Author Topic: Hot ' dry comments?  (Read 2583 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

place

  • Guest
Hot ' dry comments?
« on: May 04, 2004, 10:40:00 AM »
I have a littel question, I dreamt that I did a littel 2g ephedrine rxn (and 3g I2, 2g rP and 1mL H2O) in a 100mL flask with only a ballon on top. The cook took 1hour and was heated up to 180c. After a keypunk cleanup, 1,1g white powder was collected. (not reX.)
I dreamt about another rxn, using 7g ephedrine (and 7g I2, 2,33g rP and 3,5mL H2O), refluxed with a allin condenser in a 500mL for 4 hours, heated up to 160-170c: in other words, not so ghetto equipment. After a keyplunk and reX, 2,75g white crystals was collected (srew up when cleaning, the yield would problerly had been about 3,5 if now burning som meth during the clean up).

Why doesn't my dreams using condenser and better equipment give better yield, than smaller shorter rxn only using a ballon?

I know I should dream about LWR, but currently I have not the peace and time to dream so long dreams.

rgs, place


Stonium

  • Guest
Just do it...right
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2004, 12:04:00 PM »
Not getting where you want to be with these short reaction times is about the same as wasting that time anyway...isn't it?

It's simple, really. If you want excellent results, take the time to do the reaction right in the first place.


place

  • Guest
I know
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2004, 12:33:00 PM »
Well, I know..

But I having troubles getting peace for 48 hours.

Also, many big meth-bee's like Placebo, Worlock etc. started out doing short dry ones, right?

rgs,


Rhodium

  • Guest
Don't repeat the mistakes of others
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2004, 12:36:00 PM »
Also, many big meth-bee's like Placebo, Worlock etc. started out doing short dry ones, right?

And now they know better. Learn from their aquired wisdom.


place

  • Guest
Well, "seeing is beliveing", and I...
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2004, 01:15:00 PM »
Well, "seeing is beliveing", and I do not yet belive you  ;)  

Isn't it posseble to change some of the hot'dry ones on, with LWR, Rhodium?

rgs


Rhodium

  • Guest
Read and learn
« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2004, 01:26:00 PM »
You say you are getting a certain amount of "white crystals" after the hot/dry reaction, but the appearance of many impurities (including the toxic aziridines) is identical, forming colorless crystalline HCl salts. You cannot judge purity by looks alone.

Isn't it posseble to change some of the hot'dry ones on, with LWR, Rhodium?

That sentence doesn't make any sense to me...


jackhole

  • Guest
A complete RXN incrimentally
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2004, 02:06:00 PM »
But I having troubles getting peace for 48 hours.

Then do the reaction incrimentally.  Sure, it'll take longer, but you'll get the combination of highest-quality dope and yields.


place

  • Guest
You say you are getting a certain amount of
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2004, 02:41:00 PM »
You say you are getting a certain amount of "white crystals" after the hot/dry reaction, but the appearance of many impurities (including the toxic aziridines) is identical, forming colorless crystalline HCl salts. You cannot judge purity by looks alone.

Also if reX.?

I meant that insted of having the short rP/I synth. on Rhodium.ws, a LWR synth. would be better, but okay, it's might to simpel.


SHORTY

  • Guest
The reason your getting higher yeilds
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2004, 02:51:00 PM »
In your short, hot and dry rxns is because you are not reducing anything and you are just getting back what you started with along with intermediates and most likely no meth.

What do you mean you cannot get peace for long enough.  The lwr could easily be performed in a closet if absolutely necessary.  Where do you hide all your equipment for the 23 hours a day that your not using it?
I think it is more a issue of patience than peace.  I used to bee the same way and i wish i would have tried the lwr sooner.  It would have saved me a hell of alot of money, frustration, effort and time.  Yes, it will save time in the long run.


geezmeister

  • Guest
More water, longer times...
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2004, 04:51:00 PM »
Stoni nailed the problem right out of the box. If you are going to do this reaction, take the time to do it right. I don't care if you want to make tweaker dope by cooking too hot too fast and too dry.  But at least use ratios which match the method you select. That includes the right ratios for the type of cook you want to do.

If you studied Jacked, Worlock, or Placebo's posts on the method you would have caught the point on how much water to use. You will have more luck doing a dry cook if you use ratios for a dry cook instead of ratios for a long wet cook. Wareami's reflux ratios are too wet to use with the short cooks. You won't get meth in with that amount of water present in an hour or even in four. That is the point Stoni made. Learn the method before you sacrifice even more innocent precursors to a learning curve that is apparently steeper than it needs to be. 

I used to refuse to do a long reflux because I made good stuff in six hours and I saw no sense in exposing myself to detection for a day or longer. It took doing only one long wet reflux to become a die hard advcocate of the method. I also discovered meth that is as good as it gets.

IMHO you should add more water than you use, cook cooler than you do, and cook longer than you want to. But my opinion comes from having done the long wet reflux the chemists here always recommended. They know what they are doing. And how to do it the right way.


place

  • Guest
No choice
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2004, 05:08:00 PM »
@geezmeister: Did't I dream about the right rations with E/I2/rP? 3/3/1? I remember that I had many worries about how much water I should use. I was just recomendered to use 0,5mL/1g E in the hot'dry ones, I can't find anywhere where Placebo talks about how much water he used? Is it posseble for you to give a suggestion on how much water the rxn should have had, or can you only find out of it if you can see the rxn? Anyway, thanks for the advices.  :)

But yes, I problery have no other choice, but begin to try to dream about LWR. At least if I wants to exist at The Hive  ;D  

I actually have a little fun, dreaming about doing this :) I don't dream about it the cash, I ain't in a hurry. I have time to dream about those beginners dreams. Maybe next time I try a LWR.

The only thing i'm really worried about, if its safe to ingest?

You say you are getting a certain amount of "white crystals" after the hot/dry reaction, but the appearance of many impurities (including the toxic aziridines) is identical, forming colorless crystalline HCl salts. You cannot judge purity by looks alone.

Does that also count if I do a reX.? Rather no meth, than poison meth.

kris_1108

  • Guest
s ShortWetReflux
« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2004, 05:10:00 PM »
If one was in places' situation where he sais he cannot not go uninterrupted for 24/48hrs, I believe that it would be possible to finish the reaction quicker, by using LWR ratios but with, say, 1/3rd of the amount of pseudoephedrine, and still get a good product.

As discussed here

Post 497262

(Rhodium: "Law of Mass Action", Stimulants)


Lets say in a LWR, the ratios are - 1E : 1.2I : 0.6:RP : 0.8h20
So to speed it up, use the same, except 0.3gms E.
Which translates to about 1E : 3.6I : 1.8RP : 2.4h20

That is a full on waste of precursors, I know. I would like to think that most of that RP could bee recovered.

This is, however, fairly unrealistic. In a 10gm reaction, one would have to use 36gms I2 and 18gms RP. Which, in my opinion, is excesive.