How We Test Throat Hit

Throat hit is one of the first things many adult nicotine users notice when they try a new vape. It is the immediate sensation where the vapor meets the back of the throat and upper airway. Our goal at VapePicks is not to tell you what you should like. Our goal is to measure how each device delivers throat hit in a structured, repeatable way, and to explain those results in plain language.

On this page, I will walk through how our team defines throat hit, how we test it across different devices, and how we convert our experiences into a 5-point score that stays consistent from review to review. I write as Chris Miller, the lead tester and narrator, but our process always involves Marcus Reed, Jamal Davis, and clinical advisor Dr. Adrian Walker.

What We Mean by Throat Hit

When we rate throat hit, we focus on three main elements:

  • Intensity – how strong the sensation feels in the throat on a normal puff

  • Character – whether it feels smooth, sharp, scratchy, peppery, or “dry”

  • Control – how predictable it feels when you change puff length, airflow, or nicotine level

Throat hit is influenced by several known factors:

  • Nicotine concentration and form (freebase vs nicotine salts)

  • E-liquid pH and chemistry, including flavor additives

  • Propylene glycol (PG) vs vegetable glycerin (VG) ratio

  • Coil temperature, power level, and airflow design

Public-health and toxicology research shows that nicotine is addictive and that inhaled aerosol from e-cigarettes can affect the respiratory system. We treat throat hit as a subjective sensory measure, not as a health benefit or sign of safety.

Adult-Only Scope and Health Boundaries

VapePicks’s testing is intended for adults who already use nicotine. We do not recommend vape products for people who do not use nicotine, nor for minors or pregnant individuals. That baseline applies to every throat hit test we run.

When we describe irritation, coughing, or chest tightness during testing, these are personal reports from adult testers. They are not medical diagnoses. Dr. Adrian Walker reviews how we describe these sensations and checks that we do not downplay possible risk or turn them into health claims. If a device seems to produce unusually harsh or irritating vapor, we note that clearly and remind readers that persistent symptoms should be discussed with a clinician, not just “fixed” by swapping devices.

Our Testing Environment and Baseline Setup

Before we take a single puff, we document the basics for each device:

  • Device type: disposable, closed pod, open pod, or higher-power kit

  • Coil type and resistance

  • Rated power or output range (if adjustable)

  • E-liquid details: flavor, nicotine strength, PG/VG ratio, and nicotine type (freebase or salt)

For throat hit testing we work with two kinds of e-liquids wherever possible:

  1. Manufacturer-supplied liquid

    • The default pod or disposable formulation

    • We test this first because it reflects what most adult users will actually experience

  2. Reference liquids in common nicotine strengths

    • Usually 6 mg/ml and 12 mg/ml freebase for mouth-to-lung style devices

    • Sometimes 20–25 mg/ml nicotine salt for pod systems designed for tighter draws

We keep room temperature stable and give coils enough time to saturate before testing. Marcus tracks power settings carefully on adjustable devices, staying within the stated range to avoid unrealistic dry hits.

Step 1: Tactile Bench Check and First Puffs

I always start with a controlled series of first puffs:

  • 5 short puffs (about 1–1.5 seconds) at normal intensity

  • 5 medium puffs (about 2 seconds)

  • 5 longer puffs (about 3 seconds)

After each set, I write down:

  • Perceived throat hit intensity (from “barely there” to “very sharp”)

  • The character of the sensation (smooth / punchy / scratchy / peppery)

  • Any immediate cough, dryness, or chemical after-feel

Marcus repeats the same pattern, but often at slightly longer puff durations, reflecting his heavy-use style. He notes when throat hit becomes too aggressive at higher power or longer pulls. Jamal runs the same sequence at lower power or on more portable devices with a tighter draw, mimicking short, frequent puffs on the go.

The goal in this first step is to map how throat hit changes with puff length and power, without adding daily-life noise yet.

Step 2: Structured Panel Scoring

Next, we switch to a more formal panel approach. For each device and liquid combination, we score throat hit along four dimensions:

  1. Baseline intensity at typical use

  2. Smoothness vs harshness

  3. Consistency across repeated puffs

  4. Responsiveness to user changes (airflow, wattage, or draw strength)

Each panelist records scores on an internal 0–10 scale for these dimensions. We do not show each other scores during this step. This separation keeps early impressions from drifting toward a group average too quickly.

  • I focus heavily on consistency and responsiveness. I want to see if a device gives the same basic throat feel from puff to puff when used in a normal pattern.

  • Marcus pays close attention to upper-end harshness. He deliberately stretches puff duration and sometimes pushes toward the top of the wattage range to see where the sensation becomes unpleasant or clearly burnt.

  • Jamal concentrates on short, frequent puffs, similar to quick breaks during commutes. He notes whether throat hit feels manageable or becomes scratchy or lingering when used this way.

We then convert those 0–10 inputs into a single internal throat hit metric, which later maps to the 1–5 rating shown in reviews.

Step 3: Real-World Daily Use Scenarios

Lab-style sequences only tell part of the story. Throat hit can feel very different on a quiet evening at home compared with a rushed walk between meetings. Our process includes at least two full days of real-world use with each device, often more.

Typical patterns:

  • Commute testing (Jamal)

    • Short puffs while walking, standing on platforms, or waiting at lights

    • Device stored in pockets or bags between bursts

    • Notes on whether throat hit stacks up over time and becomes too harsh during frequent mini-sessions

  • Desk and evening testing (Chris)

    • More relaxed, medium-length puffs at a desk or in the evening

    • Occasional back-to-back draws while focusing on work or media

    • Notes about whether the sensation stays predictable or suddenly spikes into harshness

  • Heavy-session stress testing (Marcus)

    • Longer, repeated draws at higher power within the device’s stated range

    • Intentional push toward the upper limits of use to see how throat hit behaves under load

    • Attention to the first sign of burning, dryness, or chemical off-notes

Each tester keeps time-stamped notes. We record when throat hit becomes weaker as batteries drain, when coils age, or when nicotine strength feels mismatched to the design.

Step 4: Comparing Across Nicotine Strengths and Liquids

Where the device allows it, we test throat hit across multiple nicotine strengths and, sometimes, different liquid bases:

  • Lower strength (for example, 3–6 mg/ml)

  • Medium strength (typically 9–12 mg/ml freebase or moderate salt)

  • Higher strength salts in tight-draw pod systems

We are not testing which level any individual should use. We are evaluating how predictable and reasonably balanced throat hit feels, relative to what that strength and device type usually deliver.

For example:

  • If a high-strength salt pod feels unusually flat and dull, we note that as weak throat hit for its category.

  • If a low-strength liquid in a modest device still feels extremely harsh and scratchy, we flag that as overly aggressive and investigate airflow, coil design, and liquid composition.

Evidence from toxicology and pharmacology research shows that nicotine concentration and pH can strongly influence sensory impact and absorption. We treat this body of work as background for understanding why some devices feel sharp even at moderate strengths, or smooth even when labeled at higher levels.

Step 5: Irritation, Comfort, and Clinical Oversight

Throat hit and irritation are not the same thing. A firm but controlled hit can feel satisfying to some adult users. Persistent burning, chemical taste, or cough is different.

During every test cycle, we track:

  • Any cough during or after use

  • Scratchiness that lingers after the session

  • Unusual chest tightness or shortness of breath reported by testers

We avoid stretching testing if any of these symptoms become concerning. At that point, we pause and pass our notes to Dr. Walker.

Dr. Walker does not use the devices himself. He reviews our descriptions of symptoms and device behavior through a clinical lens. He checks that we present potential irritation as a reason to be cautious, not as a feature or a benefit. He also reminds readers, through short medical notes in our methodology and review pages, that ongoing respiratory symptoms warrant medical evaluation, regardless of device brand or model.

When research or regulatory bodies highlight particular concerns—for example, airway irritation from certain aerosols or high-nicotine formulations—we update our internal checklists and language.

How We Convert Testing Into a 5-Point Throat Hit Score

Internally, we work with detailed numerical scales and narrative notes. On the site, you see a simpler 1–5 throat hit rating for each device:

  • 5 / 5 – Strong and controlled

    • Clearly pronounced throat hit at typical use

    • Predictable feel across puffs and power settings within the normal range

    • No frequent burnt notes when used responsibly

  • 4 / 5 – Noticeable and well-balanced

    • Solid presence on each puff without constant harshness

    • Minor roughness may appear at the top of the power range

    • Works well for adults who want clear feedback from each draw

  • 3 / 5 – Moderate and smooth

    • Throat hit is present but not dominant

    • Suitable for users who prefer a softer sensation or lower daily intensity

    • May feel too gentle for some former heavy smokers

  • 2 / 5 – Subtle or inconsistent

    • Light hit even at reasonable nicotine levels

    • Can feel flat or “airy,” especially on shorter puffs

    • May require stronger liquids or tighter airflow to satisfy many adult users

  • 1 / 5 – Very weak or poorly tuned

    • Little to no throat sensation at typical usage patterns

    • May only show a clear hit at extreme settings or long drags

    • Not aligned with what its nicotine strength or design would normally suggest

To reach this 1–5 score, we combine:

  • Averaged panel scores on intensity and smoothness

  • Consistency across different days and battery levels

  • Fit to the device’s intended audience (for example, high-nicotine tight pod vs low-nicotine open system)

I act as the final editor for the rating. If Marcus and Jamal diverge significantly, I review their notes and our raw data. Sometimes a device earns a lower score because throat hit collapses when the battery drops. Sometimes it scores higher because it keeps a steady, controlled sensation across a full pod and several charge cycles.

How Throat Hit Fits Into Our Overall Device Assessment

Throat hit is one of several pillars in our vape testing framework. For adult users who already rely on nicotine, it can matter as much as flavor, vapor production, or portability. A device with solid battery life and clean design may still fall short if the throat sensation is dull or constantly harsh.

In our full reviews, the throat hit score appears alongside separate ratings for:

  • Flavor accuracy

  • Vapor production

  • Airflow and draw

  • Leak resistance

  • Battery life and charging behavior

  • Build quality

  • Ease of use and portability

Each score is based on a similar structured process. Together, they give a fuller picture of what it is actually like to use the device day after day, not just during the first session.

Sources

  • U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. E-Cigarettes and Vaping: What We Know. 2024. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/index.htm

  • World Health Organization Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation. Report on the scientific basis of tobacco product regulation: seventh report. 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240022720

  • Eaton DL, Kwan LY, Stratton K, eds. Nicotine – Public Health Consequences of E-Cigarettes. National Academies Press. 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507191/

  • Shao XM, Friedman TC. Pod-mod vs. conventional e-cigarettes: nicotine chemistry, pH, and health effects. National Library of Medicine. 2020. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7191502/

  • Chung S, Baumlin N, Dennis JS, et al. Electronic cigarette vapor with nicotine causes airway mucus obstruction. National Library of Medicine. 2019. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6888648/
About the Author: Chris Miller

Chris Miller is the lead reviewer and primary author at VapePicks. He coordinates the site’s hands-on testing process and writes the final verdicts that appear in each review. His background comes from long-term work in consumer electronics, where day-to-day reliability matters more than launch-day impressions. That approach carries into nicotine-device coverage, with a focus on build quality, device consistency, and the practical details that show up after a device has been carried and used for several days.

In testing, Chris concentrates on battery behavior and charging stability, especially signs like abnormal heat, fast drain, or uneven output. He also tracks leaking, condensate buildup, and mouthpiece hygiene in normal routines such as commuting, short work breaks, and longer evening sessions. When a device includes draw activation or button firing, he watches for misfires and inconsistent triggering. Flavor and throat hit notes are treated as subjective experience, recorded for context, and separated from health interpretation.

Chris works with the fixed VapePicks testing team, which includes a high-intensity tester for stress and heat checks, plus an everyday-carry tester who focuses on portability and pocket reliability. For safety context, VapePicks relies on established public guidance and a clinical advisor’s limited review of risk language, rather than personal medical recommendations.

VapePicks content is written for adults. Nicotine is highly addictive, and e-cigarettes are not for youth, pregnant individuals, or people who do not already use nicotine products.