Smoke Or Vapor?

[ezxen]

So talking with a buddy of mine we talked weather wheather shish burns or cooks, then we started talking wether it's smoke or vapor.
I've set off a smoke alarm before but it was also a carbon monoxice detector and the room was pretty much hot boxed because I forgot to open a window and the space was small .
Once vie blown the smoke directly into a smoke detector and nothing. So smoke or vapor? What is yournopion or faces to disprove or prove me wrong. If anything we need some hookah myth busters

[Travis]

In order for there to be smoke, there has to be combustion of some sort. I don't burn my bowls, I cook them. I.E. vapor.


Since you didnt have a window open, and I'm guessing you were lighting the coals in the same room, the Carbon Monoxide that the coals put off could be what set the alarm off.

[Chreees]

I agree with Travis.

It's vapor, all the way.

[Allstar]

Once again I agree with all of you. Vapor. You all are so smart.

[twoapplesplease]

Its smoke and vapor/steam.............like that of a bbq smoker not of a charcoal cooker

[noodle]

Glycerine is used in some types of "smoke" machines (mist, actually), so it makes sense to say that the glycerine found in most shishas contributes a lot to the cloudiness.

[TheyCallMeDave]

Vapor. Simple science. You can even taste when the bowl is getting too hot, the smooth, rich texture of the smoke changes into this harsh shit, and it's definantly noticable.

[Hassouni]

Vapor!!

[jessie007]

Same here. I think Travis has it right.
[quote name='INCUBUSRATM' timestamp='1287834004' post='486002']
I agree with Travis.

It's vapor, all the way.
[/quote]

[agunn1231]

vapor. I've had 5 or 6 pipes going in my studio apartment at one time and the smoke alarm didn't go off, my smoking area also used to be about a foot away from being directly under the smoke alarm. I have how ever set off the CO detector a couple times.

[Chreees]

[quote name='agunn1231' timestamp='1287862085' post='486033']
vapor. I've had 5 or 6 pipes going in my studio apartment at one time and the smoke alarm didn't go off, my smoking area also used to be about a foot away from being directly under the smoke alarm. [b]I have how ever set off the CO detector a couple times.[/b]
[/quote]

Were you using quicklights? Could've been the carbon monoxide off of them...

[Genie]

I have noticed that some shishas seem to produce more vapor while others seem to produce more smoke. When it's more vapor, it just eVAPORates and doesn't cloud up the house. When there's more smoke, there's a haze in the house during the session and often for some time afterwards. I want to believe it's all vapor and no smoke, but vapor doesn't make your house look like a smoky bar. No, if I taste burning shisha I don't just sit there and keep smoking it, I move the coals around, maybe take one off--but that doesn't change the fact that some shisha does seem to produce smoke. Al Waha Fig, in particular, really smoked my living room up the other day. So, I can't help but wonder, does the vapor/smoke ratio have anything to do with the quality of the shisha--because Nakhla is definitely more vapor than smoke and doesn't leave a haze in my house.

[Travis]

[quote name='Genie' timestamp='1287974189' post='486129']
I have noticed that some shishas seem to produce more vapor while others seem to produce more smoke. When it's more vapor, it just eVAPORates and doesn't cloud up the house. When there's more smoke, there's a haze in the house during the session and often for some time afterwards. I want to believe it's all vapor and no smoke, but vapor doesn't make your house look like a smoky bar. No, if I taste burning shisha I don't just sit there and keep smoking it, I move the coals around, maybe take one off--but that doesn't change the fact that some shisha does seem to produce smoke. Al Waha Fig, in particular, really smoked my living room up the other day. So, I can't help but wonder, does the vapor/smoke ratio have anything to do with the quality of the shisha--because Nakhla is definitely more vapor than smoke and doesn't leave a haze in my house.
[/quote]

The mist is going to stay there X amount of time depending on a few factors.
Humidity in the room, open areas i.e. windows, doors, and the amount of glycerin that is in the stuff your smoking.

You say that Nakhla doesn't haze, but Al Fakher does.
Al Fakher is [b]generally[/b] wetter than Nakhla, hence, it produces a more denser vapor.
Nakhla being drier for the most part, will still produce clouds, but not quite as dense as the glycerin whore AF.
The denser the "smoke/vapor" the longer its going to stick around.

It makes sense if you think about it, but some of you guys are knuckle heads. [size="2"][img]http://www.hookahforum.com/public/style_emoticons/default/blum2.gif[/img][/size]

[ukhookah]

Well think it like this. How do u make regular wood coal? U make it by burning wood allowing it to chaar. The black lumps left behind when burned turns to dust.
Similarly with cigs your burning the tobacco so it turns into ash. Therefore produces tar.
With shisha your heating it but not burning it. So when u finish with your shisha, if you were to cook it then it will still light up, burn, produces tar then turns to dust.

[ih303]

Travis is absolutely right.

[Genie]

[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1288013397' post='486173']
The mist is going to stay there X amount of time depending on a few factors.
Humidity in the room, open areas i.e. windows, doors, and the amount of glycerin that is in the stuff your smoking.

You say that Nakhla doesn't haze, but Al Fakher does.
Al Fakher is [b]generally[/b] wetter than Nakhla, hence, it produces a more denser vapor.
Nakhla being drier for the most part, will still produce clouds, but not quite as dense as the glycerin whore AF.
The denser the "smoke/vapor" the longer its going to stick around.

It makes sense if you think about it, but some of you guys are knuckle heads. [size="2"][img]http://www.hookahforum.com/public/style_emoticons/default/blum2.gif[/img][/size]
[/quote]

I said one flavor of [i]Al Waha[/i] filled the house up with smoke whereas I've never had Nakhla do that, I've had monster clouds from Nakhla that evaporated before I could take another hit. I think it's silly to try and fool ourselves into thinking we're only smoking vapor.

[agunn1231]

[quote name='INCUBUSRATM' timestamp='1287923204' post='486087']
[quote name='agunn1231' timestamp='1287862085' post='486033']
vapor. I've had 5 or 6 pipes going in my studio apartment at one time and the smoke alarm didn't go off, my smoking area also used to be about a foot away from being directly under the smoke alarm. [b]I have how ever set off the CO detector a couple times.[/b]
[/quote]

Were you using quicklights? Could've been the carbon monoxide off of them...
[/quote]

the first time i was...the second time I was using natural coals, so it may have been going off due to low battery. not really sure.

[Travis]

[quote name='Genie' timestamp='1288016627' post='486180']
[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1288013397' post='486173']
The mist is going to stay there X amount of time depending on a few factors.
Humidity in the room, open areas i.e. windows, doors, and the amount of glycerin that is in the stuff your smoking.

You say that Nakhla doesn't haze, but Al Fakher does.
Al Fakher is [b]generally[/b] wetter than Nakhla, hence, it produces a more denser vapor.
Nakhla being drier for the most part, will still produce clouds, but not quite as dense as the glycerin whore AF.
The denser the "smoke/vapor" the longer its going to stick around.

It makes sense if you think about it, but some of you guys are knuckle heads. [size="2"][img]http://www.hookahforum.com/public/style_emoticons/default/blum2.gif[/img][/size]
[/quote]

I said one flavor of [i]Al Waha[/i] filled the house up with smoke whereas I've never had Nakhla do that, I've had monster clouds from Nakhla that evaporated before I could take another hit. I think it's silly to try and fool ourselves into thinking we're only smoking vapor.
[/quote]

So I mixed up Al Waha for Al Fakher, sue me.


You just proved me right though. You said that the Nakhla evaporated before you could take another hit. This is because, like I said before, the "smoke/vapor" isn't as dense as what Al Waha (or AF for that matter) puts off.



Nakhla....less glycerin, less dense clouds, disperses quickly
Al Waha....more glycerin, denser clouds, takes a bit longer to disperse, thus creating the haze effect



No, I'm not arguing, just stating what my theory on the subject is. Agree/Disagree, whatever you want. Your entitled to your opinion just as much as I am.

[Genie]

[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1288018391' post='486187']
It makes sense if you think about it, but some of you guys are knuckle heads. [size="2"][img]http://www.hookahforum.com/public/style_emoticons/default/blum2.gif[/img][/size]
[/quote]

When you call someone a knucklehead, it kind of implies you're arguing no matter how many smiley faces you put behind it.

[quote]
You just proved me right though. You said that the Nakhla evaporated before you could take another hit. This is because, like I said before, the "smoke/vapor" isn't as dense as what Al Waha (or AF for that matter) puts off.[/quote]

I don't see how you figure that. The Al Waha clouds I was blowing were nothing compared to the nice thick Nakhla clouds I get. Yet the Al Waha smoke lingered forever and Nakhla clouds are GONE in moments.

[quote]Nakhla....less glycerin, less dense clouds, disperses quickly
Al Waha....more glycerin, denser clouds, takes a bit longer to disperse, thus creating the haze effect[/quote]

I've smoked a lot of Hydro Herbal and most of us know how much glycerin is in that stuff, the smoke from Hydro sessions doesn't linger.

I'm no expert and I certainly don't know how to test hookah smoke to see how much of it is vapor and how much of it is smoke, but I don't buy that there's zero smoke in hookah smoke. And perhaps we should define vapor, when someone says it's not smoke, it's vapor, what do they mean? Do they mean steam? Mist? What?

[Travis]

[quote name='Genie' timestamp='1288019714' post='486196']
[quote name='Travis' timestamp='1288018391' post='486187']
It makes sense if you think about it, but some of you guys are knuckle heads. [size="2"][img]http://www.hookahforum.com/public/style_emoticons/default/blum2.gif[/img][/size]
[/quote]

When you call someone a knucklehead, it kind of implies you're arguing no matter how many smiley faces you put behind it.

[quote]
You just proved me right though. You said that the Nakhla evaporated before you could take another hit. This is because, like I said before, the "smoke/vapor" isn't as dense as what Al Waha (or AF for that matter) puts off.[/quote]

I don't see how you figure that. The Al Waha clouds I was blowing were nothing compared to the nice thick Nakhla clouds I get. Yet the Al Waha smoke lingered forever and Nakhla clouds are GONE in moments.

[quote]Nakhla....less glycerin, less dense clouds, disperses quickly
Al Waha....more glycerin, denser clouds, takes a bit longer to disperse, thus creating the haze effect[/quote]

I've smoked a lot of Hydro Herbal and most of us know how much glycerin is in that stuff, the smoke from Hydro sessions doesn't linger.

I'm no expert and I certainly don't know how to test hookah smoke to see how much of it is vapor and how much of it is smoke, but I don't buy that there's zero smoke in hookah smoke. And perhaps we should define vapor, when someone says it's not smoke, it's vapor, what do they mean? Do they mean steam? Mist? What?
[/quote]

Nevermind Edited October 25, 2010 by Travis

[jan019]

WOW! This is interesting . I never thought about it i was just sure it was vapor. But maybe there is some smoke, who knows. Were there actually some official tests with hookah smoke? Not the ones that burn the hookah, but some that do it the right way and ''cook'' the tobacco? I think not and that sucks!

[Genie]

[quote name='jan019' timestamp='1288034314' post='486220']
WOW! This is interesting . I never thought about it i was just sure it was vapor. But maybe there is some smoke, who knows.
[/quote]

I don't know, but it's certainly a subject worth exploring.

[Josh Hamilton]

its definitely smoke...why?....coz I tell my friend "dude lets smoke" and hes like " smoke what?" I go " smoke the hookah man"...an hes like "yea me and my neighbor smoke hookah...so where do we smoke...oh wait the game is on sunday...lets smoke in winstons house...Im like ok Ill bring the hookah and the tobacco so we can SMOKE it..." he goes "cool...ill bring my kid so he can fetch me my beers.." >>>now in another lifetime I might have said...dude lets "go vaporize"

[ih303]

[quote name='Genie' timestamp='1288016627' post='486180']
I think it's silly to try and fool ourselves into thinking we're only smoking vapor.
[/quote]

You're right.

There's such a fine line between burning and vaporizing when smoking, and I guarantee we cross that line well before we percieve it as tasting harsh. I'd even go so far as to say by the time we taste the tobacco burning we've already inhaled a significant amount of smoke. We all do it, no one's exempt, it's a moot point that we don't need to argue about.

In regards to the whole "lingering" point, vapor and smoke differ greatly in their composition. Vapor is simply the gaseous form of a solid, in this case honey/molasses and glycerine. With smoke there are actually solid particles present, i.e. soot & tar, as the result of combustion. As anyone who's ever boiled water knows, steam (a type of vapor) quickly dissipates into the surrounding air. Conversely, those of us who have burned bacon know that smoke does not dissipate and always seems to fill the room setting off all your smoke detectors in the process.

The important thing to remember is how much vapor you actually create smoking hookah compared to a cigarette or cigar. I gaurantee that if you had two identical rooms and introduced identical quantities of smoke and vapor into each room respectively, the one filled with actual smoke would appear significantly more hazy for a significantly longer period of time.

Brands such as Al Fakher and Tangiers tend to generate ultra-thick vapor which would result in a more noticable haze than Nakhla and Starbuzz. With Nakhla this happens because it's generally dryer than some other brands. But with Starbuzz it's different. In my experience honey-based tobaccos smoke slightly differently than molasses-based tobaccos, however I can't be sure of the extent that this effects the density of the vapor produced because Romman is also honey-based and it performs up there with AF and TN. I'm left making the assumption that brands such as SB, Fantasia, Social Smoke, etc. have something else going on that make their smoke plentiful, but not as dense. Has that been

Anyway, I'm sure this is more than what you were after, but hopefully you can get something you can use.

[ih303]

[quote name='Josh Hamilton' timestamp='1288035169' post='486222']
its definitely smoke...why?....coz I tell my friend "dude lets smoke" and hes like " smoke what?" I go " smoke the hookah man"...an hes like "yea me and my neighbor smoke hookah...so where do we smoke...oh wait the game is on sunday...lets smoke in winstons house...Im like ok Ill bring the hookah and the tobacco so we can SMOKE it..." he goes "cool...ill bring my kid so he can fetch me my beers.." >>>now in another lifetime I might have said...dude lets "go vaporize"
[/quote]

Well you could say that, but you'd be talking about something else entirely.

By the way, what ever happened to that thread about using a vaporizer with hookah tobacco? I know it scared a lot of folks away out of fear of the mighty ban-hammer, but I thought it was a very interesting notion.





(please don't ban me for bringing it up )