Is the minimum temp 120C?

[WizardX]

If hypo can reduce iodine to HI and HI can reduce iodoephedrine to meth, it should at least be theoretically possible for hypo to do it too, provided that there is a mechanism for it.

C6H5-CH(-I)-CH(-NHCH3)-CH3 + H3PO2 + H2O ==> C6H5-CH(-H)-CH(-NHCH3)-CH3 + H3PO3 +HI

[BOS]

Should this work with say bromoephedrine or chloroephedrine?

[SHORTY]

Since rp releases hypo at a slow rate then is that why it takes longer than hypo?  What i mean is that as the rp releases hypo it is making HI and phosphorous acid.  The phosphorous acid can then generate more HI. Therefore the concenctration of Hypo is probably not high enough when using rp so the HI has to do most of the reducing and therefore takes longer to complete.

I think i have a similar problem with my homemade hypo because it takes longer to complete than most of the hypo synths I have seen.  I think that by not evaporating under vaccumm, alot of the hypo is oxidizing.  This would explain why it takes 8-12 hours of refluxing to complete the rxn.

 So although its faster than rp, it is slower than lg hypo.

Does this make any sense?

[SHORTY]

Rhodium,
You might want to put a copy of this pdf on your website, It has good, fairly current info about research on rp.

http://ecb.jrc.it/classlab/0900_IND5_red-phosphorous.pdf

[Rhodium]

It now resides at

https://www.thevespiary.org/rhodium/Rhodium/pdf/chemical_behaviour_of_red_phosphorus_in_water.pdf

and is linked from the Inorganic Precursors section.

[placebo]

Geez,

I noticed long ago there was direct correlation between hot cooks and tweaky dope.

I noticed long ago there was direct correlation between unclean meth and tweaky dope.

I don't disagree with anything you said above except that statement. And it's not really that I disagree with it, as it may be true, it's just not the whole truth. I think what you mean is that hot cooks give rise to more side reactions and by-products which when not cleaned properly results in tweaky dope.
But, no matter how you cook it, clean, dirty, hot, cold, fast, slow, birch, I/RP, I/hypo or I/H3PO3. If the end product is isolated and cleaned properly, it will all be as good as eachother although yields will vary.

I, as we all have, have had some major fuck-ups and catastrophes, (only way to learn) and extracted the goods from the most disgusting looking black mess, but upon copious, laborious cleaning processes it always turned out as good as any other batch.

Oh and I too have the thermometer curse The worst was breaking a nice $88 0-400c thermometer 10 mins after unwrapping it.

[wareami]

I'm going to let Geez have the first shot here, as it's his statement with which you disagree....
I've done extensive study and experimentation in an effort to reveal more about cooking conditions and how they relate to the effects of this drug, before and after refinement processes.

Because lets face it, no matter how you cook it, clean, dirty, hot, cold, fast, slow, birch, I/RP, I/hypo or I/H3PO3. If the end product is isolated and cleaned properly, it will all be as good as eachother although yields will vary.

I find that statement false, misleading and misinforming.
I'll let geez speak for himself before I explain why you're incorrect.

[geezmeister]

I agree with Placebo. I am saying in shorthand (remember shorthand?) what he said in a few more words. He is correct. High temperature doesn't make meth tweaky. Meth is meth. There isn't a thing about the meth molecule that makes it tweaky. If its meth, its meth. And pure meth isn't tweaky. You can clean most of the tweak out of street meth with multiple recrystallizations, at the expense of the weight of tweaker substances in the meth. 

The real "tweaky" crank I have had has been associated with hot cooks and less-than-stellar post-reaction workups. I agree the tweak comes from by-products for the most part, and in part from intermediates, and not from the meth itself. Meth is meth. The chemcials that make crank tweaky are not meth, they are something else. Its these other things in the mix that make you go nuts, induce paranoia, make you hear the folks outside the third floor window, and see the DEA surveillance team in the trees. (I remember the night I was certain Santa Anna and the entire Mexican Army was hiding in a field behind my lab, waiting for dawn to attack.)

High reaction temperatures help create the by products that taint meth and make it crank, or make it tweaker dope. They can combine with meth to make a product that keeps you up but gives you tweaker's paranoia and insanity. 

I am less prone to concur with Placebo that less-than-clean feedstock is the source of the problem. I am not saying that it cannot be a contributing factor, but from experience I know that even with very clean feedstock, hot cooks (particularly the dry, hot, and fast cooks) will yield a product full of tweaker characteristics. I've had it happen with feedstock from a very clean pill source, and with feedstock pulled from a two-inactive pill formulated to be pulled pulled with MeOH alone which was recrystallized twice after an alcohol extraction. I've had it happen with feedstock extracted from the same pills by an a/b, which also was recrystallized before reacting it. I recognize that less than pure pseudo may contribute to the byproduct formation in the meth reaction; I merely emphasize that heat, particularly in conjunction with a drier type rection, is a primary contributor to the tweak often found with methamphetamine.

I agree completely with Placebo's comment, "No matter how you cook it, clean, dirty, hot, cold, fast, slow, birch, I/RP, I/hypo or I/H3PO3. If the end product is isolated and cleaned properly, it will all be as good as each other although yields will vary."

I will note some of the by products have virtually the same solubilities as meth, and are difficult for the clandestine cook to isolate and remove. You can clean most of them out by simple recrystallization techniques... and the number of tweakers I have known that prefer their meth straight from the evap dish before recrystallization confirms the fact that you can separate most of tweaky by products from the real meth post reaction. I remain of the opinion that the best route to really clean meth is to avoid making the byproducts in the first place, and the best way to do that in an rP reaction is with a long wet reflux at a reasonable temperature.

Damn. I agree with Placebo again. I must be getting old, or something like that.    And I recently discovered the newest themometer I had at my disposal neatly disposed in two pieces on the floor. How it got there is a mystery to me. Must be the curse acting up again.

[placebo]

Wareami,
I'm waiting, enlighten me.

[CharlieBigpotato]

geez,
i was wantin' to chirp up for ol' placebo on this, but didn't want to piss you off, on account of what a sweetie-pie you are, and generally speaking, how caustic dear placebo is (or has been capable of in the past, bless his heart)

so i offer this imagery to the rap:
in the fucking '60's, of which i am a child-codger, meth was plentiful, cheap, pretty god-damned pure, and sort-of frowned upon, especially in hipper circles that were tripping.

yet, even back then when nobody had to put up with shitty meth, there were all the same tales of the speed freak and his paranoia.
frank zappa did radio public service raps on it.
r.crumb created vivid characters based on it.

perhaps the l&d ratio back then was in favor of the l side; compared to now, and its that side that encourages one to stay awake far too long; not eat or drink or bathe; and generate verbose theories.

geez, you must know that i've been 'around'.
here's a weird one from biz's anecdotal history, with clear gear; beefore he knew any better:

the dumb fuck would sprinkle a line into a joint of leaf, and torch it and smoke it.
what an amazing no-no that was, in terms of various meth-monster side chains and azirides and such.

and yet, to this day, he must admit, that the buzz from that goofy-ass means of ingestion, was absolutely identical to any other means the old fool tried later on, when he got more edu-macated.

god bless the placebo effect

[geezmeister]

As an old Dead Head myself, I assure you that I recall the slogan that "speed kills" although I frankly have forgotten what it meant. The speed I did in the sixites was most often done during finals week. I either did benzedrine by the handfull, Black Mollies (those lovely Biphetamine capsules the long haul truckers loved so much), or some of that nasty methamphetamine a roomie of mine who was a chemistry major made for us at the university lab. I recall giving him the small amount of money it took to buy his supplies and watching him set up the reaction and start it one time. I believe I doing acid at the time and got off on something else before he finished.

it isn't so much how you ingest it that makes it tweaker stuff, its how its made. Tweaker dope will make you tweak whether you smoke it, snort it, eat it or fire it. Placebo's comments are well taken. Tweaker dope is meth that needs to be cleaned carefully because it has other chemicals in it, by products of the reaction for the most part, that give it the weirdness that leads to the paranoia and adverse side effects we call tweaking.

In fact, I never had particularly tweaky dope making it with hypophosphorous acid, although I ran a few batches pretty hot before I learned what a phosphine fire was. I have run H3PO3 reactions as hot as the hotplate or oilbath will go. I have noticed in these only a slight edge to the meth that I do not have with LWR rP/I2 dope. Nothing like tweaker dope, although the inner flask temp has to be pretty high. The tweaky dope I have made, and that that I have obtained from others, was to the best of my current recollection dope made from red phosphorous and I2, both  of questionable purity, cooked hot and with very little water and "finished" in an hour to an hour and a half. The methods all employed a vigorous, smoky, exothermic start to the reaction that filled the flask or coffeepot with thick, yellowish smoke.

Very little of the tweaker dope I have done was at all clean, and what was was very strong stuff indeed. I know the strongest real "tweaker dope" of this kind was cleaned repeatedly with acetone but never recrystallized. When I was doing push-pull type reactions, or low water reactions,  I recrystallized without fail; there were noticable decreases in the tweaky characteristics of the dope, with a noted decrease in yield on recrystallization.
The uneventful-start-fairly-low-temp-long-wet-rP/I2-reflux- for-36- to-48-hours gives dope out of the evap dish that is not tweaky at all, even though it is very strong. With that dope there is minimal loss of weight in the recrystallization step, and the improvement in quality is very limited.

I may be in error in my overall recollection, but I think it  entirely possible that the tweaky meth I am familiar with may be red p/I2 dope cooked with little water, and the norm for such cooks in my area would include high heat. I can tell dope that has been cooked hot by the tweaker characteristics and feeling of it; it may well be that the by products I do not like and the tweakers prefer may actually be the result of the fast hot smoky start making by?-products and the hot dry cook making others. I have no doubt that heat is involved in making rP/I2 reactions yield tweaker dope; in retrospect a good part of that may come from the smoky, hot, exothermic start.

I don't recall in my limited experiences with birch dope ever having any partiucularly tweaky birch dope, although some of it has been pretty nasty stuff.

[wareami]

Okay, I'll agree with Geez here in regards to when the end product being produced is 100% meth
Then the drug won't have the side-impurities that produce the effects were talking about when discussing "Tweakermeth/SpaceDope".
 
But from what I gather, placebo is talking about any end-result from any rxn, under any condition, that is suppose to reduce pfed to meth,
and as the last recourse this end product can be supposedly cleaned post-rxn and refined to exclude all impurities associated with Tweakermeth .

Because lets face it, no matter how you cook it, clean, dirty, hot, cold, fast, slow, birch, I/RP, I/hypo or I/H3PO3. If the end product is isolated and cleaned properly, it will all be as good as eachother although yields will vary.

I believe that statement is incorrect primarily because the intermediates that get introduced via the reduction in hot/fast start/fast finish/ HI/RP cannot simply be cleaned away once those impurities are created along side and bonded to the meth via rxn. Be it extraction through steam distillation, a/b,  or further refined by recrystallization.
Some impurities, I like to refer to as intermediates because they form in a neccesary stage whether we like them to or not, are not easily removed by post-rxn cleaning, IMHO.
When looking at the individual processes that go into all that's involved, it's clear to see there are conditions that effect yield and purity.
If it's as Placebo suggests, one should be able to take any method on this board, throw in dirty pills, halfassed cleaned precursors, run the rxn, then proceed to do final  cleaning via steam distill followed by several re-xtallings, and walk away a happy camper never to hide from the bushes again.
I fail to see the logic...
Maybe it's just me!
Maybe I took that statement too literally?
If so placebo, please correct me.
I just don't see the good in handing down that kind of info when there are clearly several better, more effective ways to address the removal of most bad impurities in-situ.
We are a few steps closer to understanding the mechanisms that produce those unpleasant side-effects and then I see a statement like that which clearly undermines the findings and confirmations disscussed on this board.
I'd like to continue moving ahead and advancing in learning more about what makes meth tick, the psychoactive effects produced, and refining the product further. In that process Ibee has duplicated several unpleasant conditions that confirm what everyone suspected about hot HI/RP rxns.

By no means are my findings a definative, but they are as close to an understanding of the 'what's, how's, and why's, as I can manage. These based on individual findings through research fueled by the determinaton to achieve purity since success was only a taste considering the bigger picture here.
Placebo, You do know that my reply wasn't meant to offend, but rather to reach a collective understanding of the processes and conditions bees are beeing handed down as new information becomes available through exploration of new avenues and refinement techniques.

[Dragontail]

Geez
Swim has used alot of Birch dope and every time it always had extreem tweaky side effects. This dope comes from the north-western part of the US and is made from pills bought localy in that area that only have two inactive ingredeints and pull easily with alcohol. Swim has thought that mabie it was due to exessive lithium or that mabie the Anny never fully evaped before adding NP. Swim always beleived that the NP used was ether because after three of four puffs, swim felt real "spaced out" as well as high. Also upon IV use, intense hallucinations would fallow for about ten to fifteen seconds! Swim can remember doing a shot and looking out the window and watching trees wave back and fourth like a belly dancer! Was that the ether or effects of impurities?
Weather smoking or shooting this dope, Swim always ended up having to deal with transparent hellicopters, shadow people and cops in the trees with binoculars. Needles to say that Swim no longer chooses to use this dope, nor does he need to because of all he's learned on the Hive!

[SHORTY]

In my opinion this just happens to bee on of those rare occasions where for the most part everyone is right.  I have dealt with "tweaker meth" which i beleive was due to getting the rxn too hot and at least for me it was very difficult and usually impossible to rid it of all the side effects like jaw clenching or even worse the one that makes you do things with your mouth and tongue that cause you to make some weird ass faces without know it.  Even after several recrystalizations it would still be there.  I beleive that many of the impurities or intermediates which cause this are very similar to meth as far as solubility and other properties are concerned.

But as Wareami pointed out, for the best results the pseudo should bee as clean as possible in order to avoid these problems as well as avoiding excessively high rxn temps.

It took a long time for me to understand why my meth was never the same from batch to batch although the answer is simple enough.  It seems to me that the best way to avoid the impurities and intermediates is clean pills and longer cook times both are keys to the best meth possible.  Falling short on either of these will have the most effect on the quality of the results.

[placebo]

At no point did I condone or promote laziness and dirty reactions/meth, in fact the opposite. You are reading shit that aint there.

I simply made the observation that regardless of method, dirty meth can be made one way or another, but upon thorough cleaning it should all be good. Obviously if you take the steps to have the cleanest product possible after the reaction, you'll have less work to do in the cleaning, and hopefully a higher yield to boot.

My point is that you dont belittle others methods, as all can produce good meth. Some methods may suit others better in their particular circumstance. You can't make everybody cook your way, it aint practical for some.

I only posted to correct/reword geezmeister's post, which was not a mistake, merely misworded or abbreviated. I know, he knows his shit, I just thought I'd throw a little something in for the newbees to understand better. But you seem to have misunderstood me.

[katsogiannos]

Why not just use ephedrine hcl? Not that pseudoeph crap that is in sudafed. Do you still get a lot of impurities/tweaky side effects if you use ephedrine hcl?

[spectralshift]

This is what isn't making sense to me, I've read from Shorty and others that hot reactions can produce "tweaky" meth, but meth is the final product of the reduction?

A hot and quick reaction, or a hot and dilute reaction would make sense, but to say the same for a warm and quick, or a warm and dilute reaction would make more sense--that would produce more partially reduced rubbish and by-product.

Heat is actually a positive factor if the other factors are right isn't it?

[Rhodium]

Why not just use ephedrine hcl? Not that pseudoeph crap that is in sudafed.

It is a lot less readily available to people, as only pseudoephedrine is found in OTC medications nowadays.
 
Do you still get a lot of impurities/tweaky side effects if you use ephedrine hcl?

Maybe not to the same extent, but the problem is still there with sloppy technique.

[biotechdude]

Well done lads; a great little read over a spicy thai dinner..

Now it is clear that a 100% pure meth molecule from one synth will be the same as a 100% pure meth molecule from another synth.  This is regardless of whether a hot cook, long cook, etc etc.

HOWEVER, it is worth noting that regardless of method or post reaction cleaning; it is very near impossible that ANYONE will produce a 100% clean meth molecule.

So for the sake of the 'tweaker dope' arguement, we will say that ALL meth that anyone here has produced has impurities present.  Now the discussion boils down to the fact that different methods and factors produce different ammounts of the 'substance(s)' that cause tweaker characteristics.  Now this 'substance' seems to be produced in higher ammounts in
- higher temps (rxn/production rate of 'substance' production increases with temp)
- shorter or 'harder' rxn times (substance produced quickly but then can 'die' off (eg with LWR))
- dirty precursers (tweaker substance can be produced from all production methods.  Therefore 'substance' must be produced from impurtity common to many different precursers eg RP, Li, pseudo)

The 'substance' that produces tweaker behavior must have very very similar properties to meth; in that it is very hard to remove once 'produced' via one of the aforementioned factors.  Additionally, it must be produced in very very low levels (to avoid detection on HPLC) or that close structurally to meth or another impurity to avoid disciminative detection. 

In summary, swix believes that 'tweaker' effects are produced a chemical molecule produced when the factors are best for its production eg. hot, fast and hard, unclean precursers.  This tweaker molecule has near identical properties to meth and hence make its removal very difficult.  Perhaps this tweaker molecule is a structural derivative of meth or a molecule derived from an impurity present across many meth-production techniques.  This molecule could perhaps one day become a new 'drug'; because it is apparent its effects are extremely psycho-active, even in extrememly low levels.

Imagine -
To produce '1g of TWEAKER'
Ingredients - dirty ass pseudo, RP I. 
Reflux for 1min at 250`C

[Osmium]

> Now it is clear that a 100% pure meth molecule from one
> synth will be the same as a 100% pure meth molecule from
> another synth.  This is regardless of whether a hot cook,
> long cook, etc etc.

Wow, what a revelation!
I thought that was clear for at least 150 years?