blueridgedog

Yea...my bad. Will lock it tonight.

Curious as well. I put a dual coil, dual 28g nickel twisted coil in my tugboat this weekend and it came to .35 and would only run in non tc mode. I did not have time to trouble shoot it.

If you have a wave spring in mind as a replacement, link it. If you think it will work, I am certain we can go in together with some others to test it out.

I doubt you will find them for a bit...rumor is that the factory that makes them and some other popular ones had a fire. Production is unknown. I have a small stash and I guess now is the time to put them on eBay...not! But fear not, they will be back.

Evolv in general and the DNA40 and DNA200 chips in particular are designed to limit the exposure of carcinogens that can be released due to higher temperature vaping. One of their objectives is to make a product that is not only safe, but viewed as safe from a regulatory standpoint. As such, the design is geared around that fact. To get the type of vape you are seeking would be best accomplished without a temperature controlled device.

And you are certain that the assembly is not putting pressure on the fire button...i.e. you can press it and note that it is "clicky" and not depressed constantly? If it auto fires and there is no actual pressure on the button, then you will need to return the chip/mod.

There is a tutorial on the virtual machine setup on the software board and the timeout has been increased to improve the disconnect issue, though you may still get it from time to time. I use macs exclusively.

I have locked ohms for three days now and could not reproduce this.

Hardware. An add-on daughter board.

Mod Crate and Evolv: What is the story with the availability of screens?

What is your percentage trigger for "new/old" in escribe? It could be that when you set it down for a long period or it changes temp, that the change is enough to trigger it when you start again.

As an added note for those that my look...I thought I had killed a board once it it was a bad screen. The second time I thought I had killed it was a botched firmware update. I was able to recover it (but blew a cell in my pack doing it).

I have to use it on some of my atomizers due to their varying resistance. On in particular will vary from adding .02 to .15 to the total resistance. With a .23 coil in, it vapes great with the base resistance, but when it reads .15 more it is unusable. I lock it in. For me this is a function of a weak 510 spring as the atomizer behaves with more pressure on the center pin.

Or the display ribbon cable has moved to the point where it is interfering.

I recommend you join in the existing thread considering this: /topic/67683-topic/

Have you looked at the cell voltages in escribe before/during/after charging? Have you set the watthours of your pack in escribe?

You could try, in device monitor, charging options, diagnostics, perform usb recovery charge.

Usually that is a button that fights tight in the case or gets jammed or finally is too tight against the tactile switch.

Even with the LED built in, you will need to power the LED. From Brandon's instructions, put your resistor on the board, the grab power off of the opposite two solder points:

1.2Wh x 15c = 18amps so it is below the recommended discharge. I would not use it. But it could be used if you limited your device to around 133w, but if you are willing to do that, you could get a 2s pack with more capacity for the same space.

Mike's image.

James: Timeout is better. I still get a hickup periodically, but I leave it to you to decide if it is now long enough. I will a handful of flashes to see if it gets in the way. The best way to see them is in atomizer analyzer.

I will try and reproduce this...never locked my ohms. How long is the sleep timer?

Will it show up in escribe? If so what is the firmware date and the charge level of each cell?

Thanks James (odd as I am James). I added the serial number recovery device as a USB device, but I may not have restarted the host OS. I am thinking with your longer timeout may make the issue moot (hopefully). I have tested VirtualBox and VMware and I think all methods function about the same with the lag.