Review Mutation X v4 versus CLT v3

[scrumpox]

These are both reasonably priced originals, both purchased from Grey Haze, and both are aimed at those who like a flavourful and, more importantly, a cloudy vape. The outright flavour chaser will not be interested, please look away now if you have a disposition for mouth to lung vaping.

I'm going to put identical builds into these, 0.4mm twisted kanthal with Fiber Freaks type 2 wicks and juice up with the same eliquid. It'll be a day or two before I can feed back on performance. For now I can tell you about the first impressions.

PRESENTATION
Yeah, like it matters! Well, it does create those very first impressions. Both arrive nicely presented in their respective boxes, both come with tools, spares and a few options. Both have chuff caps and 510 DT adaptors - the CLT has several DT options, for the MX you'll need your own 510 DT.

BUILD QUALITY
The CLT arrived the cleaner of the two. The MX had swarf in two of the 4 post holes and black coating overspray on the inside of the body section. I scraped it all out with a scalpel which shows that the coating on the outer will also come off with scrapes over time.

The decks on these are different. The CLT has 3 massive, squared posts with huge holes and very chunky crosshead screws and a very deep juice well. The MX has a split positive post, the post holes are a decent 2mm each but much smaller thatn the CLT's and the screws are not high quality, threads are shallow - you'll be needing those spares for sure. Much of the MX's deck is taken up by the bottom fed air ducts, it's a respectable 5mm but over far less area than the CLT's.

For those who prefer stainless atties, this won't bother them much, so for those with a taste for the dark side the CLT's plated finish is superior to the MX's coating.

The CLT is the clear winner here - infinitely better you might say. The CLT is built to last.

BUILDING

Both decks will be easy enough to build on. The CLT has fewer constraints regarding coil position and post hole size for the fancier coils. Positioning the coils over the air holes is going to be interesting on the MX, though you could of course simply block off the bottom air feed to make it side fed only. The split pos post offers a slightly easier build.

Building comes next and then the performance review. Best get the windows open ...

 

[Mr.Motivapr]

These are both reasonably priced originals, both purchased from Grey Haze, and both are aimed at those who like a flavourful and, more importantly, a cloudy vape. The outright flavour chaser will not be interested, please look away now if you have a disposition for mouth to lung vaping.

I'm going to put identical builds into these, 0.4mm twisted kanthal with Fiber Freaks type 2 wicks and juice up with the same eliquid. It'll be a day or two before I can feed back on performance. For now I can tell you about the first impressions.

PRESENTATION
Yeah, like it matters! Well, it does create those very first impressions. Both arrive nicely presented in their respective boxes, both come with tools, spares and a few options. Both have chuff caps and 510 DT adaptors - the CLT has several DT options, for the MX you'll need your own 510 DT.

BUILD QUALITY
The CLT arrived the cleaner of the two. The MX had swarf in two of the 4 post holes and black coating overspray on the inside of the body section. I scraped it all out with a scalpel which shows that the coating on the outer will also come off with scrapes over time.

The decks on these are different. The CLT has 3 massive, squared posts with huge holes and very chunky crosshead screws and a very deep juice well. The MX has a split positive post, the post holes are a decent 2mm each but much smaller thatn the CLT's and the screws are not high quality, threads are shallow - you'll be needing those spares for sure. Much of the MX's deck is taken up by the bottom fed air ducts, it's a respectable 5mm but over far less area than the CLT's.

For those who prefer stainless atties, this won't bother them much, so for those with a taste for the dark side the CLT's plated finish is superior to the MX's coating.

The CLT is the clear winner here - infinitely better you might say. The CLT is built to last.

BUILDING

Both decks will be easy enough to build on. The CLT has fewer constraints regarding coil position and post hole size for the fancier coils. Positioning the coils over the air holes is going to be interesting on the MX, though you could of course simply block off the bottom air feed to make it side fed only. The split pos post offers a slightly easier build.

Building comes next and then the performance review. Best get the windows open ...

Nice write up mate.

I have to stop reading your reviews, im developing a fetish for black RDAs,

I dont have one yet but I want one!

I rated the CLT V2+ very highly, so will check out the V3 soon enough

 

[Mr.Motivapr]

Will be waiting for part 2

 

[scrumpox]

Nice write up mate.

I have to stop reading your reviews, im developing a fetish for black RDAs,

I dont have one yet but I want one!

I rated the CLT V2+ very highly, so will check out the V3 soon enough

Yes, I bought the CLT v2 mostly on the back of your comments. It's a brilliant atty and I still rate it better than the v3 on flavour alone, especially single coiled with the opposite airhole sealed up with gaffer tape.
Black is the new black. So black even the shiny bits are black.

 

[Mr.Motivapr]

Yes, I bought the CLT v2 mostly on the back of your comments. It's a brilliant atty and I still rate it better than the v3 on flavour alone, especially single coiled with the opposite airhole sealed up with gaffer tape.
Black is the new black. So black even the shiny bits are black.

Have a feeling my next atty will be black.

Hope I dont get the Scrumpox bug as I dont have funds to replace all my atties with a black equivalent

 

[scrumpox]

Have a feeling my next atty will be black.

Hope I dont get the Scrumpox bug as I dont have funds to replace all my atties with a black equivalent

Nah, you stick to shiny stainless ones, mate. It's hard enough getting hold of black ones as it is.

 

[scrumpox]

MX4 coiled and wicked ... 2 x 3.0mm coils, 8 wraps of 0.4mm twisted kanthal which settled down to 0.4ohms. Wicked with Fiber Freaks density 2.
Easy to build and plenty of space in the post holes, screws feel cheap though and like they'll slacken off. Coils positioned directly over the airholes.

 

[scrumpox]

Been vaping these 2 all afternoon and evening, part 2 didn't take as long as I thought it would.

BUILDING (continued)

With identical coils and wicks both atties were easy to build on, a slight edge to the MX4 for the split centre post. A lot more wicking material went into the CLT as the coils are set higher and the deck has the much greater area. Unlike the MX, the screws in the CLT feel robust.

DRIPPING

The CLT is the winner here because of the bottom airflow on the MX. You have to be careful dripping into the MX but you can be careless with the CLT … the CLT also holds significantly more juice so you’ll drip less often. The MX leaks – yes of course you can block off the bottom airflow but that’s a bad compromise because you lose flavour.
On both atties, the o-rings hold the cap at the optimum grip to allow easy removal yet still prevent leaks. Three thin o-rings on the MX, two thicker o-rings on the CLT. I’d fancy the CLT’s for longevity.

AIRFLOW

Now this is the most interesting aspect for me. Both atties have great adjustability, both have massive potential airflow, as much as your lungs can physically cope with.
The MX’s airflow is like having both Troll and Freakshow in a single atty. An inner blade controls the side airflow and the outer cap controls the bottom airflow. Yet you cannot get it tight, it’s a restrictive lung hit even when almost closed off. Personally I found the best setting to be closing off the side airflow altogether and using the bottom wide open. The MX is then a Freakshow, though I’d give the MX the edge on flavour. Not by too much though.
I’m still perplexed as to why the three bottom air holes are of different diameters. Does the smaller one produce more velocity and create swirl? Seems a bit fanciful to me.
The CLT’s airflow is all side fed, but it’s clever! You can adjust the airflow down to a very tight setting, you can adjust the width of the airflow and, this is the magic, you can also adjust the height. The air vents are slits and the AFC on the inner has very clever cut outs which allow a huge variety of settings, so it is possible to direct all the air at the lower part of the coil, if not under it – assuming that you’ve spotted this and set your coil height correctly.
The final part of your preferred airflow settings will be your choice of chuff cap/drip tip. The CLT’s chuff cap is huge yet comfortable and enables slipstreaming. I hated the conical cap on the MX, it’ll be personal preference but I couldn’t stand my lips resting on the cap and fitted the 510 adapter and my own wide bore drip tip within the hour.
Wide open there’s nothing between them, they both get top marks for adjustability, albeit for different reasons, which means any user should be able to find the setting that suits them best.

FLAVOUR

These are cloud chasers’ atties, let’s not forget that. But no vaper wants the flavour vacuum that is the KingTu Yep – laughably labelled the MX4 by the cloners! Both of these atties deliver plenty of flavour, surprisingly so when you consider the volume of vapour produced but not when you consider the thought that has gone into the airflow designs. Vapour density is the key and it can be unleashed from either with a good build, airflow setting and power delivery. I score them pretty much even on flavour.

OVERALL

All things considered, if it had to be one or the other, for me the CLT v3 is the better atty and the better buy for the following reasons:-

• superior build quality
• much less prone to leaking
• usability when dripping (drip less often and worry less about where you’re dripping)
• at my preferred settings the CLT produces more vapour and flavour

If the MX designers, Project Subohm, had copied the CLT’s side airflow instead of evolving the MX’s distinctive holes and blade, it might have been a different story.

So where does the MX4 win? Well, I think it’s a better looking atty for starters! It’s shorter and slightly lighter, this might matter to you. It’s an outstanding vape for the money and it is (at the minute) a few quid cheaper than the CLT.
If you love RDAs as much as I do, there’s absolutely no problem in owning both! Does anyone want to buy a Yep? No? Didn’t think so …