Main Index   Search   Register   Login   Who's Online   FAQ   Links
  1 Online, 0 Active   You are not logged in  
Main Index     The HIVE light edition (TM)
This is a historical archive
The forum is read-only. Private information has been removed. It is not possible to login.


All 15 posts   Subject: cold rxn.....died   Please login to post   Down

11-05-04 22:29
No 539912
      cold rxn.....died     

today swims buddy give worlocks cold push/pull method (super high potency push/pull dope....)a try:

20g pseudo, 24g iodine, 12g RP, 3ml H20 (exact as recommendet) rxn starts smooth, little white smoke appeared, all was liquid and bubbled nice, temp. is growing up to 100°C inside flask without external heat.
then the flask was set inside a heating jacked, temp. inside the flask was adjusted at 40°C, to run for the next 36 hours. But after 1 hour there is nothing going on, no bubbles, no reflux, the mixture is not longer a fluid, looks like marmalade, mag.stirrer is unable to turn it.
this is not what swim wants to see, there is no live inside this flask, so something must changed:

decided to switch the whole thing to an LWR:
ratios are the same, but a little more water was addet and a condensor. 
so there was now 10ml inside, and the heat is set on 95°C inside flask. nice reflux is going on. hope there was something to saveblush


what to do now ? is there a chance of a happy ending?

thx for help
(Hive Addict)
11-05-04 22:54
No 539914
User Picture 
      Howdy dextro! Ratio is okay for a LWR for the...     

Howdy dextro!
Ratio is okay for a LWR for the exception of RP which Ibee would have bumped up to 16g
0.8g RP x 20=16g
and the dh2o amount being too low to generate enough HI for continued recycling and reducion.
But since the rxn was started dry(3ml dh2o), compared to the recommended 0.5mldh2o per 1g E for LWR,
0.5ml dh2o x 20=10ml
it's a good thing the excess RP wasn't added from the outset.

Since it's unlikely that HI was generated to 50-57% the time cooktime doesn't start until the addition of the necessary ratio is adjusted and added.

Time and temp are the most important factors in a LWR!
Skimping on either one will leave most unhappy.
Cook for the full 48hr in this case.

This is assuming the ratio was brought up to 10ml dh2o and 16g RP.
Hold inside flasktemp at 95-100°C...stir at 24mark and bump up flask temp to 120°C during last 4-8hr!
Good Luck and don't forget the chant!wink

If the shoethrows fits...Ware Itout
(Hive Addict)
11-05-04 23:08
No 539919
User Picture 
      The worlock cold rxn     

Ibee remembers well when Worlock posted that thread.
It coincided with a time that all bees were trying to justify the parameter switch from the Hot/Fast P/P to the LWR.
That post, in hindsight, was missing a few key elements and much leadway was gained on bringing the LWR into the windw of success as we know it today.
Even at the time and date of his posting that thread, alot had been worked out by Geez and Ibeeware on the LWR parameters and were posted and Worlocks endeavors to bring down the temp and ratio were no match for the gaaks that were barging onto the scene, and his departure left alot openended regarding his attempts.
Had Worlock stayed with us longer during that period his experimentation would have reflected the needed adjustment parameters. That I am sure of.
Worlock and his infinate wisdom/support is missed by alot of bees and we hope he is fairing well and eagerly look to the day he rejoins us again!

If the shoethrows fits...Ware Itout
11-05-04 23:40
No 539925
      thx wareami o.k. ratios/temp are adjusted,...     

thx wareami 

o.k. ratios/temp are adjusted, reflux is going on, but there is still no bubbling activity, why?.
assuming this little bubbles are necessary frown
(Hive Addict)
11-06-04 01:30
No 539942
User Picture 
      Read This whole thread...     

Post 497980 (popi: "Acid in Reaction", Stimulants)

If the shoethrows fits...Ware Itout
(Of Counsel)
11-06-04 02:04
No 539948
      if the rp is good...     

If the rp is good, you've added plenty. I would add more water, in fact, I would go to 16 ml for this reaction and run it for 36 hours right at 100C, then up to 120C for another eight.

Try as I might, I can't talk any sense into that Ware fellow... you know he gets...

Next thing he'll claim is that I use too much water... laugh

People with as much experience and no reputation involved will tell you that either of us is right enough to be in window of success. One of us is just a little righter, and the other a little lefter. The window is pretty wide, if its wet enough.

mostly harmless
(Hive Addict)
11-06-04 20:41
No 540055
User Picture 
      As Good As It Ghettos :•ю Pt 1     

Geez: I think it's no big secret I'm far left winglaugh

Who needs windows of success when you have a seeing eye dog?tongue

And Geez...this isn't a disgreeance in any way...jst splainin what went left unsplained amigo!cool
I feel if I had been more clear and concise back in the daze of the LWR developement, there would have been more agreeance concerning the parameters Ibee found best that worked for him.
Believe it or not...there are reasons Ibee's stuck to his guns concerning the LWR Ratio from day one when he made his first LWR post and gaurantee to the newbee that he couldn't fail.

Seasoned, experience bees could tweek those handed down measures anyway they saw fit that suited their preference, and Ibee knew they would and would be happy doing it.
Nobody even heard the phrase "As good as it ghets" concerning meth until Ibee introduced it 6 months into The LWR development before the LWR was even suggested as a reinvented way to get there. No bee believed it possible at first glance either.

But Ibee knew 90% of the bees weren't getting it and he was.
The two happiest daze in The Kidz lives were Geez reporting his first 24hr success and Jacked reporting a difference in potency/quality and yield.
Those were Ibee's findings 6 months before Geez's post

Keep in mind as you read the rest, (and for those that don't care to wade through all the bullshit can skip to the bottom, secondpartpostwhere I make my point that sums up this narrative) that the reasoning and purpose behind Ibee's LWR parameters were padded and buffered that way to account for any given scenario and variable introduced that would support Ibee's gaurantee that when followed to the tee, NO BEE WOULD EVER FAIL, and every bee would find that wide success window if they keep the fundamental time/temp/ratio intact.(ratio tweekable)

I had no idea at the time that that window would be as wide as it is concerning ratio because the only examples he had to compare that window to were the Unforgiving HI/RP rxn that we all know and love. You either got dope or you got pfed-iodometh-iodoeph.
No fence sitting there! You either got high or you didn't and if you didn't you chucked a shit load of time and money in exchange for the experience and a never-ending resolve to try a different stategy next time.

Until the LWR, once a bee found that right combination, they new if they shifted far from it they'd be back to the drawing board. And no bee likes that so they keep applying what worked for them even at the expense of settling for whatever they could get. In most cases, settling for less!
The masterseasoned teachers at the time reinforced that ideaology and didn't like it when they were challenged by anybee young or old, seasoned or new. They saw it as someone trying to reinvent the wheel and came off with shit like..."Look...that's the way it's done, if I can do it so can you so quit your bitchin and JUST DO IT!"

Now faced with those examples, it's no small wonder that Ibee thought he had a huge obstace to overcome and said "Oh yeah fuckers, I'll show you!"
And he did! Time and again concerning what he picked off what the bigwigs like Rhodium and Osmium and Wizardx and Lugh were saying and confirming all along. In pill extraction and the HI/RP rxn.

In extraction...not many bees had the answers here as they had to be developed in response to a barrage of formulation changes every 6 months. The main options were a/b`ing pills or steam distilling and long solvent soaks and Ibee refused to do anything that he onmly got a 50-80% yield doing. His skills sucked at a/b'ing...hence the off the beaten track Ibee signature solvent extractions of pills.

Although he didn't understand the journal accounts in chemspeak....he just used as a reinforcement tool, the time/temp/ratio's that promised the highest yields.
Unbeknownst to Ibee at the time, He'd already performed the first LWR before he even began narrowing down the variables and reasoning behind why he made the best dope he'd ever tasted in his life.

Concerning the promises Ibee made with the LWR, In the history of the HIVE, I've never had nor never seen another bee stick their neck on a guilotine that large and walk away unscathed. To be so bold as to say it would be impossible for a newbee to walk away empty handed from the most boring rxn they'd ever lay their eyes on or attempt.
I've had many hairsplitting close calls as rxn inhibitors were busting onto the scene as being seen as more a soothesayer than a smoothesayerwink and many more sidesplitting fits of outrageous bioassay bred accounts that hopefully provided an entertainment value to many in the serious trenches along the way. The stick in the mud types balked, but hey...if newbees could follow along, that was the intended audience anyway. That may seem uncaring, but my intended audience isn't chemists that could do half as much footwork as I had and come to the same end result, given just the chemical names and measurements, if they had a mind to.

ADHD combined with heavy assaults on bioassay testing make for a strange bedfellow it turns out. If I had the money, I'd pay for all y'alls psychiatric bills for the sessions you undoubtedly needed as a resultlaugh
At times Ibee felt like moses telling the methgodz they were nuts for throwing successful methods in Ibees path. And he didn't have a brother that was any better at saying "LET my people GO".

Ibee, Being the one rare bee that could claim he adopted that saying, "Once Bitten, fifteen shy", regarding HI/RP xns, only fueled Ibee's determination to widen that success window soas others didn't fall victim to the pure frustration that Ibee and the Kidz suffered at the hands of endless experiemental footwork without having any clue that if what they were doing was right or would make a difference or would result in a back to the drawing board experiment.
The sheer volume of aquired chemicals in search of something that worked makes my head spin(no pun intended) Bees only had the priviledge of seeing the successful ones applied that did the trick as reported in write-ups from this corner.
How they did the trick? "How the fuck should I know?smile" I'm not a chemist.

It was trial and error that favored error more than success!
Ibee and the Kidz weren't nearly as skilled as most and lacked hand's on experience or guidance to boot for the exception of those here and what could be deciphered from chemistry books.

After failure 13, Ibee was ready to employ anybee and ay them $5000.00 to teach him...but that wld have been silly eh? Has narc and setup written all over it.
I came to the hive not knowing who was who, or who was right or wrong. Who to listen to and who was full of shit. To my dismay, I had no idea the latter was so prevelant and we'd only number in a handfull that really cared enough to make the sacrifices we've made in bringing the field past obstacle after obstacle and every form of adversity.
In the history of my tenure here at the hive, I may have asked 2-3 how to questions.

The Egull tetrachloroethylene procedure was mapped out prior to ibee's first real success and executed single-handedly three weeks after Ibee ever had his first rxn he could call successful. Jacked and Dwarfer were the first to ever here of it and it was almost never posted publicly at all because of Ibee's fears.
And the Egull method would have never seen the light of day if it weren't for those first fifteen failures as FumbleBee and StumbleBee were blaming the pills for the failures and needed to eliminate that as the cause. The need for pristeen clean feedstock became a greater obsession than the search for the AWE-Mighty crystal grail.
Imagine Ibee's delight at finding that not only did he have pristeenclean feedstock from the newfound method but the yields fell in the 90-100% range of expected.
First 30% than peaking out at 60-65% of the finished product seemed hardly worth all the effort and chemicals he put forth and sacrificed in developing the Egull Method.

This 65% went on like that for months until he decided to step the plank into the great divide in search of a better way. Coincidental circumstance lead to the first LWR rxn.
The shift in ratio!
The precursors on hand weren't what was expected and the rxn was topheavy with excess feedstock.
The thought at that point, against his best gutfeeling was to add some excess dh2o and cook for an hour and then extract off some of the liquid to reduce the pfed amount in rxn and then to proceed cooking while looking for the visible signs of activity and aroma. Bees suspected at that time that spacedope was caused by excess heat so That wasn't an option cause Ibee wanted a nice buzz, not to be yanking invisible assholes out of the trees across the street or watching helplessly as the shadows of swatteam members were scaling down the side of the building.
As fate would have it the rxn was too wet. Okay...time to apply some of what Ibee taught others in that case. Cook It Off.

Well woudn't ya know it...The only heat source at the time was a coffeemaker that held consistant heat. Every day Ibee would shut the rxn down to go to work and resume when he returned leaving it cook all night while he tinkered around the lab doing other things hoping that by morning it would show signs of completion before he had to crank the heat back off.
He didn't feel confident that he could return to a building still standing and uncharred if he left it cooking unattended.
That went on for three days until the fourth day around midnight. He went to check in on the rxn and saw that a volume increase had taken place and was still stuck on the flasksides 3/4 way up the glass.
Ohhhh Goodie! Popped the balloon off, smelled satan's ass(gemini33 may recall that night and long wait as we were emailing back and forth) and it was off to the races on some of the strongest meth Ibee had ever had. 7 day run.
That first LWR and resulting Bioassay also coincided with some of the most hideous, torturous, unforgiving Wareamiese this board had ever been subjected tosmile which lasted for months cause Ibee found the secret to "How to Fry your synaptic gaps and live to tell about it".blush Marbles were scattered for months due to excessive intake of high-octane fuel.

To think back on those daze now, I'd swear that the methgodz saw fit to beat Ibee senseless with a MiracleWhip to have allowed him to stumble across such effective solutions with so little knowledge of what he was UP to and doing.

My humbleness and gratitude to the Hive and the Info it provide would never allow me to  claim that I invented the LWR method just as I can't claim I invented Tetrachloroethylene, nut I'm proud and feel priviledged to have been instrumental in doing the footwork that brought this methods to the forefront and into the hands of other struggling bees.
My only desire from day one was to make a difference bygiving back someday to the cause and those responsible that gave me a hand UP.
I've done that and haven't stopped and won't until I'm dead or in that other hell!
But I know I left a peace of undying gratitude behind for others to share the joys of.
Back to the LWR!

After that first fluke LWR rxn...there were still flaws in Ibee's thinking and idea's on the dh2o content/HI concentration issue. For 2 months he kept cooking dry,(3-4 drops per g of E), just wet enough to keep the rxn from drying out. These cooks were cooked for days and finished the rxn on the last 12 hours by adding .5g per g of E, and noticed the rxn activity would take off between10-12 final cooking hour and double in volume.

~month 3, the ratio shifts were added to include the parameters you'll see suggested to this day from Ibee's corner.
The determnation of those ratios were the product of a grueling, frustrating trial and error process as well.
The good as it ghets dope didn't materialize until ~3-4 months after that initial LWR cook.
During those grueling months, I found it necessary to know why this rxn worked better, was failsafe, yielded higher quality/potency and quantity, and why it left little to no emulsion making work-up a breeze compared to same feedstock in shorter timed, hotter, drier rxns.

That is when the hand's off research began to begin putting the puzzle pieces together in order to refine the process to a stage it was completely doable by any bee, no questions asked! After all, the chemistry synths contained info on longer cook times, more hydration, and a slight shifts in procedure as opposed to Do-Bee accounts. Worlock suggested ealier on in his tenure that a more controlled rxn produced better results. Then I started stumbling on posts by Rhodium and Osmium that practically begged the shifts be applied to create conditions that afforded less intermediate impurities and fuller reduction.
Finally had all the confirmation Ibee needed that he was doing the right thing even if others would leave clawmarks on the doorway as they were being lead off to put the rxn into practice.

Now one last issue before the parameter conflict issue is addressed.
To this day Ibee will not perform the necessary gruntwork of extraction if he can't walk away with 90% consistanly of reactable feedstock. This figure excludes the necessary footwork and losses in developing workarounds on newer formulations as they are discovered.

Ibee has defeated every gaak formulation that's come down the pike since povidone and each new method s refined to that magic 90% or it's abandoned in favor a completely new method that holds that yield promise. Ibee tells others to not settle for less, and soas his not seen as a hypocrite, he refuses to settle for less himself.
Ibee's become proficient enough at the rxn itself and the subsequent work-up to walk away with finished product in the 75-90% range...consistantly.
To those that don't get that range back in end result, it's easy to label someone who does as a boasting egotistical fool and a liar.
That Ibee is not, you see what you get, and I've proven beyond the shadow of any doubt that it can be done and be executed the exact way it's layed out instructionally.
One thing that can't be misrepresented easily, when conveying any lab procedure, is when someone describes a method of doing something that he's done and describes everything to a tee what will take place. If you have been given the shaft, you'll know it when you see something other than what the instruction provides.
If that person has never actually carried it out and witnessed it taking place and is only guessing at the results and what others can expect to see, he's telling on himself.
You'll know he can't be trusted to provide accurate information.
It's easy to conceptualize and to put something on paper and sell it, but when it comes time to put UP or Shut UP and put your money where your mouth is, you'd better have had the field and hands on practical experience that'll back it UP.

So from the time of the LWR's inception as a workable solution to "Set it, Forget it" type HI/RP rxn, it took about 6 months in the making before it was delivered for a test drive under the conditions Ibee felt 100% sure that 99% of all bees would not fail.

If the shoethrows fits...Ware Itout
(Hive Addict)
11-06-04 20:45
No 540057
User Picture 
      As Good As It Ghettos :•ю Pt 2     

That is how the LWR came into being with the suggested parameters as told by Ibee's corner.
He knew he'd have his hands full trying to convey the shift in cooking style and the longer cook time, especially among the veteran do-bees that have been performing the HI/RP rxn for years.

In order to establish a failsafe rxn that already has built in variables, it became necessary to learn about HI concentration and best case scenarios and conditions for creating and maintaining that reducable concentration throughout the whole rxn time until complete reduction.
Now we had built in variables, we needed to consider the user introduced variables that were inevitable possibilties and account for a middle ground whereas they'd still have success and not be disappointed.

Just because Ibee sees things one way...doesn't make it gospel and never makes him right.
So other do-bees were, and still are encouraged to inject their insights and expertise/experience with the LWR rxn.
As a matter of fact....There was a brief period of time that I adopted suggesting the ratio of 1 to 1, dh2o to E because those with more experience were claiming success.
I went back to the 0.5ml-dh2o to 1g-E suggestion after determining after several rxns that the end result fall off the back of the Good as it Ghets train. Very Very fine line there, but noticiable none the less. Which brings me to whyIbee stayed with that 1to1 sugeestion for long.
It's pretty common that most pill extraction procedures will include some pretty wide results and qualities. As such gaaks can reek havoc on the rxn and the precursors themselves.

These are variables. The amount of HI in aqueous concentration is the other area considered a huge variable between success/failure, and reacted/unreacted, as well as the degree of intermediate impurities present.

Now in the case of any gaak going into rxn, those gaaks take up room...some encapsulate precursors prior to reduction. This will lessen HI concentration. Water lessens HI concentration...In combination, this is a recipe for failure as HI is produced or maintained at ful strength.
Even when gaak isn't present...I'm not saying HI can't be produced in concentration high enough to reduce, but what I am saying is if that Hydration amount tips the scales to the point that you end up with a constant 40-49% HI concentration, guess what? You'll not be cooking at full power and something suffers.

That something can be yield...quality...potency, any number of different sets of circumstances that will still spell success...bu8t not as good as it ghets.
The other blanket that is provided to combat varuiables with the 0.5ml dh2o suggested ratio is this. You only want as much dh2o as is needed to maintain 50-57% HI level.
Not everybee uses completely dry labgrade precursors....
This is a rxn that has proven it can be run considerably dry on dry weather days and leave a bee with mediocre quality and quanity or a complete dud. Run identically the same rxn during a rain storm in higher humidity and BANG...GOOD SHIT!!! Works everytime.
OldTimers reported this scenario in the past and Ibee experienced it, which is why it's included as example.

This speaks volumes about the amount of hydration needed to make a difference.
The fine line between diluting the HI level too much in the LWR isn't so great that alonger cooking period won't fix.
Ibee's gone back down to the 0.5ml dh2o ratio when suggesting soas to minimize cooktime while maintaining the highest possible level of HI to cook off intermediates, account for possible gaaks found in any variety individual bees rxn, and most insure Ibee can stand by that Money Back Gaurantee to offered Geez and every bee here that they would not fail under any normal circumstance save introduced user-error variables!

Again...agreeing with Geez wholeheartedly here....that window of success is wider than it use to be....but I felt it necessary to point out why Ibee's ratio differ from others.
Either way...success should be had but only an impossible side by side bioassay will tell the tell of what exactly is "As Good As It Ghets"!

If the shoethrows fits...Ware Itout
(Of Counsel)
11-06-04 20:47
No 540059
      DA- yuummm     

That must have been a damn good batch! cool

mostly harmless
(Ancient Alchemist Delux)
11-07-04 02:00
No 540101

You said it geez.. Shit

After that first fluke LWR rxn...there were still flaws in Ibee's thinking and idea's on the dh2o content/HI concentration issue. For 2 months he kept cooking dry,(3-4 drops per g of E), just wet enough to keep the rxn from drying out. These cooks were cooked for days and finished the rxn on the last 12 hours by adding .5g per g of E, and noticed the rxn activity would take off between10-12 final cooking hour and double in volume.

 No wonder you were having problems with purity. Way to little water for the push pull... You could have triplied that with no adverse affect...The funny thing about this reaction is it by all means ain't dry. And to add just enough water to keep it from drying out is not the ideal setting in the flask. As a mater of fact after the first phase has started into it churn it is as liquidity as a reflux, just darker. The second phase has even less viscosity to it and runs like water from a phosit.. Hows that for beating a dead horse...

Tighten Up!  (UH)
(Hive Bee)
11-07-04 03:20
No 540117
User Picture 
      Beating a dead horse     

Jacked made an excellent point, by no means is the push/pull rxn a "dry" reaction.  A certain elder bee recommended that swim use 4 mL/oz of E for the push pull(thanks, swim was Gluecifer back then).  Swim has almost doubled that ratio on the oz. cook and still had no problems, only adjusting the cook times to the sometimes extra h2o added.  (Usually on an accident by the anxious cook)

By no means when too much h2o were added to the push/pull superior to when the correct amount of h2o was used. Same for too little water. 

With the standard one ounce push/pull cook swim has found that 4 to 5 mL of water are perfect and the reaction generally runs around one hour and a half. 

Enough of beating the dead horse, sorry.  Here's a little more though.  In a recent post by Org he stated that no unreduced ephedrine will come through a proper post-rxn work up and that in his experience only pseudoE came through unreduced when gakked.  Is this the main reason in the yield difference between the push/pull and LWR.  Swim routinely gets back 55% of rextaled goodz on the PP and 65% to nearly eighty has been hit with the longer ones.

I just wish there was one simple explanation that all the chemists could agree on about the push/pull method.  Most chemists have no reason to try it and in fact there is no reason for someone wanting the purest meth they can produce to NOT do a reflux, but nevertheless swim knows it(pushpull) works and still don't mind ridin' those mules to town when the car is in the shop!wink

Another little sip/ a bit deeper in debt
(Hive Addict)
11-07-04 06:17
No 540135
User Picture 
      The Power Of Love!     

>That must have been a damn good batch!
Geez: Never let it be said there is a better verbiage wanker than ware(tf)ami! Right Os?
He's earned the title and ware's it proudly!

What you see is what you Ghetto!
Knock on wood!

Ibee's just another innocent victim of:

No wonder you were having problems with purity. Way to little water for the push pull... You could have triplied that with no adverse affect...The funny thing about this reaction is it by all means ain't dry. And to add just enough water to keep it from drying out is not the ideal setting in the flask

Jacked: That hydration factor was one of the puzzlers for a long time. It wasn't helped any by those attempting the curbshot as their first "get yer dick wet" experience. Not knocking the curbshot, but after running that rxn three times in a row, to the letter, Ibee went into a LONGGGGGGGGGGG period of celibacy. That period is what forced Ibee into a mass reading spell across the board for lack of anything better to dolaugh.
Bees may laugh at this, but I think jacked will remember the PM sometime 3 years ago.
It wasn't until rxn failure fourteen that jacked sent Ibee "The Chant" and it was all UPhill from there with the successes.
Bees, I shit you not!

For christs sake....bees were still employing h2o2 in place of dh2o at the time! To this day newbees are still coming on board stating they used h2o2 in the rxn.

See for yourselves:

excerp from the Curbshot
note: the ratio is based on your more then likely using mbrp and iodine from tincture.DO NOT ADJUST RATIO. reason being never once while nano pondering had failure or half reacted product, and never yeilded under 60 % so follow instuctions and don't make any adjustments. from start to finish takes swim 2 hours give your self probobly 21/2.


 put test tube in freezer about 5 min before adding chemicals, once all 3 are added ( i2 1st , E 2nd , R 3rd ), you will have 3 distinktive layers in test tube, next you will need your tape & ballon ready. with an eye dropper add 4 drops peroxide ,fit the ballon on tube (only needs to be on 1/2 inch let the slack hang over )now tape the ballon to the glass tube, shake the 3 reactants to mix well ( dont let any get into the ballon)the rxn will start

It took a little while before Ibee made a distinct observation that neither jacked nor worlock ever participated in either(one was editted remake by fearNloathing) of the "nano scale curbshot style" threads.
From then on Ibee stuck with only Jacked and Worlock teachings.
Again...Curbshot provided this board with many enlightening threads so I can't knock him, but his nano HI/RP method didn't work as outlined or one out of five attempts would have succeeded for Ibee.

Now like I said...there was a tremendous amount of reading and understanding to do back then....not unlike today.
Change is the only thing you can count on as being a constant. And that makes for volumes stacked on volumes of what use to be good information in it's day. What worked yesterday doesn't always work today.
This is why it's imperative for newbees to start with recent reports and then work their way deeper into pile to extract the finer points.

I know what jacked, methhead, worlock, placebo, rhodium, had to put up with in order to try to keep bees on the right track and it's no wonder they all tired of the same questions addressing the same problems, trying to drill into bees the right ways of achieving success.
That was a thankless task and everybee to come down the pike is grateful they alljust didn't throw up their hands in disgust and walk away!

We've come along way since those days.
Anybee that says it ain't been one hell of a ride musta been sleeping the whole time!

In a recent post by Org he stated that no unreduced ephedrine will come through a proper post-rxn work up and that in his experience only pseudoE came through unreduced when gakked.

abominator: Not sure I understand the correlation your trying to have explained here.
Let me guess.
Ibee's never run ephedrine in an HI/RP, only pfed! Ungaaked pseudo will travel through an a/b,cooked or uncooked.
If pfed will do it either way and ephedrine can be extracted in an pre-rxn a/b, then I see no reason why unreacted ephedrine won't travel through the post-rxn workup a/b as well.
Maybe I'm not understanding what Orgy was meaning or what he's interpretting as a proper post-rxn work-up. Even steam distillation requires the a/b to be done properly to get to the salt.

Is this the main reason in the yield difference between the push/pull and LWR.

So to answer that question...the mechanics of the rxn need to be understood.
It doesn't get simpler than this:
The rxn that's undercooked will contain
"Unwanteds"=unreacted starting feed plus intermediate iodo, dimers, blahblahblah...impurities.
The percentage of doneness determines the amount of meth...the leftover is the result of being undercooked unwanteds.
Yield of wanted = Meth minus "Unwanteds"
70% meth is the result of undercooked rxn
Since it's nearly impossible to walk away with unreduced from a LWR, executed properly, the higher yield and higher quality difference speaks for itself and validates the LWR as being the likeliest way of achieving what you're after in the purest, highest yielding form from an HI/RP rxn.

I just wish there was one simple explanation that all the chemists could agree on about the push/pull method.  Most chemists have no reason to try it and in fact there is no reason for someone wanting the purest meth they can produce to NOT do a reflux, but nevertheless swim knows it(pushpull) works and still don't mind ridin' those mules to town when the car is in the shop!

The P/P still works and we all know now the rxn needs dh2o regardless of cooktime and temp!

The main reason why people can't agree and provide one simple explanation for the P/P is because the success margin is so narrow and less consistant and that's what drove Ibee off the beaten path and stumbled onto something that was less forgiving based on what those more experienced academically taught bees were saying all along.

Jacked became a master at what SWIJ does as did many others and they all had one thing in common. The experience to know what to do and when to do it to get the best product they could from the P/P.
Ibee spent every ounce of energy he could and eventually experienced the best the P/P had to offer as well because he believed the masters of the P/P and what they handed down.

Then Ibee stumbled onto the LWR and has yet to see tangible evidence that will dispute the yied and qualityof the product it produces compared to that of the P/P.
Ibee even had a deepseated fear that the initial LWR reports would be seen as a "Stabbing in the back" to those that invested so much over the years on this board.
He knew his vindication would come in the form of others test driving this boring ass reinvention of the wheel rxn and arrive at the same conclusions Ibee had.
Geez was the first well respected bee to take up that challenge and had he not taken it up and came away happy with the result, things would be different.
I think the first was an 18 or 24hr hour rxn and Ibee recalls a post at the now defunct ChemHead forum where The Kidz said "Wait til you get a load outta the 36hr rxn" in reply to his reported successful LWR.

The trade off must be made to step into the higher quality range and many just don't want to invest that kind of time!

I'll take the gaurantee over potluck any day because I resigned myself to no turning back once I hit a certain mark!
And as I recently said in another post, I'm not above revisiting the P/P faster method when I don't feel like investing in that tradeoff.
Both give product.
But only one gives As Good As It Ghets and it doesn't get better than that!

If the shoethrows fits...Ware Itout
(Hive Bee)
11-07-04 07:51
No 540143
User Picture 
      Ware you are on point re: my queries     

Maybe swim should edit that one bit about the unreduced E out of his post?(lack of sleep w/o aid)  Sorry for the confusion, but yes Ware this bee has never ran E in an HI/RP rxn, only pseudoephedrine.

Glad to see

Another little sip/ a bit deeper in debt
(Ancient Alchemist Delux)
11-08-04 03:47
No 540330

I'm not sure but warlock was the one that introduced the quick method to the hive I think. Before that everyone was refluxing.. 10 years ago refluxing was the only method practiced beside the real chemist working P2P.. It is old hat to some. Nothing new at all in refluxing pseudo or E. I think in festers first book he recommended 48 hours or maybe it was 24. Thats it 24 hours.. 48 hours is something new to the game... Swim could have made a batch and covered 2000 miles in that amount of time on a motorcycle no less.. Thats a horse that ain't dead yet and loves to be beaten... hahahahaha.. Anywho I remember some things better than others but for the most part its personal preference. If one was to start out pushing his pull and on his success the shit he produced will by far be the best he has ever done regardless of impurity's and it would be a hard thing to convince him other Wise.. Only over a long period of time will he begin to listen closer to the ones with other methods because of boredom more than anything. Needing to add spice to his lab time he tries something else.. It's an age old syndrome that will be repeated by bees for years to come... My hats off to any method of success to the newbee.. whether it be fast and furious or long and mundane.

Tighten Up!  (UH)
11-10-04 17:49
No 540862
      thx mates, everything was very well at the...     

thx mates, everything was very well at the end.
compared to former lwr`s there are some differences:

1. the colour change of the rxn fluid from black to
   purple to yellow to clear white

2. the colour of the refluxing liquid was orange and there
   was a orange colour in the condenser (disappeard at 
   the end of rxn) 

3. no single condensor crystal is growin

4. the smell of the post rxn fluid was like a flower

5. after addition of water to the post rxn mixture, the 
   fluid turned milky yellow (in former ones, the liquid 
   was clear like water, where is the iodine?)

6. the colour of meth FB (before steam dist.) was only 
   light yellow, compared to piss/golden yellow but the
   fishy smell was the same. 

6. the endresult was more potent, then former ones

compared to my earlyer lwr's swim used NO labgrade red/iodine. but the pseudo was cleaner, the re-x shards are a/b and re-x`d a 2. time (before a/b, they looked also very pure, nice sparkling neeles, shimmering in the sunlight) but mayby with an reaction killer/blocker inside?

ratio was 1:1,2:0,8:0,5 (e:i:rp:h20) refluxed 48 hours.
former lwr´s performed with 1:1,2:0,6:0,8 (labgrade I/rp).
european 120`s used with 5mg cetirizindihydrocloride but not so much gaaked, then others.

fact is, the rxn is dryer then my others but no single condensor crystal appeard. assumed this was a sign for a rxn at the dry end. this is not true.

the endresult was better but the Iodine was over 20 years old and the red smelled like rotten eggs? the SMALLL difference in ratios? can`t belive this. the cleaner pfed? possible, but can shards so gaaked that they can block rxn?

after heating the meth crystals (before smoking) they melt but when cooling they are crystals again (in 1-2 sec.) is this an indicator for the purity?


All 15 posts   End of thread   Top
Powered by Extreme Dulletin Board V. 6.21.4, © 2017 - 2021, BumbleSoft R&D Asia

Links     Erowid     Rhodium

PIHKAL     TIHKAL     Total Synthesis II

Date: 12-05-23, Release: 1.6 (10-04-15), Links: static, unique