boost circuit in an efficient range of operation. And presumably it's more efficient to boost from a fresh-ish battery up to 5.8V rather than 4.8V. I suspect it doesn't make a huge difference, but it shows attention to detail. It's a nice touch... or rather, it would be if it used RMS and didn't make that gap in available powers!!
Bottom line for a low wattage vaper - keep it charged to 6 bars or less
I'm guessing they switch to a lower peak voltage, when possible, to extend battery life by keeping the boost circuit in an efficient range of operation. And presumably it's more efficient to boost from a fresh-ish battery up to 5.8V rather than 4.8V. I suspect it doesn't make a huge difference, but it shows attention to detail. It's a nice touch... or rather, it would be if it used RMS and didn't make that gap in available powers!!
Bottom line for a low wattage vaper - keep it charged to 6 bars or less
The I-stick is working very well for me with RBA's and a coil around 2.0 But the power is set at minimum for this coil, 3.0 volts and 4.5 watts. Sure don't know what power level is coming out, but it works. Looks sweet too
I should also have mentioned that this setup, loaded with RocketPuppy's RY4 is great. That juice seems to be tolerant to more or less power, while the taste and vape remain constant. Just to test it I tried that juice in another Russian on the I-stick with the same results. Other juices from HIC, that I enjoy in the same RBA's or Aerotanks but on an MVP, do not taste good on the I-stick, even at minimal settings. Thanks again RocketPuppy
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Maybe not quite bars, but given the way it shrinks over just nine steps it's probably a reasonable way to describe it!
Full still has a gap at the top, this is one 'bar' down from full...
Full still has a gap at the top, this is one 'bar' down from full...
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
If yours is like mine, the new glasses won't show them either
I can't make them out even with the over-strength reading glasses I use when making coils and such!
Something different - when charging, it draws 1A from the USB. So it needs to be charged from USB wall plugs that have a 1A output or higher, or computer USB ports that are meant for charging (although quite a few ports will cope with it anyway). Using a 500mA USB wall plug could mean it's slow to charge, and perhaps doesn't get fully charged.
I plug in my MVP then plug the I-stick into the MVP. Both charge overnight.
Nice !
Hermit
Silver Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
Interesting setup! I'm too paranoid to leave anything charging overnight.
The MVP charges at about 0.84A - less than the istick, so the istick will charge first and drain the MVP a little, then the MVP will start charging once the istick has got nearly charged. Or if the MVP is completely flat, it charges itself a bit first before turning on the USB output. Clever little devices!
InMyImage
Gold Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
Member For 5 Years
So after reading through *most* of this discussion, I am curious about one thing because I have been considering this as an X-mas gift for SWMBO...
All of the discussion seems to be centered around the use of it in VV mode, but after getting my MVP 2.0, I quickly switched to using VW only because I was told that
a) It would only ever generate 11 watts at the coil no matter what volt level you set it at
b) When set to VV mode the effective power at the coils, and thus the vape, would change through the life of the coil and depending on how hot the coils were due to changes in their resistance over time and heating cycle
My understanding is that the VW mode on the MVP 2.0 takes into account the resistance of the coil at the time that the fire button is pushed and therefore regulates the power so that the vape is more consistent over the life of the battery and the coil.
After winning a ZNA 30 clone, I was able to see the same thing happen in real time because the panel is always lit when not in sleep or lock mode. When using an old coil, it shows the variations in the voltages being used fire to fire, I assume that because the old coil's resistance is affected much more significantly by rapid heating cycles.
So.... does anyone using the iStick strictly in VW mode experience this problem?
If some of you who have issues try using VW for a while do you have the same issues with the same coils?
Thanks
All of the discussion seems to be centered around the use of it in VV mode, but after getting my MVP 2.0, I quickly switched to using VW only because I was told that
a) It would only ever generate 11 watts at the coil no matter what volt level you set it at
b) When set to VV mode the effective power at the coils, and thus the vape, would change through the life of the coil and depending on how hot the coils were due to changes in their resistance over time and heating cycle
My understanding is that the VW mode on the MVP 2.0 takes into account the resistance of the coil at the time that the fire button is pushed and therefore regulates the power so that the vape is more consistent over the life of the battery and the coil.
After winning a ZNA 30 clone, I was able to see the same thing happen in real time because the panel is always lit when not in sleep or lock mode. When using an old coil, it shows the variations in the voltages being used fire to fire, I assume that because the old coil's resistance is affected much more significantly by rapid heating cycles.
So.... does anyone using the iStick strictly in VW mode experience this problem?
If some of you who have issues try using VW for a while do you have the same issues with the same coils?
Thanks