|
 the
Hive BB  Crystal
Meth  Methhead
- I have a question
|
| next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Methhead - I have a question |
| Worlock Member |
 posted 09-14-99 05:58 PM 
Not only me, but many others desire your practical hands on knowledge, and experience. My question involves your thoughts on optimal flask size and precurser ratios. What do you believe is best for yeilds, consistancy, and quality. |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-15-99 03:55 AM
okay........this is what hands on knowledge tells me........I started with a 2000 ml filter flask......I choose the filter flask because it's thicker than your standard boiling flask and can handle the pressures and temperatures alot better than any other flask.......Now, in this 2000 flask, my teacher and I had started with 1 oz meth yeilds, at a 50% yield ratio......and the size of the gas cans were small 1 gallon sizes....I noticed that as we had expanded our size (up to 4 oz's of meth at a 50% yield), the flask was becoming to small, and the push/pull would rock really violently.. and not to mention that when the second reaction would go off, some of the contents would shoot up the hose, and into the push/pull......so when I started going solo, I upgraded to a 4000 ml flask........I also upgraded the cans to 2.5 gallon cans.... As the story goes, I had ran into a money problem cuz of an accident, and was only able to piece together enough money to blow off a 1.5 oz load of meth at a 50% yield....but the reaction had problems.........I think the size of the flask, and the amount of water in the cans, would not let my reaction happen like a text book......instead of getting my reactions kicking off, it just cooked, and cooked, and cooked........there was no violent reaction whatsoever......I noticed the yellow iodine color though, and proceeded the steps, and came out with 74% yield instead of 50%.....but, the red took forever to filter out.......I think the high temperature of the second reaction, actually bakes the R, and helps to separate it..... cuz I've never had a problem filtering it off when I have that second violent reaction, but I always have a hard time when I don't get it to happen.......second thing I noticed, was that in the 4000 flask, I could fire off an expected, 3.5 oz meth load at 50% yield, without any of it crawling out the hose..... most all the other batchers I know of, never ever heard of my method, and use the old ten foot hose going straight to the ceiling method, and just wash the hose back into the flask when it's over........well, if you can keep the contents from shooting out the hose in the first place, then all the better..... third thing I noticed, is that the harder the pull, the more yield.......check this out, after the second reaction (when all the I gets used up), I leave the flask on low heat, and swirl every minute, I notice the sprinkle effect watch the pull in my tanks get harder and harder and harder, and that if you do not let any oxygen whatsoever back into the flask, not only do you have a higher yield, but better shit too.....reason being, is once the pull effect starts happening, this tells you that you've created a completely hydrogen state in the flask, and the less oxygen, the more vacuum, or in other words, more pull......so the more pull means higher yields.......something to think about, since the fact that since i've been using this as my template, I always now get anywhere's from 66 to 74% yields........ As far as amounts go, in every other method, I always hear of using large amounts of heat, and precursors, but I don't think this is necessary.......I just had a hands on student tell me, that my way is the most simplest, cleaniest, easiest system he's ever seen....and this guy is an old dog to the meth scene......Take this into account.. I tried upgrading both I and R to my current ratios, and didn't get any better results... I'm not sure of exactly why my recipe works sooooo good, but it does...........I use less I, R, and Heat, than everybody else, and I have some of the best in town......This is not ego, this is comments from people that will wait weeks sometimes for me, cuz they know that mine always comes up right..... currently, I use 1/3 R, equal I, and less than 180 degrees of heat to fire it off.... I tried more 1/2 R, and more I, but didn't get any better results, and more heat actually makes for more chance of explosion, due to the fact that at a certain temperature the Red Phosphorous, CAN, and WILL, convert back to WHITE phosphorous, which is explosive on contact with oxygen.....this is how match books work.......the friction of the match head, actually causes the Red phosphorous on the striking pad, to convert back into White Phosphorous, therefore igniting on contact with the surrounding oxygen and thus igniting the match head..... I hope this answers your question, and i'm sorry if I rambled a bit too long..... |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-15-99 04:15 AM
oops, also forgot to mention, that with my recipe, my shit is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, consistent....If I change anything, so does the quality, for instance, one time I couldn't find any Methanol at all, and had to use Denatured Alcohol, and when it came out, it was good stuff, but not my normal kickass shit....And the more Wax you get out of the Pseudo, the better quality the shit......Twice I left the Wax in, fired it off, and it came out as only okay stuff..... but when I do a full cleaning on the pseudo, and get it as pure as possible, the shit is kickass........OHHHHHHH, here's something interesting to note......You'll like this one......A couple times I've burnt my pseudo REALLLLL bad, and had to throw it away, cuz it was like tar.....but a friend said to react it anyways......well opportunity came up when I fell asleep, and burnt it REALLLL bad again......I mean BLACK TAR bad!..... but I said "What the hell" and decided to dry it out and react it anyways......NO LIE! I came out with superb shit!....at a 52% yield! and it was White with a slight yellow tint, and everybody said it just tasted a little funny!.....Now, ain't THAT some shit.. so don't get discouraged if your burn your shit, USE IT ANYWAYS!.....After all, it can't hurt, and you already spent money on it...I mean THAT one REALLY freaked me out...hehehe ....And here's another good one.....my friend brought me an ounce of Pink pseudo, cuz he couldn't get all the red out, and I looked at him funny but fired it off anyways, expecting nothing to come out, well I was wrong, and somewhere in the process, the red dye gets eaten away, and you still get white shit......and it was pretty good too......I was afraid it would affect the reaction, but it didn't......SOOOOOO......everything stated just now, is hands on experience, and hands on experience has learned me a VALUABLE lesson.....That in these situations, there is always a margin for NOT BEING EXACT.... and still coming out with what you want.... It's all workable, and DOES NOT have to be exact......Remember.......I'm no chemistry student....Just a business man.......and if you want consistency, then YOU YOURSELF, have got to be consistent in the way you do things |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-15-99 04:25 AM
Sorry, one more thing.......to sum it up... I use a 4000ml filter flask, with really clean Pseudo, with fresh precurors gets you the GOOD shit.....the ratios for me......are as follows.....i do no more, or no less than 172 grams of pseudo per cook....doing 2 cooks at a session...yielding about 8 to 9 ounces of meth........so it's 172 grams of pseudo, with 172 grams of Iodine, and 58 grams of Red Phos........to get roughly 110 to 128 grams of meth..........or, 4 to 4.5 ounces of meth when at a 50% yield, would be 3 ounces of meth per batch........ |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-15-99 04:29 AM
DAMN!....i'm sorry, one last thing.....VERY important....I also use a capful (from the gallon jug) of distilled water, for every ounce of 50% yield I expect, like in the above scenario, I dump in 3 capfuls of distilled water.....and the Gas cans are each 2.5 with a total of 2 1/4 gallons of water.........The drier the contents, and the less yield, however if you over saturate the contents of the flask, it'll cook forever and you'll get nothing........ |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-15-99 04:36 AM
my question to you, as the non-chemist that i am, is...What do you think about what I said above of the burning the Pseudo...every single person said that it was absolutely the best I ever had.......do you think that by burning it up...how should i put this.... burning things up, adds extra carbons to the mix.....so by burning up the pseudo, added extra carbons to the molecules, and maybe these extra carbons added an extra bond?... maybe?.....I don't know......but i'm gonna purposely burn some again, and see what happens........what do you think?.. |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-15-99 10:11 PM
??? |
| FMAN Member |
posted 09-16-99 03:07 AM
Try DROPING a battery ina test tube? --------WATER ANOMOUS TIME----------- GOOD WORK REFINE THIS AND MAKE PAMPHLETS INSTRUCTIONS BACJTHEM UP: 
|
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-16-99 09:47 AM
After reading what you call "ramblings" I feel inspired and in awe of your abilities. You have a good command of the language and are able to relate your thoughts. Having burnt a fair share of ephed , and watching just slightly over
hot ephed turn brown for no good reason. is a good place to begin. Never have I seen a flame, from burning ephed , although more than enough smoke is produced, and it always has pretty much the same smell, that is the smell of ephedrine. There is in addition a hint of a harsh, acrid(not acid) odor smilar to acrylene, that comes from buring oil. Racemic ephedrine is what we purchase commercially and is a mixture of D & l ephedrine, the D form producing L-meth which is worthless. The melting point of L-ephedrine hydrochloride is 220 C The MP of d-ephedrine HCl is 187 C Not having the information on boiling points, it is safe to assume that the boiling points are higher and that l-ephed boils at a higher temperature than d ephedrine. I have heard that ephedrine was used as a coolant for drill bits at one time. This would be consistant with the chemical's ability to boil away and not actually flame up or oxidize. A flame would indicate a chemical reaction with oxygen. So as you see ephedrine is rather tough and heat resistant. So that by the time your nose detects a problem, the smoking pan has
lost some crappy fillers, d-ephedrine and This gives me an idea about the latest DEA pill additive (which is very
difficult to remove). Their newest additive is a wicked hard wax, that is soluble in water, methanol, goes into a nonpolar solvent when basified and becomes water soluble when acidified, however in cold temperature it does not became water soluble in acids at a fast enough rate and the majority of it can be filtered out, but enough remains that it still waxes the shit out of the RP and stops a full reaction. I had heard they developed a blocker similar to ephedrine except the
aromatic ring contains an additional side group. This may be what I have
just run into. This drug enforcement trip is way out of control, they have no reason to hinder and imprison the population over meth, it is dumb. |
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-16-99 11:01 AM
Methhead I am confused about the "Second-reaction". Some say it is adding a bit of the P/P juice and heating the mixture, to fully react any remaining ephedrine. I think you mean a "second reaction" is the pull phase or anaerobic-hydrogen phase of the reaction. Please expound on your meaning, when you have the time. I often think about compression and the pulling effect of the hydrogen. Am starting to see this as absorption of the hydrogen by the meth as the iodine is removed. "you knows, I be trying". |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-16-99 02:32 PM
okay, um "First Reaction" means, to pop the contents into the flask, and you get the highly volatile earthquake that you quickly calm down in the flask, by shaking it..... then letting it sprinkle away for awhile til the mix gets liquidy and yellow....then you add "heat" for the the "Second Reaction"... Second Reaction, is when you add the heat, and you get the violent earthquake in the flask, when you blow out the rest of the iodine. It is right after this, that you've created a hydrogen state, and get the pull.. this is when the rest of the Pseudo gets turned into meth, and you get higher yields. |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-16-99 02:37 PM
I agree with you on the DEA thingy.....They shouldn't imprison people over drugs...but this is the constant war we live in....You know what?.....I think I might live very near to you.....it sounds like "my town" that you are talking about.....heheheh..... wouldn't be surprising........Anyways....I haven't tried the "NEW" pills yet, cuz I have a store owner friend who still has thousands of the old Top Form, and Generic Black and White Label kind. So until he runs out of those, I haven't tried the new 60 count bottles yet......but if the wax solidifies in the cold, then maybe Ice Cold Water, like I already use does the trick?, or maybe after doing a Methanol pull, leave the liquid in a regulated freezer, at say around 33 degrees fahrenheit, should lock up the wax, and not the pfed.......... |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-16-99 02:49 PM
oh, by the way, you wouldn't know how to separate acetaminophen from hydrocodone,do you? |
| Gadget Member |
posted 09-16-99 02:56 PM
I love you guys, keep up the good work! Just a humble bee saying "Thanks, its much clearer now" |
| Stonium Member |
posted 09-16-1999 07:51 PM
MH: Here is solubility info on the two substances: Hydrocodone-Soluble in alcohol, dil. acids. Insoluble in water. Acetaminophen-Very slightly soluble in cold water, considerably more soluble in hot water. Soluble in methanol, ethanol, dimethylformamide, ethylene dichloride, acetone, ethyl acetate. Slightly soluble in ether. Practically insoluble in petr. ether, pentane, benzene. Reprinted from the Merck Index V 12.1a, 1996 That there give you any ideas? Heh-heh. Yeah, well, I figured it would!
Toodles, |
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-16-1999 08:03 PM
Guessing from structural similarities of the two molecules to other known molecules. Hydrocodone should become water insoluble near pH 9+ That is only a guess, but it appears for sure that one will precipitate out of a water solution before the other one will. Acetaminophen being much like ephedrine. Hydrocodone being closly related to morphine. |
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-16-1999 08:07 PM
Well Stonium has the thing all wrapped up and ready to go, kewl. |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-16-1999 08:17 PM
Thanx Stonium, and Worlock......... .....Hydrocodone is my drug of choice, but the mass amounts of acetaminophen is destroying my liver.......so I figure that if I can separate the Hydro, then my liver will be much happier.......Thanx again... |
| mrr
pyrex Member |
posted 09-16-1999 11:05 PM
I know much less then either of you but when looking over some new info at Rhodiums site the other day I came across in depth explainations as to the the workings of this reaction, I was half out of it while looking over the info and later that day when it came to miind again, for the life of me I couldn't remember where I had seen or heard these details, then after banging my head against the wall I remebered it was at Rhodium's site, the explainations were something to this effect- At the start of the reaction all is combined and the red and the I2 react to make PI3 which then (i'm drawing a blank, sorry) ...then the HI which is created on the spot reduces some E and in the presence of H20 HI wants to dissacociate into the H and I the I meets up with P again and the H once pulled out of the E starts to move away or float away whatever, now h20 free it recombines with the I from PI3 and jsut keeps cycling. I hope this makes some sense or at least you'll know what to look for on his site, and the pull coming from the atomsphere in the vessels becoming saturated so heavily and the resistance of the water creating pressure it reaches the point where the HI vapors can't stay gasoues anylonger and they dissolve into the liquids in the tanks, this last part about the pull actually my not have come from Rhodiums site, it may have been read in a post here...like i said I was half asleep, if the source was posted wrong i'm sorry, but these details did sound very convincing and do appear to follow the rules of chemistry. Well hope this helps, Ill have to look around when I have more time if this didn't help. Pyrex dozzin offfff |
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-17-1999 07:45 AM
Mrr Pyrex Thanks for the info, get some rest my friend, Ever wake up to find that you have been sitting in front of the computer fast asleep, managing to pull it together long enough to squeeze the mouse, and end up sending a letter FMAN would be proud of. No, never, oh, I see, sheesh |
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-17-1999 07:50 AM
Hydrocodone What an amazing thing, add a little alcohol,and a lot of coke and no telling what will happen. Some amazing stories can be told. So it seems that you just add water, and filter, the solid is the codone, think I'll try it myself. |
| Stonium Member |
posted 09-17-1999 09:20 AM
WWell, hydrocodone is something else, I must say. I had some major dental work recently--ouch, ouch, ouch. Was given prescription for Vicodin 750's for pain relief. Whenever I take them, I am damn near completely immobilized--all I could do was sleep! And the dreams I had-whoa! Strange, very strange indeed. Heh, guess it did help me forget the pain for awhile, though. Still got plenty of them left for a rainy day, too! 
Worlock: I frequently nod off right here in front of this computer. Suppose that means we're internet junkies? Aww, who cares? I'm always a slave to one thing or another, might as well be this computer, eh? Over/Outski, |
| mrr
pyrex Member |
posted 09-17-1999 10:22 AM
yeah, but have you nodded of while posting only to wake up to find that you have just written a post with lets say 20 words and then the next word is hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...get the idea finger decided while you were asleep to repeat itself until all there is is one character over and over and over again, then you wake up enough to clear all those unneeded characters only to find yourself doing it again a couple mins later :-} Pyrex outttttttttttttttttttt |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-17-1999 01:53 PM
I never have, and never will, do Meth..... I love the hell out of Hydrocodone though, I do about 15 pills a day, of the 10mg kind. but the amount of acetaminophen is tearing up my liver, and according to the post WORLOCK, the codone is soluble, the solid is the acetaminophen, unless i'm reading STONIUM'S post wrong...........MAYBE? Help if I'm confused.......... |
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-17-1999 09:08 PM
Stonium is saying
quote:
I was guessing that the codone would be less soluble than acetaminophin but did not realise it was not soluble at all |
| Worlock Member |
posted 09-17-1999 09:11 PM
I eat 2 of those hydrocodones and that is more than enough, they sure are mmm mmm good. the hydroconone in water will not dissolve and will be with the
solids |
| methhead Member |
posted 09-18-1999 02:52 AM
yeah, i see now, hehehe, had a major brain fart......Thanx to both of you again |
| Barracuda1965 Member |
posted 09-18-1999 02:56 AM
Hey, hey, hey! This belongs in the, uh, the uh, the forum marked Other. This is the Crystal Meth forum where we like things nice and neat. But as long as we're on the subject I think the idea is you can't
disolve a Vicodin in a spoon and then shoot it. Is that correct? Well
let's just say so, shall we? What can you do with them besides chew em up
and swallow them after root canal work? Just my goddamn opinion godamnit! Thank you, very much. ------------------ |
| mrr
pyrex Member |
posted 09-19-1999 05:12 AM
Ok I'm back and rested and found what I was trying to explain before, here it is-"http://rhodium.lycaeum.org/chemistry/forensic.txt". Well I think that should do it but if not, it is labeled impurities found from the manufacture of meth....it's right above the P2P title heading. Hope this helps with insight a little. Pyrex out |
| Stonium Member |
posted 09-19-1999 01:00 PM
Heh, yeah, I got that article right here, pyrex. Matter of fact, (not that it means doodlie) I'm the one who sent the article to Rhodium to begin with. Very good article I thought. Still do, too. Stonium |
| mrr
pyrex Member |
posted 09-19-1999 05:19 PM
If I might ask, where did you find such useful text?? Web? book? Pyrex out |
|
All times are CT (US) |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
 
|
|
Contact Us | the Hive
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.39a
© Infopop Corporation
(formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 -
1999.