When I received the Vision X.Jet Spider, I was fairly eager to put it through its paces. I don’t have the same level of experience with Vision’s clearomizers; I’m sure many have tried and either loved, tolerated, or hated the original Vivi Nova, but I can’t say the same.
I have tried the Vision V-Fate, and although I liked it for a while, its lifespan seems to have come to an end after a couple weeks of steady use. And while its performance was certainly good, it was good in comparison to clearomizers like the iClear 16, original iClear 30, and the Protank II.
I hope you’ll pardon the digression; this isn’t a review of the V-Fate. I’m just offering the preceding for the purpose of contrast, on the question of performance, and on longevity, something I have to admit, right up front here, that is going to remain an open question in my mind at the time of this writing.
But this review is about Vision’s X.Jet Spider. Allow me to digress once more, briefly, because I’d like to note something I’m observing in the vaping industry:
It’s my educated opinion that clearomizers have unofficially reached their next level. If you’ll refer back to my recent review of the Kanger Aero Tank, you’ll notice that I was just blown away by the performance of that device. We’ve also seen the arrival on the vaping scene of the iClear 30B from Innokin, a competitor to the Aero Tank the performance of which puts it easily in the same league. And now we arrive at the Vision X.Jet. Ladies and gentlemen, the makers of these devices have raised the bar in a big way. Now let’s see how the X.Jet fares.
Presentation and Build Quality
The X.Jet arrived at my doorstep clad in a slim box of pinstripe-textured black paper with a clear plastic window. The box is branded with XFire Ecig’s logo, and sports relevant information about the specifications of the clearomizer inside. The box is mercifully easy to open, giving you quick, easy access to your device.
The device itself is handsomely crafted of what I would have to guess is a polycarbonate tube sheathed in brushed aluminum with a cutout so that the user can monitor the level of eLiquid in the device. Additionally, the aluminum sheath comes in several mellow pastels and sports a satiny-brushed finish emblazoned with the word X.Jet under a graphic, which to me resembles a stylized star.
The threading on the device is sure and smooth, while the tapered “shoulder” of the device contributes both to the aesthetics and to economy of space. The drip tip, while not itself terribly stylish, is both perfectly comfortable while being wide enough to contribute handsomely to the device’s performance.
Features and Specifications
The X.Jet Spiders I received for testing came with 1.8ohm dual coil heads. The interesting feature of the heads is that they are, according to the manufacturer, both wireless and wickless. Now, I don’t have the equipment or expertise to conduct a teardown on atomizer heads — not yet, at least; I do intend to acquire both.
The connection collar on the device is recessed and includes both 510 and eGo threads. While it will work on some 510-only devices, a 510-only device must have a drip well or otherwise allow for a recessed connection; otherwise, you’re going to need an adapter to use the X.Jet Spider on your APV or mechanical.
Setting up the X.Jet is, in most respects, identical in procedure to setting up any other bottom-coil clearomizer. However, I’ve included this section on this particular device for one specific point that had me raising an eyebrow:
The physical tube that is the central airflow channel for this device rides alarmingly low in the tank at first glance. The first time I unscrewed the base of the X.Jet and reached for my bottle of test eLiquid, then looked inside the Spider, I blinked and thought for sure that I had done something wrong.
I even looked at the base of the device to see whether anything had detached from the tank itself and come off along with the base and atomizer head assembly; that’s how much I was taken aback by the low-riding center tube; I thought I had somehow broken the Spider, or perhaps that I had misread the packaging and was about to try to fill it from the wrong end.
But, no. Nothing was wrong. It’s simply an unusually short central airflow channel. I thought I’d let you know that, Dear Reader, so that you won’t get the same mistaken impression that I did. Now, then — onward!
I tested the X.Jet Spider on the Innokin Cool Fire II APV at 8.5 watts. I’ve found that 8.5 watts, for me at least, is the “sweet spot” for this device when it’s packing a 1.8-ohm atomizer head. The eLiquid I used for testing was Mountain Oak Vapors’ “Heavenly 7” in 18mg strength for the first run, and Totally Wicked’s “Cherry Pipe” in 18mg for the second.
I have to tell you that, after testing the Kanger Aero Tank, I was bracing myself for a letdown when it came to anything else. I needn’t have. The X.Jet Spider easily matched its competitor’s performance in every area.
Flavor reproduction was extremely high, while throat hit, at 8.5 watts, provided a welcome and satisfying “thump” from the Totally Wicked Cherry Pipe and a firm shove from the MOV Heavenly 7. Visual vapor output from both liquids was rich, thick and plentiful.
The real test came when I decided to evaluate the X.Jet Spider’s performance across the available wattage settings of the Cool Fire II, which are 7, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, 10.5, 11, 12, and 12,5. What I discovered was that the Spider handles all of those wattage settings beautifully, although as was to be expected, the vapor became quite a bit warmer and the throat hit a whole lot stronger at settings beyond 10.5, without either becoming harsh or unpleasant in any other detectable way.
In fact, my personal preference is to use the Spider at 12.5 watts full time, at least when it comes to tobacco eLiquids. With baked goods and sweeter flavors, I tend to keep the wattage closer to 9 watts, and the Spider likes both settings just fine. This is truly a flexible and robust device.
Recommendation & Final Thoughts
Would I recommend the Vision X.Jet Spider? The answer to that is an absolute and unqualified Yes. This device beats the living snot out of every other Vision product I’ve tried or read about to date, and whomps the stuffing out of everything else in the 1.6ml capacity range, as well.
This is the reason for my comment in the introduction: with devices like the Spider, the Kanger Aero Tank, the Smoktech Tumbler, and the Innokin iClear 30B, we’re seeing the next industry standard in clearomizer innovation and performance.
The X.Jet Spider is available at MyVaporStore for $7.94. It includes one clearomizer and the coil head. T
Dual Bottom Coils (No Wick,No Wire Seen)
Fill from the bottom (avoid getting liquid into the tube in the center)
Polycarbonate tube wrapped in stainless with window cutout
Each Spider with 1.8ohm Coil
1.6ml E-liquid Capacity
Compatible with 510 drip tip
Dimensions (including drip tip): 3-1/4″L x 9/16″D
For those of you who like the sound of the X.Jet but would like the same performance with a larger eLiquid capacity, I have received word that there are also 2ml and 3.5ml Nova Tank style renditions of the X.Jet, and once one of them finds its way into my hands, I’ll give you the good (or bad) news on that device, as well.