How We Test Vapor Production

Vapor production is more than “big clouds.” For many adults it affects how predictable a device feels, how clearly flavor comes through, and how visible exhaled aerosol looks in public spaces. Our goal is to measure those factors in a structured way and turn them into a clear 5-point score that reflects how the device behaves in real use.

This page explains how the VapePicks team evaluates vapor production for any vape device we review. All testing is done with adult nicotine users in mind, and all observations describe product performance, not medical outcomes or health promises.

What “Vapor Production” Means in Our Reviews

When we talk about vapor production, we are looking at several linked aspects:

  • Volume – how much visible aerosol is produced per puff at realistic settings.

  • Density and texture – whether the vapor looks thin and wispy or thick and opaque.

  • Consistency – whether the output stays stable over a full session or drops off as the coil heats or the battery drains.

  • Responsiveness – how quickly vapor appears after you start a puff and how it tapers off when you stop.

  • Fit to style – whether the output matches the device’s intended use, such as a tight mouth-to-lung (MTL) pod or a high-wattage direct-lung (DL) setup.

Higher vapor output does not automatically mean better or safer. E-cigarette aerosols still contain nicotine and other substances, and long-term health effects remain an active research area. Our scoring focuses on performance, reliability, and transparency for adult readers, not on encouraging heavier use.

Who Tests Vapor Production on the VapePicks Team

Chris Miller
I coordinate vapor-production testing and keep results comparable across devices. My background in tech and consumer electronics means I pay attention to build quality, battery behavior, and how power delivery affects output over time. I move between commutes, desk work, and evening sessions, which gives a range of real-world environments for each device.

Marcus Reed
Marcus is a former heavy smoker who now uses higher-wattage devices and DL setups. He is the person who pushes devices close to the upper end of their stated power range. He focuses on:

  • How output holds up during longer, higher-power sessions

  • When vapor starts to thin out or taste burnt

  • How coil and wick design handle repeated heavy use

Jamal Davis
Jamal spends most of his day commuting, walking, and moving between tasks. He uses smaller pod systems and disposables more often and focuses on:

  • Whether short, quick puffs still produce reliable vapor

  • Whether output feels discreet enough for adults who want lower visibility

  • How well a device performs after riding in a pocket or bag for hours

Dr. Adrian Walker
Dr. Walker does not test devices directly. He reviews how we talk about vapor production, especially when we mention sensations such as chest tightness, coughing, or breathing discomfort. He checks that we do not:

  • Treat vapor thickness as a sign of safety

  • Equate strong output with “better health outcomes”

  • Overlook that e-cigarette aerosol still carries nicotine and other chemicals

His comments keep our wording medically cautious and aligned with current guidance from groups like WHO, CDC, and FDA.

Our Testing Principles for Vapor Production

Across all devices, we follow a few fixed principles:

  1. Adult-only focus
    We test and write for adults who already use nicotine. We do not recommend vape products for minors, pregnant individuals, or people who do not use nicotine.

  2. Category fairness
    A compact MTL pod is not punished for producing less vapor than a large sub-ohm tank. Each device is measured against what a reasonable adult would expect for its category.

  3. Realistic settings first, maximum output second
    We start near the middle of the recommended power range or factory default settings. Maximum output tests are important, but the main score reflects typical daily use, not edge-case cloud chasing.

  4. Consistency over single puffs
    A device that looks impressive for the first three pulls but sags during a normal session will not score well. We care about stability over time.

  5. Subjective experience, described as clearly as possible
    Vapor feel, density, and comfort are inherently subjective. We use a structured panel process to reduce individual bias, but we still present the final result as an experience-based score, not a biological measurement.

Step 1: Standardizing Liquids, Coils, and Conditions

Before we test vapor production on any device, we align some baseline conditions to keep results comparable:

  • E-liquid composition

    • For MTL pods and lower-power devices, we typically use balanced or slightly PG-leaning liquids (for example, 50/50 or 60/40 PG/VG).

    • For DL and higher-wattage devices, we use higher-VG liquids that match typical adult use in that segment.

  • Nicotine strength
    We use several nicotine levels during testing but pick a standard strength (common for that device type) for direct comparisons. This helps avoid confusing stronger nicotine effects with changes in vapor thickness.

  • Coil or pod condition
    Every device begins testing with a fresh coil or pod that has been properly primed. This reduces the risk that weak vapour comes from a damaged or badly saturated coil.

  • Battery charge
    We always start the main series of tests with the battery fully charged and then repeat sample tests at 50% and low-battery levels to see how output changes.

  • Environment
    We run tests indoors at a stable room temperature first. Marcus and Jamal then repeat parts of the process outdoors in cooler and warmer conditions to see how visible vapor and consistency change.

Step 2: Controlled Vapor Output Testing with Chris

I handle the initial, structured testing for each device. This stage is designed to answer one main question: How much vapor does this device produce when used in a normal, repeatable way?

2.1 Timed Puff Series

For each device and liquid combination, I run timed series such as:

  • 10 puffs at 3 seconds each

  • 10 puffs at 5 seconds each (for devices that support longer draws)

  • Rest intervals between series to avoid extreme coil heat

During each series, I track:

  • How quickly vapor appears after activation

  • How visible the exhaled aerosol looks against a fixed background

  • Whether the vapor density changes from puff 1 to puff 10

I keep reference devices on hand in the same category. When I say a device is “above average” or “muted” in vapor production, it is based on side-by-side comparisons rather than memory.

2.2 Category-Specific Expectations

A few examples of how we adjust expectations:

  • A disposable or slim MTL pod should deliver modest but consistent vapor that matches cigarette-like draws in strength and visibility.

  • A mid-power pod mod should give a noticeably fuller cloud without jumping into extreme output.

  • A sub-ohm tank or box mod at mid-range wattage should produce a dense, continuous plume suitable for DL inhalation.

If a device overshoots its category—for example, a small MTL pod producing surprisingly heavy clouds—we note this clearly, since some adults want very discreet output and others do not.

Step 3: High-Output and Stress Testing with Marcus

Once baseline testing is complete, Marcus pushes the device closer to its limits, within manufacturer guidance. His focus is not on tricks or spectacle but on stability under heavier use.

3.1 Higher-Power Sessions

For adjustable-wattage devices, Marcus:

  • Moves toward the upper half of the recommended power range

  • Runs longer series of 15–20 puffs with shorter breaks

  • Notes whether vapor remains dense or starts to thin out

  • Watches for early signs of overheating, dry hits, or sudden harshness

He gives detailed feedback on:

  • How quickly vapor ramps up at higher wattage

  • Whether density remains uniform through a full lung-length draw

  • Whether the device feels strained, even if it still produces a lot of vapor

3.2 Coil and Wick Capacity

Vapor production is closely tied to how well the coil and wick handle liquid supply. Marcus tracks:

  • How many heavy sessions a coil tolerates before performance drops

  • When flavor and vapor begin to feel dull or burnt

  • Whether repeated high-output use shortens coil life in a noticeable way

This information feeds into the final vapor-production score because an impressive first day does not help much if output collapses after a short period of adult use.

Step 4: Everyday Mobility Testing with Jamal

Jamal focuses on how devices behave when adults use them in quick, spread-out sessions during the day.

4.1 Short, Frequent Puffs

He carries each device for several days and uses it:

  • Walking between errands

  • Waiting for transport

  • Stepping outside during breaks

For these quick pulls, he notes:

  • Whether the device delivers consistent vapor after sitting unused

  • How often the first puff after a pause feels weak or delayed

  • Whether the draw is smooth or if vapor arrives in an uneven surge

4.2 Visibility and Discretion

Jamal also looks at how visible exhaled aerosol is in common public settings. Some adults want lower visibility; others do not care as much. He records:

  • Visibility of exhaled vapor in cooler outdoor air

  • How quickly aerosol disperses indoors under normal ventilation

  • Whether the device tends to overshoot expectations for a small form factor

Again, none of this is framed as advice on where vaping is acceptable. Local rules and restrictions still apply. The goal is to give adults realistic expectations about how noticeable their device might be.

Step 5: Battery Level, Environment, and Long-Term Consistency

Vapor production can change as batteries deplete, coils age, and conditions shift. To capture this, we:

  • Repeat short test series at 50% and low battery

    • If a device drops sharply in vapor output at lower charge, that affects its score.

  • Re-test after several refills or days of use

    • We check whether the device still produces similar vapor to day one, or if output has faded.

  • Re-run tests in warmer and cooler environments

    • Thick high-VG liquids may behave differently in cold weather.

    • Some devices produce much more visible vapor in the cold than they do indoors.

These checks tell us whether vapor production is a short-term highlight or a stable characteristic.

Our 5-Point Vapor-Production Scoring Scale

After the testing rounds, we convert findings into a 5-point score. Scores are always relative to the device’s category and intended adult user.

Score What It Means in Practice
5 / 5 – Exceptional Strong, stable vapor that matches or exceeds expectations for its class at realistic settings. Output is consistent across puffs, battery levels, and environments without frequent harshness or obvious strain.
4 / 5 – Strong Clearly above average for its category. Vapor is full and reliable in normal use with only minor drop-off at low battery or after long sessions. Most adult users who want noticeable output will be satisfied.
3 / 5 – Adequate / On-Target Meets basic expectations for its device type. Output is usable and predictable but may feel modest or slightly inconsistent. Works for adults who do not prioritize large or particularly dense vapor.
2 / 5 – Weak or Inconsistent Vapor often feels thin or unreliable even at recommended settings. Noticeable drop-off during normal sessions or at mid-battery. Many adults expecting typical category performance may feel under-served.
1 / 5 – Poor Frequent weak puffs, clear power or wicking limitations, or severe drop-off with regular use. May struggle to deliver steady vapor even under ideal conditions.

How We Agree on the Final Score

  • I lead the scoring discussion using notes from all test stages.

  • Marcus weighs in on high-output performance and how quickly the device starts to struggle.

  • Jamal focuses on quick-session reliability and vapor behavior during everyday carry.

If our impressions differ, we compare them to the device’s stated design and target user and settle on a score that reflects the most typical likely experience for adult users.

Dr. Walker does not pick the number, but he may ask us to clarify wording where we describe vapor as “smooth,” “light,” or “strong,” reminding readers that these are sensory impressions, not clinical measurements of risk.

How Adult Readers Can Use Our Vapor-Production Scores

Vapor production is one part of our overall evaluation. A device with a 3/5 in vapor production but very high scores in leak resistance, portability, and ease of use may still be an excellent choice for adults who want something low-maintenance and discreet.

In general:

  • If you prefer larger, denser clouds and direct-lung inhalation, you will likely look more at devices that score 4–5/5 in vapor production within higher-output categories.

  • If you want quieter, more discreet output, a stable 3–4/5 on a slim pod or disposable often works better than an overly powerful model.

  • If you care most about predictability, focus on how we describe changes across battery levels, coil age, and different environments, not just the final number.

These scores are tools to describe device behavior, not instructions on how much or how often any adult should use nicotine products.

Health and Safety Context Around Vapor Production

Public-health agencies agree that e-cigarette aerosols contain nicotine (where present), ultrafine particles, and various chemicals from liquids and the device itself. Larger or denser vapor usually means more aerosol per puff, even if the exact health impact depends on many other factors.

Key points we keep in mind when writing about vapor production:

  • A smoother or denser cloud does not guarantee a lower health risk.

  • More visible vapor can mean more exposure to aerosol for the user and for people nearby, depending on ventilation and proximity.

  • Laboratory and animal studies show that e-cigarette aerosols can cause oxidative stress and other biological changes, although patterns differ from traditional cigarette smoke and long-term outcomes are still being studied.

Dr. Walker reviews these sections and may add short notes reminding readers that persistent respiratory symptoms, chest pain, or significant discomfort require medical assessment, not just switching devices.

Nothing in our vapor-production scores should be read as a guarantee of safety or as medical advice. Our focus is to describe how devices behave so that adult nicotine users can make more informed product choices within the limits of current evidence and regulation.

How Vapor Production Fits into Overall VapePicks Ratings

Vapor production is one of several core dimensions we measure, alongside:

  • Flavor performance

  • Throat hit

  • Airflow and draw quality

  • Battery life and charging behavior

  • Leak resistance

  • Build quality and ease of use

  • Portability and daily-carry behavior

When you read a VapePicks review, the vapor-production score sits inside this broader context. A device might trade extreme output for better leak resistance or more convenient everyday use. Our goal is to make those trade-offs clear rather than chase a single performance metric.

Sources
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.