Flavour concentrates will still be available as they are used in everything, though Vape Train as a name may not be allowed in Australia with the coming TGA legislation change.
May be a rebrand if they supply other industries, but it may be a vape only company.
hence the mango recipe that we shared and you kindly put up.
Nom nomz still has the cordial, my 2 of my favorite limes canât be aquired from bcf or flavor jungle anymore and nomz has both.
Iâm guessing a dark rum?
But am open to your suggestions. I think Iâd prefer a stronger and smokier type rum if that makes sense.
@McDuckie it is with a sad heart that I thank you for the heads up. Sugarloaf was one of my main gotoâs but now Iâll have to start the search.
Mango Jam (FLAVRZ) 5% / 8% (5-4-23) â Oh YES, it IS Jammy !!! This is the LAST FLAVOR from the first 40 flavor series and I appreciate you guys hanging in there, for the ride. This one was similar to the previously tested FLAVRZ Mango, BUT, it felt like it had a lot more sticky yellow body to it. At 5% it was good, but (you know the drill), it needed a boost, and 8% did it. This flavor exchanged some of the fresh mango nuances for some sticky, and jammy ones. At 8% it was very full, and still had some fresh/juicy aspects to it, but the thick and jammy-ness was front and center without being too much. It was a little sweeter than the Mango, but only at about mid-level sweet. The sticky/jammy could not be overstated, as it rode through from beginning to end. No off-notes, and no âgreenâ-ness, just a juicy, sticky, yellow mango with great jammy notes was what it delivered. At the higher weight, it tasted less relaxed, and more forward than the Mango, and that worked out nicely for my tastes, so rating it a bit higher @ 9.3/10.. Having paired both this and the Mango in Darrenâs Mango recipe, I can attest to how WELL they pair together.
Nomz still has Sugarloaf.
Yes but diyejuice does larger bottles. They actually have more of the flavors that I want. Like Caramel Mocha, Sugar Cane, Dark Chocolate and Mmm 
Yoghurt Base. As well as that awesome Miami Vise One-Shot.
I didnât even think to look there. Their shipping costs are quite high.
If you get a list of what flavors are going to be discontinued please start a thread with itâŚThank You for the heads up
Mango Jam definitely caught my attention and Iâm looking forward to trying it even more now.
Thanks for these reviews.
Iâm thinking that Australians are about to lose a lot of possible vendors and the opportunity to import so Iâm thinking Flavrz could become very popular given Jetz reply to a previous question.
Any flavour can be replicate. Just need some of the original to analyze 
Missed that one.
There always is 
I did notice Marshmallow Custard in a few recipes which I looked at last night, for some reason that peaked my interest.
If Iâm judging by what I vaped they seem different, but I havenât eaten one from anywhere else. Thereâs only a few that Iâve tried which were ok, it didnât seem to take much for me to pick up green.
I made notes on preconceived percentages I was going to mix the Flavrz concentrates at but once I received them I used the old nasal passages to reassess.
Working somewhat off Sessiondrummers notes, Flavrz website and the premise that I think I generally like to mix a bit stronger than Sessiondrummer I have adjusted some. Basically Iâve hovered between 10-12% for all of them apart from Musk Candy as that does have a strong aroma. As mentioned previously itâs not for me but my son who loves TFA Musk @5% so I will initially try that one @6%.
Some smell absolutely Devine with Farmhouse Custard and Rum & Raisin being the standouts. Iâm hoping to find time to mix this weekend but I have a few things that I must do so itâs possible I wonât get a chance until next weekend.
Let me know how they go at the higher percentages @Gazza7 as I am like you when it comes to needing higher strength as a rule. Might be a little while 'til I get to test mine.
No worries, will do.
If you look at our recipes on elr we run them at around 30% total volume
Though this is mainly for commercial style and to take into account pods
May of our clients use them at 15% total for the recipe
So for instance if you made a mango recipe
Mango -3%
Mango Jam 6%
Then it is 9% total. Plus say .5% ss
Then we suggest you make it 15% total
Elr will allow you to mix a normal recipe % then adapt the % It will do it for you once itâs saves
@TorturedZen would know more functions on this
But you will end up at
Mango - 4.8% or something
Mango Jam - 10.2 % or something
Hope that helps
Part II:
In case you havenât been following the first series, @Jetz was kind enough to send a MASSIVE shipment out of their FLAVRZ flavors, One-Shots, and Flavor Shots for the purposes of this review. He sent SOO many I had to break them down into Series. This is (duh), the Second Series, with MORE to follow.
As always, the flavors are/were tested at the listed percentages, in a 70v/30p/3mg carrier base. All tested on my very trusted SteamCrave RDTA v.1 running dual vertical Kanthal 24ga. coils, which were dry burned in between every test, with fresh KGD cotton. They were all tested at 65 watts.
On the FIRST series, I started testing at 5% for the most part, and stepped many up to 8% and by a wide margin, they all seemed to fit better there. Unless specifically stated in each review to the contrary, I ran this second series at 8%.
In case you missed it up top, jump to series I here.
Marshmallow (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-6-23) â Starting off with this, the FIRST flavor in the second series from FLAVRZ, with a BANG !!! I had to make REALLY sure before I made any âofficialâ statements, and ran through THREE testers just to make sure. I think this may be the NEW, Best Marshmallow I have ever tried. Any of you who know my Sâmores obsession, know that I know the mallows. I regularly use FA, and TPAâs for different purposes, but this one, hehe, is damned good. As mentioned, I shifted my testing weights (unless otherwise specified), at 8%, and this one was BANG ON at that weight. My first impression was, âWow, this is an ACCURATE marshmallowâ, and three testers later, that hasnât changed. Most others are good, and have their proâs and conâs, and I use each MFGâs for different purposes. I literally tasted JUST like I had stuffed a real marshmallow into the SteamCrave. Mouthfeel was def. above average, and although I canât speak to any âsofteningâ, or âtemperingâ in mixes yet, soloâd, this was now the Marshmallow to get. Accurate, accurate, and MORE accurate was all you need to know about this one. Nice smell, taste, mouthfeel, it just had it all. Some flavors can start to mute, or sour after a few tankfuls, but this one finished JUST like it started. A beautifully fluffy, accurate, spot on marshmallow. Despite looking VERY hard for any nit-picks I could not find even a HINT of one with this flavor. Sweetness was a few ticks above mid-level, and there were no off-notes to be had. 8% solo, suited this flavor just fine, and I canât WAIT to get it into a Sâmores. Not burnt, browned, campfired in anyway, just a super authentic tasting marshmallow. With only slight hints of vanilla, it stayed completely true to a neutral marshmallow. If you love Sâmores, Marshmallows, or are in need, just ADD it to the cart now. 10/10 without hesitation.
Marshmallow Custard (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-7-23) â This one proved to be an INTERESTING flavor to say the least. Having NOT tested FLAVRZâs Vanilla Custard yet, BUT having tested the Marshmallow, I felt I did get some of the MM Iâd previously tested in there. It was tempered, or rather, blanketed in a somewhat creamy Custard, which did taste like a Vanilla Custard. It was not very eggy, and seemed to be more of a Custard/Pudding pairing. Exactly nailing it down was tricky due to the MM pairing. At 8% it was solid, and didnât feel the need for more, and there were no off-notes but for a slight astringent finish. Iâll know more when I solo the VC as to whether or not that was the culprit or not. Just below mid-level sweet, and fairly rich. Rich enough to make you wonder how FLAVRZ did it, sans all of the DAAP. Rich, somewhat creamy, and mallowed up, really sums this one up. 3 testers later, I still couldnât tell if the VC had a slight eggy-ness or not, and if so, it was covered up by the delicious mallow form the Marshmallow. The pairing of the two, was really interesting, and seemed to play off of the two main elementâs strengths, without conflicting. All in, this was an interesting, and unique pairing of a pudding-like Vanilla Custard, with possibly just a smidge of eggy-ness, melded into a realistic marshmallow. Minor take-offs for the slight astringent finish, but that, was about all there was to nit-pick on this one. Tastily done, and leaving it hgih @ 9.0/10.
Marshmallow Natural (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-7-23) â Having had GREAT results with the previously tested Marshmallow, was indeed wondering how different the ânaturalâ would be in comparison. My immediate reaction was not natural, but more of a smaller, dusted, candied Marshmallow. It even had the almost wintergreen-ish powdered finish note. Sweetness was just above mid-level, and it felt pretty good at 8%. While the previously tested Marshmallow tasted exactly like a fresh marshmallow, this one continued to taste like a smaller dusted marshmallow, almost like you would get in some breakfast cereals. No overt malty notes, and because of the âcandiedâ and âpowderedâ-ness, it tasted less like a real,fresh marshmallow. It was def. different than the MM, and that would allow for different uses between the two of them. My preference would easily be the Marshmallow. This one did have a distinct, very slight metallic undertone that I couldnât shake, and while not off-putting, was still there. All in, it was fairly accurate for a smaller powdered marshmallow, but not sure if ânaturalâ was the selling point. It felt good at 8.0/10.
Menthol (FLAVRZ) 1% (5-7-23) â As a general rule, I do NOT use cooling agents of ANY kind. Even small amounts of cooling can completely ruin a juice for me. SO, with THAT said, Menthol. I tested this SUPER low due to my complete dislike, and distrust for cooling agents. This didnât let me down, as I hated it, just as much as any OTHER. Granted Menthol may not be as extreme as some of the others, and it did impart a taste. That taste was Vicks VapoRub. There was minor cooling at 1%, and, well, it tasted menthol-y. Despite really not liking menthol, I did complete the test, but JUST for you guys. Having little to no other menthols tested to compare, letâs just say, it tastes like Menthol, and it seemed to have more taste than cooling at this weight. It tasted like it was named, so for that, Iâll leave it fairly high @ 9.5/10.
Mixed Berry (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-7-23) â Right out of the gate, I liked this medley. It was non-descript in so much that I couldnât clearly identify any specific berries, and that is a testament to itâs ratios OF the different berries. It actually kind of reminded me of RFSCâs Yumberry. At 8% it was full but also slightly relaxed. Sweetness was about mid level, and there was some nice tarty-ness on the finish that helped it pop. There were no off-notes, and the more I tested this one, the more it seemed I might be getting a delicious Red Currant in this one. At times it felt like something was holding this one back from popping a little more, hence my aforementioned âslightly relaxedâ. It felt like it was about 80-85% of the way there. No overt darker berries, but a great Red Currant with some others flirting around it in the mix. It was a little below mid-level sweet, and there was nothing out of place, and about the only take-off would be the slight recessive-ness. Rating on flavor only I would have rated it higher, but with the slight relaxed nature, it still felt really good @ 8.75/10.
Mixed Berry Natural (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-9-23) â Testing this one directly after the Mixed Berry, I could better compare/contrast the two of them. This one presented almost exactly at the Mixed Berry regular, BUT, it was better, and more intense, and that was a good thing. I got the same nondescript berry medley that seemed centered around a red currant and some other mid dark berries. I wasnât sure exactly what changes were made in this, the ânaturalâ version, but it worked. About mid level sweet as the regular, and no off-notes, and it was damned good at 8%. Noticeably more present than the regular version, and with about the same tarty finish as the regular. All in, a mirror image of the regular Mixed Berry, but better, and with increased saturation Easily a 1 point increase, and leaving it at 9.75/10.
Mulberry (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-10-23) â I think Darren had mentioned this one, and he was waiting to hear what I thought about it, and NOW I see why. It was great. It tasted like a lot MORE than âjust a mulberryâ. It had the common similarities to a raspberry, but seemed to have more punch and tart than expected. Almost like what a blue raspberry is to a raspberry. It felt taken to the NEXT level Sweetness just above mid-level, and no off-notes, or florals at 8%, which was a great weight for this. The main notes tasted more complex, and richer than a simple berry. Not a medley per se, but def. far more complex than just a single berry. It had some really nice lower/darker tones, mids, and a nice high end tart finish. Although it wasnât overt, it had a nice darker, almost earthy undertone, BUT, in a good way, that seemed to tie it all together. A really good Mulberry, with raspberry notes, along with some darker berry notes, and a really good tart finish it was this did, all day long. A very good berry to add to your collection, and I couldnât go lower than 9.8/10 on this one.
Orange (FLAVRZ) 6% (5-12-23) â I spent a little extra time with this one, to better try and explain it. It was very good at 6%, and really seemed to be a mix of natural and artificial combined. It was a neat one as it never really seemed to be either, but both. At times I thought it was almost orange soda-y, but not completely. At times I got an almost tangerine undertone, mixed with a nice juicy orange. On the finish, there was always a nice citrus oil effect, that really closed the deal. Fairly fresh, somewhat juicy, and it really did straddle both the natural and artifical both, which would allow it to be used much more than if it were one OR the other. Not candied, nor a soda, and sweetness was at about mid level, with no off-notes to be had. It was a really good orange that straddled more than one type, and with some interesting trangerine (almost) undertones with a really impressive citrus oil (almost) finish. Too good to nit-pick, and it would really work for most, if not all of my orange needs, including a GREAT orange-sicle. Placing this little juicer high at 9.6/10.
Peach (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-13-23) â âGolden Yellow and Deliciousâ were my immediate take-aways on this flavor. WOW, because FLAVRZ got this one right too. After a short break in, and 3 testers later, this one stayed impressive. It didnât present like a fresh picked peach, BUT, it did taste more like peaches in syrup, sans the syrup. What I really liked was it had plenty of rich yellow almost canned peaches nuances, with some nice ripe aspects on the top if that makes sense. Typically peaches for me are one or the other, meaning ripe OR (fill in the blank), but here we had BOTH. Sweetness was about mid level, and despite really leaning towards peaches in syrup, it was in no way syrupy, or sickly sweet. Just a hint or tart, and just surrounded in juicy yellow peach is the best way I can explain this flavor. It was nicely full at 8% with no off-notes, and it was also very hard to nit-pick. I think your needs for a peach will decide better than I can, but for an (almost) peaches in syrup, with great ripe notes, and a touch of apricot, you canât go wrong with this one. Most of my uses will favor a peach like this, and therefore will rate it fairly high, with no real issues or nitpicks. 9.6/10.
Peacharine (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-14-23) â One of the MOST interesting things for me when testing flavors, is when two (or more) known, easily identifiable flavors are mashed up, and they take on a completely NEW light. This one, WAS one of those flavors. I went into this one thinking I would simply identify what ratio each of the main notes were, and move on. That DID however, prove to be complicated, hehe. A Peach, and a Nectarine meet in a bar and ⌠You get the idea. Now what was most interesting, was I had JUST tested FLAVRZâs Peach with great results, and had expected that to show up here as well. If it WAS, it was ingeniously concealed. If I looked REALLY hard, (at times) I could almost pick out a Peach, and Nectarine, but overall, the two were soo well blended / ratioâd, that I couldnât detect either. The melding of the two, REALLY did present as a NEW flavor of sorts. Juicy, fresh, and with nuances OF Peaches and Nectarines, but fully neither. No overt tartness, sour, or sharp notes overall, and no off-notes either. At 8% it was actually really good. If you want a UNIQUE fruity mashup that probably tastes like NOTHING on your racks right now, this one WILL fill that spot. Because it rode the lightning, and was just perfectly split between the two main flavors, you could get a lot of use out of this one, and in a myriad of recipes. I like to be surprised with flavors, and it doesnât happen as often any more, but this one, DID, just that. A really unique pairing from FLAVRZ, that really did seem to create a NEW flavor from the mashup. Hard to mark down just because of the lack of identifiable fruits, and marking UP, for the execution on it. Handily a 9.3/10.
Peanut (FLAVRZ) 6% (5-14-23) â âSometimes, you feel like a nut âŚâ. And this IS one of those times my friends. Matter of fact, if youâre allergic to nuts you may NOT want to try this one, as it was damned peanut-y. At 6% it was about perfectly situated, and didnât feel over, or under-powered. No off-notes, or overt artificial notes either. It presented as a slightly salty, slightly sweet Peanut. It had JUST that right amount of earthy-ness to sell itself, but without being overpowering. After 3 testers, nothing changed, and I liked it just as much as I did on the first tankful. Crisp, peanut-y with some earthy tones, and just enough salty and sweet to sell it. To be accurate, it was more sweet than salty, by maybe a 2:1 ratio, and that still left it just below mid-level sweet. It was strong enough without being overpowering, and lingered on the tongue which was actually very much LIKE eating fresh peanuts. About the only take-off would be for the slightly higher than expected sweetness, which just ever so slightly pushed it out of 100% authentic, BUT, that didnât stop me from powering through 3 testers before I knew it. Solidly a mostly realistic Peanut, with barely any take-offs, I had no choice but to leave this hgih @ 9.0/10.
Peanut Butter (FLAVRZ) 6% (5-14-23) â Having JUST tested FLAVRZâs Peanut, I had expected this to be THAT, with some creameries added, and what I actually got, was something else. Not really the Peanut Butter I had expected, but it was almost a melding of a Peanut, and a Honeycomb almost. VERY interesting, and NOT what I expected. Itâs not what I would call a traditional Peanut Butter. I was def. getting SOME Peanut in it, but there WAS an almost distinct Honeycomb note in there, throughout the entire vape. I wouldnât call it off-putting, but it didnât push it into the âtraditionalâ peanut butter. It had some mouthfeel, and richness, but creamy wasnât what came to mind when trying to describe it. It was very full but not ceiling smashing @ 6%, and didnât feel like it was bending. It did share some of the slight earthy tones as the Peanut, but even less with this flavor, and despite trying to re-evaluate the main center note I was getting, I kept just going right back to a Honeycomb. It actually was a VERY good flavor, and I think a lot of you will love it, BUT, maybe not as a Peanut Butter. Iâll have to down rate it a bit, as it just never fully made it to the creamy butter part of the peanut butter, BUT, donât let that stop you from picking this one up, as it was actually QUITE good, and I could think of some new(er), and unique uses for it. Down rating for named profile to 6.5/10, BUT, if I had to rate it on TASTE alone, I would probably boost it up 2.5 points to a 9.0/10.
Pear (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-14-23) â Getting the âsugar sandâ effect from any flavor can be almost impossible, including Pear flavors. Sadly I did not get it from this one, BUT, I seldom do with any Pear flavor. This one started out really good, but kind of fizzled out near the end. It had SOME Pear nuances, and a very distinct âgreen-nessâ that was SIMILAR to a Green Apple, BUT, without the tart or sharp notes, so similar was just for lack of better terms. Even at 8% it was a lighter flavor, and you COULD indeed get some Pear FROM it, but it wasnât overtly a Pear. Perhaps going even higher might have worked, but it just seemed like a lighter flavor. No off-notes, and nothing out of place, but it just needed a bit MORE of the Pear that was in there. What I did get was a fresh, green pear, lightly sweet, and it had a really nice âcrispâ finish. Not tarty like a green apple, but âcrispâ was the best way to describe it. All in, a good START for a Pear, but it would need a little boosting to help it. All in a good, but fairly light/recessed fresh pear. The ONLY take-offs were for the fairly recessed nature OF the flavor not the flavor itself. It felt good at 6.5/10.
Plum (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-20-23) â Finishing out the Pâs with the Plum from FLAVRZ. I honestly didnât get a ton of Plum FROM this one, but more of a grape-ish, with maybe a hint of Port Wine mixed in. I mean, it wasnât a full on grape, but that was the closest comparison I could think of. Maybe some plum skin perhaps, but the full Plum never really revealed itself. The funny thing was, it WAS a good flavor, and had some darker purple undertones, some grape notes, and some almost grape/plum skin notes. Very interesting. Sweetness was below mid level, and there was a slightly sour, almost fermented undertone to it, which is why I think a grape-ish flavor is the best comparison. It was nicely purple and full at 8%, and there was nothing off-putting, JUST not putting out a lot of Plum for me. For a Plum, I will have to down-rate it a bit, but donât let that scare you off, as for a almost grape (purple) flavor, with a hint of wine, it was actually very good. Trying to place it fairly purley for itâs namesake @ 5.0/10.
Popcorn (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-16-23) â Wow, I had a great time testing this one, and it was hard to put down. I HAD expected maybe a heavy/heavier AP note, or Los Fritos, BUT, neither were present. Score !!! What I did get, was a very nice, slightly light freshly popped popcorn, that had some pretty good butter notes. Sweetness was almost at mid-level, which was unexpected, as it was not a âKettle Cornâ flavor, BUT, it wasnât that distracting. It was freshly popped through and through, but was not a heavy overall flavor. No face-smashing AP, no drooling butter, but a more refined, almost more âpleasantâ popcorn. Before I knew it, the 3 testers were done, which is testament to how good it was. Because it was somewhat sweeter, it would be HELLA easy to push into a Caramel Corn, or a Kettle Corn. The corn notes were fairly natural, and accurate, and stayed fresh tasting to the last tank, with zero bitterness or burnt notes. Strangely enough, I had the urge to mix up a Popcorn Custard while testing this one !!! All in, it was a very good, freshly popped popcorn, with good butter notes, and mid level sweetness, that didnât get overly âcornyâ. About the only nitpick would be the slight relaxed nature of it, and not the profile(s). Minor take-offs for that, and at 8% it was pretty good as a solo. Easily a 9.1/10.
Portello (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-20-23) â BACK to the Pâs we go, with the Portello from Flavrz. Thankfully (as Iâd never heard of it before), @Jetz was kind enough to drop some intel on the Portello. This one, WAS another interesting one. This one had a distinct berry mix/medley, BUT, they werenât always completely identifiable. At times I did get some darker berries, and maybe even a hint of grape, but most of the time, it was just more of a mid to darker berry medley. Now the interesting thing was it tasted like it was riding on a soda carrier. Now it wasnât billed as a âsodaâ, but it sure tasted like it had soda undertones. No fizz, no carbonation, but it tasted like MORE than just berries. At 8% it was actually very good, and there was nothing off-putting. At times I almost wondered if this was berries riding on top of some of FLAVRZ Creaming Soda. At about mid level sweetness, and having some nice tarty-ness on the finish, this one was good and unique. It wasnât as sharp as a berry only flavor, and I kept trying to identify what it was paired with. A really hard one to fully identify, but Iâll leave it as a very good mid to mid-darker berry medley that tasted like it was riding on top of a creaming soda. Not straight berries, but in many ways, better. Solidly placing this one at 9.3/10.
Rainbow Drops (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-21-23) â If youâre old enough, you remember the Original Skittles. You know, with the Lime instead of the newer version with Green Apple. Yes, thatâs RIGHT, they did the âGreen Switch-a-rooâ on ya. Needless to say, old OR new, this flavor, Rainbow Drops is about as SPOT ON for a Skittles flavors, that Iâve ever tested. Sure sure, there are a lot of them out there, and many end up going down âSweet Tartâ road, but this one stayed very true and accurate for, Skittles. Much like just eating a handful of them, I couldnât always pick out the individual flavors, except for sometimes getting the Grape, and maybe the Orange, and most times, it was just a handful of Skittles. It was about perfect at 8%, and did NOT leave you wanting, with the candied fruit medley youâve probably grown up with, with just the right balance of fruit flavors, sweet, and tart. No sweet tarts here, just skittles. Sweetness was a few ticks above mid-level, which was expected, and was not cloyingly sweet. The slight citrus kick at the end, worked well to finish it off, and the entire front and middle of it was just (you guessed it), like hammering away a handful. Very authentic, and absolutely nothing out of place, missing, or askew here. If you love the Skittles, you WILL love this flavor, and if you donât, well, hehe, move along, because that is what you get with this one. A few testers into it, it was still bright, and zingy with no muting, or fatigue. All in, if you love the Skittles, just get a bottle of this now. Easily a 9.9/10.
Raspberry (FLAVRZ) 6% / 3% (5-21) â In case youâre wondering why I have 6%, then 3% for the testing weights, was because I initially started at 6%, and it felt and tasted a little TOO high, with some florals, and maybe some bending. The good news was, reducing in half to 3% things became MUCH more manageable. At the lower weight, things calmed RIGHT down, and I could better assess the Raspberry. It presented as a mostly natural RB, that covered almost the entire spectrum of a RB. Low, mid, and high notes, with no real emphasis on any one of the three. It tasted very red, with some darker hints swirling around, and I would compare this to a Malina from INW. Similar but different, but that will get you in the ballpark. Just below mid level sweet, and with a good helping of tart/sour which helped to liven it up, and help it pop more. Because of the lower than mid level sweetness, it was def. NOT a candied, or candy RB. Fresh, not overly juicy, but not dry, and with no florals, perfumes, or any off-notes at the lower testing weight. Probably the most consistent aspect to this one would be itâs âcrispnessâ. A very crisp Raspberry, without being sharp, or harsh. All in, as long as you stay in the âzoneâ this one performed and tasted very good. No off-notes, but there was a very certain tart-ness that carried through from beginning to end, and I feel that really helped this one, and was not a negative. When finishing the 3rd tester, I had considered a possible red currant undertone in this one that I did not notice as the higher rate. I would strongly suggest starting to solo this one at 3%. It felt very crisply placed @ 9.0/10.
Rum and Raisin (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-23-23) â Iâve never had a R&R before, and I wanted to get INTO this one. Smelled VERY good, and just like it was billed. Now, some of it seemed to get lost in translation, but not all of it. It felt like it tasted about 70% of the way there, when comparing to how it smelled. The raisin notes were just spot on DELICIOUS, and the Rum was less present when tasting than it was when smelling, but was fairly below the raisin. The raisin itself presented as maybe both golden and brown together, and it (IMO) was the star of the show. It was a completely unique flavor, like none other on my racks, and I have a LOT of flavors on my racks. If time permits later I will add this to the re-test list, and test it up higher to see if it better mimicâd the smell. At 8% it was present, and full, and it was honestly hard to put down. I had guzzled through 3 testers before I knew it, and thought, âUh oh, whoâs doing the reviewâ ?? What was surprising about this one, was it didnât present as a pure raisin, but it was still very present. It tasted richer than a simple plain raisin, and with the Rum lower in the mix, I couldnât decipher exactly what it was paired with, maybe a fig undertone for just a guess, and needless to say it was damned good. It was one of the harder flavors to fully isolate and explain, but if youâre even some what remotely raisin curious, it would be worth a pickup. About the only take-off would be the shift from how it smelled and then tasted. Didnât taste bad in ANY way, it just didnât 100% translate. Possibly fixed by upping the percentage. As it stood, a very good raisin-ish flavor, with subtle Rum undertones, that had NO off-notes, and stayed a few ticks below mid-level sweet. Minor take-offs for the translation. 8/0/10.
Sherbet (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-24-23) â Oh yes peeps, weâre up to the Sâs now !!! I actually didnât realize that Sherbet most times, uses Dairy elements. Never knew that. With that little discovery out of the way, WOW, letâs call this one, the âLilâ Zingerâ. Sharp, punchy, and bright were the big take-aways with this one. None of the aforementioned were bad, and they just work, work, worked. Super punchy, and relatively âcleanâ throughout. It presented as a âwhiteâ sherbet, not orange, or green, etc. It centered around a bright white citrus center, and while not exactly favoring overt Lemon or Lime, it tasted like they were in there, and tempered with a âsmootherâ middle note. A few ticks above mid-level sweet, and although I didnât get any âfizzâ or carbonation, it was quite zingy, and poppy. Zero off-notes, and it was damn near a One-Shot by itself @ 8%. IMO, slating this as a âwhiteâ sherbet, would allow you to EASILY push/pull it, if you wanted to, BUT, you might just think it was too good on itâs own. Either way, a super Sherbet with no take-offs that I could muster. Sparkling-ly placing this one high at 9.7/10.
Shortbread (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-25-23) â Man, all Iâve got to say is, now that Iâm up to the Sâs, and Iâm testing this Shortbread, Iâm wishing I had started AT the Sâs. This one was good. My initial thought was, âHow in the HELL is this DAAP freeâ ?? Yes, my friends, rich, buttery goodness flowing from this one, along with vanilla and almond undertones, with a GREAT almost grainy bakery. Yes, it was the FULL monty. What IS in your favorite Shortbread ?? The one I bake has butter, flour, vanilla, and almond extracts, and sugar. Nothing fancy, just simply delicious, and THIS my friends, tastes almost exactly like what I bake. I really was surprised how how rich and buttery it was, especially considering the DAAP free-ness of it. The bakery notes had some very nice grainy texture to it, which added to the experience. The vanilla and almond notes while not explicitly identifiable WERE in there. Tasty, and almost crunchy. At 8% it was as strong as you would ever need, and I could find not off-notes, or anything out of place. To my tastes it was everything you would need or want in a shortbread, and nothing you didnât. While it was fairly butter dominant, it was not greasy, or over powering. Nicely done. Sweetness was just below mid-level, and this one was very hard to nit-pick. If you are in the mood for a great buttery, rich shortbread, just add this to your cart. 9.9/10.
Spearmint (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-27-23) â Back in the saddle, and running the Spearmint. This one was a nice surprise as I had expected an overly cool, maybe bitter mint, but what I got was more of a double mint gum, missing most of the gum, wrapped around a cotton candy-ish center. 3 testers in, I still didnât feel this was an all natural Spearmint, but much more. It did really remind me of a Wrigleyâs Spearmint Gum, BUT, without most (not all), of the gum. The spearmint was pretty accurate, and you could almost taste the oil if that makes sense. The center of this one however, was much richer than expected, and the best way I could describe it, would be almost cotton candy-ish. It worked to liven up, what could have been a linear, 2 dimensional Spearmint, into something much better (IMO), and bigger. Now, if you are, or were looking for a simple, natural spearmint, this may or not not be what you want. If you want a really good Spearmint with some slight gum undertones, with a nice rich, cotton candy paired in, this WILL work out for you. At 8% it was very present, but with no off-notes, bitterness, and only a slight dryness that I typically get from mints. I was happy that I didnât get any overt cooling from this one, as it had the typical âmint effectâ that was LIKE cooling, but NOT a cooling agent. Iâm a hater of all cooling agents, and this one did not âtriggerâ me at all in that regard. The mint was sweetened, and at just above mid-level, and tasted mostly natural with maybe a 80% natural / 20% artificial ratio. All in, this was an enjoyable one to test, and thatâs coming from the âNot a big mint guyâ, at that. About the only nit-pick would be the slight dryness, that again, I get from most mints, and that was minor, and just barely there on the finish. Beyond that, a really enjoyable one, and entertaining, even as a solo. It felt very good at 9.0/10.
Sponge Cake (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-28-23) â Yum was the word of the day with this one. Who doesnât love a good spongy sponge cake ? This one presented as a very good sponge cake, BUT, with some yellow cake notes as well. Realizing there are multiple Sponge Cakes out there, the ones I bake always have egg whites, and Baking Soda. This one had many of those characteristics, and was pretty accurate in doing so. I did seem to get some other almost âyellow cakeâ notes in there as well, and it seemed to rich-en it up a bit, and gave it more body. Many times I thought I could almost TASTE the Baking Soda. At 8% it was very full, and did NOT leave you wanting, and was unmistakably cakey. Sweetness was a few ticks above mid-level, and there were no off-notes, and smelling it, was JUST like tasting it. What you smelled was what you got. In keeping with a traditional SC, it was lighter, without heavy egg yolk or butter notes, but was in no way thin. I was surprised by how rich it was, and thatâs where I think I was detecting some yellow cake notes. Not many, but it tasted like it had a little more âweightâ than just a light SC. It was an impressive flavor, and I had blown through all 3 testers before I knew it. Light, cakey, with some heavier YC (Yellow Cake) notes thrown in on top. If you love the cake, and need/want one of the Sponge variety, you might as well sign up for this one. Not sure if itâs a take-off or not, because the YC notes that I felt I got, seemed to fatten it up JUST enough, without being overbearing, and because it worked so well, not sure if I could take-off for them. Going to leave this at a 9.2/10, because it was too good not to, and itâs cakey-ness could not be ignored.
Strawberry (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-28-23) â âMore Cowbellâ, errrrr, âMore Strawberryâ. I got into this one RIGHT as we were opening the pool up, so I had some good one on one time with it. What I liked most about this one, was the complete, and utter ONRUSH of Strawberry. Juicy, Red, and Look Out !!! It presented as a 50/50 mix of natural / artificial, but didnât really lean one way or another. The majority of the flavor seemed centered around a juicy red SB, with some green/white (Alpine) notes sprinkled on the top. With the inclusion of the latter, it really was a full spectrum SB. It did taste fairly fresh, and with good juicy-ness too boot. At 8% it was very red, and full, and nothing tasted out of place. The only complaint was, there was a little âtranslationâ issue, wherein it tasted just a bit fuller on the finger, than it did vaping. It wasnât muted, but it tasted constrained a bit, and I couldnât figure out why. It was probably more obvious, because of the massive onrush in the beginning, that the finish felt a little lack luster. Sweetness was about mid-level, and there was a certain âtartâ that hit you on the finish that was a nice send off. All in, a good wide spectrum 50/50 natural/artificial SB, that was fresh, and juicy with a nice little tart sparkle on the finish. As mentioned, the only take-off would be for the somewhat lack luster finish. It felt freshly placed at 7.5/10. If I get some time (LOL), and can play around with this more I WILL update this review.
Strawberry Biscuit (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-28-23) â Butter, Biscuit, Strawberry, what ELSE could you need ?? Hopefully not much, because THAT is what this one way. Now, the good thing was, none of the three was overpowering, no salty bisquik biscuit, no greasy over butter, and no out of place candied SB here. The SB almost fell behind the other two, but only just. Because the SB was a little lighter, I couldnât be 100% sure if it was a jam or not (Spoiler, FLAVRZ SB Jam is up next), but it played nice with the other two. The biscuit was present enough to know it was there, and the butter, while clean, accented it nicely. At 8% it was full, but not screaming in your face loud. Sweetness was a little below mid level, and there were no clear off-notes. The SB could maybe have used just a bit more, and maybe a bit more tarty jammy-ness to help it break through more clearly on the finish, but that was about the list of my âshoulda, coulda, wouldaâ-s. If it wouldnât have slowed me down, I would have added a touch OF the SB Jam, JUST to see, BUT, gotta stay ON mission. Beyond wanting to tweak the SB just a bit, I got a minor muddled dark(er) note on the finish, and couldnât fully identify it, but it was only minor. Not quite a one-shot, but still pretty good. Minor take-offs for the slight lack of SB pizazz on the finish, and the darker end note, and that was it. Tasty, just not completely jammy. It felt fairly placed at 8.9/10.
Strawberry Jam (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-28-23) â OK, now weâre cooking with some Jammy Jam Jams. Right away the jammy-ness was very present, and as a whole, it seemed more present than the regular Strawberry. What was interesting, was that it was below mid-level sweet, which you could easily do, if you needed to. Itâs nice it wasnât sickly sweet out of the gate. The strawberry notes were fresh, and rich, but with a fairly jammy slant. It ranged full range from low, mid, and high notes, and had a slightly sweeter finish, than a tarty one. Like the previously tested FLAVRZ Strawberry, it felt like it was missing a little pizazz on the finish, and this time, Iâll take @Jetzâs advice, and see if adding a drop or two of Super Sweet improves that. There was an underlying richness, that was almost buttery, and Iâve gotten this from another SB Jam before, and it works. Very subtle, not overpowering, but it added some richness to the jam notes. At 8% it was strong but not overbearing, and no off-notes to be found. After adding two drops of SS to the tester bottle and re-filling, the SB pizazz did increase, and as expected, it got stickier, and jammier, so it was easy to push into that. All in, a good Jammy SB, and from the MFG it lacked a little punch on the finish, but a dash of sweetener picked it right up. Jamming this one at 9.0/10.
Sugar Cookie (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-29-23) â This one presented as a delicious Sugar Cookie, with an outstanding Vanilla accent. A little butter, a little bakery, and just overflowing with the Vanilla. The bakery wasnât overly grainy, so there was no âgritâ to it, more of a light bakery note, and the butter was fairly obscured by the vanilla, but still just barely present. Sweetness was at about mid level, and there were no off-notes, and, it felt pretty damned tasty at 8%. It was hard to fully define just the vanilla because it was so expertly crafted in with the bakery and butter, but it seemed to favor a mid to brighter vanilla. No spicy-ness, or darker tones, so it was a brighter, cleaner sugar cookie if that makes sense. It also had an almost âcreamy-nessâ to it, but that could have been the butter/bakery in disguise. All in, there was NO mistaking it WAS a sugar cookie, and a bright, clean one at that. About the only take-off would be a very slight almost sourness on the finish, but even that wavered in and out of perception, so it was minor at best. About the only want, might have been to have a little more âbakeryâ or âgrainâ to bolster the cookie part JUST a smidge more, and to give it some weight. All in however, it was a crisp, clean one, and it felt very good at 9.4/10.
Toast Coconut (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-29-23) â This one turned into a mystery of sorts, as I was having a hard time trying to figure out exactly what it was trying to be. Def. a coconut, but I wasnât getting dry, flaky, or toasted from it, but more of a juicy coconut in coconut milk perhaps. At 8% it was actually quite good, with no oily-ness, suntan lotion, etc, and it was about mid level sweet. Sweetened coconut in a can perhaps, but the âtoastâ or âtoastedâ completely evaded my tastes. It leaned more artificial than natural at maybe a 80% artificial / 20% natural ratio. When I think of a toasted coconut, I think of a dry, flaky, coconut with darker toasted notes, but that was not what I got. Not bad, not bad at all, but not really a toasted coconut. No off-notes, which can be hard to do with coconuts, but kind of off base as far as the name, so despite liking it as a sweetened coconut in milk, will have to down rate a little. Leaving this one at 6.5/10.
Tobacco # 37 (FLAVRZ) 6% (5-29-23) â For the record, I am NOT the Tobacco Guy. Hell, I barely even vape them, so no deep NET diving here. With THAT said, and being a non-bacco vaper, this one, I enjoyed. The tobacco had some nice âleafyâ qualities, and there was a definite caramel undertone, BUT, not to be confused with an RY4, as this one was MO bacco, and less caramel. There was this other note that kicked in, just on the very end, and it was intriguing. FLAVRZ calls it a burnt brown sugar, and you know what, I think thatâs it. Deep and somewhat earthy, the bacco was the star of the show on the front end, then the slightly lighter, rich caramel kicked in for the middle, and then the burnt brown sugar on the finish. Wham, Bamm, Boom. Triple threat. I know RY4âs are often criticized for being too candy like, and although this one was just above mid-level sweet, it didnât scream candied to me. The mid to dark tobacco WAS the star, with the caramel and brown sugar playing supporting roles. Well, well, well, FLAVRZ has gone and done it now, as previously stated, I am NOT the tobacco guy, but I liked this one. Nothing out of place, and the three main players, fit like a glove, and were plenty strong at 6%⌠Maybe one of you âbacco-headsâ can delve deeper into this one, but for my tastes, it was full, rich, somewhat earthy, and complex enough to satisfy, and keep on doing so. Very good, and nicely placing this one very high @ 9.8/10.
Unicorn Vomit (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-30-23) â Iâve never Unicornâd before, so breaking NEW ground, again. At 8% this one was still fairly weak, with fairly unidentifiable individual flavors, but my first impressions were âSkilttles meets Sweettartsâ. While somewhat relaxed, it really did present as a mixture of both of the aforementioned candies. I tried adding a drop of SS to see if it would âboostâ it, and it did, albeit slightly. After about the third tester, it seemed as if the Sweet Tarts were a bit higher than the Skittles, if that helps. Having never unicornâd before, I could still see a use for this flavor, as itâs bright, candied tart/sweet/sour notes could be easily used in numerous recipes, but as a solo, it felt a little lacking. Not that it was 2 dimensional, but it just felt like it needed something. No off-notes, and at the testing weight it was just below mid-level sweet. After finishing the last tester, my original assessment stood, and that was (you guessed it), a bright, punchy pairing of Sweet Tarts, and Skittles. The somewhat relaxed nature of this one would be about the only take-off, and it felt fairly placed @ 7.1/10.
Vanilla Custard (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-17-23) â After a little (LOT) of peer pressure, I decided to break my own rules, and push a FEW of the flavors at the END of the list, ⌠to NOW. Wow, wow, WOW. Could THIS be THE Custard ?? Maybe so. Smelling it in the bottle there was promise, but you NEVER know how things will translate, from SMELLING, to TASTING. Needless to say, this one was G-R-E-A-T. Now, letâs get the âugly-nessâ out of the way, regarding Custards. Everyone seems to have DIFFERENT wants/needs with, and from them. Heavy eggy-ness, more pudding-like, a combination of the two, maybe even thicker, like a Flan. It is VERY hard to tell anyone what the BEST Custard, or Vanilla Custard is for them, BUT, this one worked for me. In the past, Iâve never really âlovedâ Câs, or VCâs that were TOO eggy. I love eggs, but I take mine scrambled LOL. As time wore on, I started to like a little MO egg in my C/VCâs, and THAT is this one delivered.
At 8%, it was a dumptruck load !!! This presented as a super rich, almost velvety (but not quite), custard, with JUST enough eggy-ness, but without being TOO much. It felt/tasted like it was tempered with an equally smooth vanilla pudding. I think the Custard/Pudding ratio was spot on, and it really WILL appeal to a WIDE audience, as it gives you just enough of both, without either of the two being overpowering. This obviously would allow for easy push/pulling to whatever you needed, if required. Honestly, I donât know how FLAVRZ did it, being sans DAAP (and other not safe for vaping substances), it was just below HELLA RICH, and thick, with a great mouthfeel. Did I get slammed by greasy, buttery notes ?? No. Did it leave me wanting ?? No. TBH, when I first tasted it after a whopping THREE day steep (yes, 3 days only), I thought, "Wait, this is DAAP free "?? Yes it is, and yes it molecule-ized in just THREE days. I think that Darren went into some details on how many of their flavors require FAR less steeping time, and/or being designed TO be atomized, and that sure seems to be the case here.
Rich, thick, great mouthfeel, just enough eggy-ness, with a super good vanilla pudding on the finish. Luckily for YOU guys, I gotta roll for work, and weâll stop this love fest here. At just below mid-level sweet, and with no off-notes, this one wowed as a VC with some VERY impressive richness and thickness from a DAAP free flavor. Not dripping in butter, so if you want that, move along, BUT, hehe, you still may want to pick up a big bottle of this, JUST in case. Very impressed, and am still wrapping my head around the very short steep time needed. In closing, the more I vape this, the BETTER it gets. I hate to say it guys/gals, but I think I have to release the Kraken again here, because Iâve not been able to remotely pull any nit-picks out on this one. 10/10. Get a BIG bottle.
Vanilla Ice Cream (FLAVRZ) 5% (5-20-23) â Can a Vanilla Ice Cream be clean and crisp ?? Yes it can, and this is one of them. C and C (crisp and clean) were the two main immediate take-aways on this one out of the gate. If there WAS egg in there, I didnât get much, but more of a clean vanilla with a great creamery finish. Being DAAP free, I wasnât expecting, nor did I get any heavy, rich buttery notes, but honestly, they werenât missed. Iâd rate the mouthfeel about a 7/10 on this one, and it was plenty strong at 5%, and was about mid level sweet. No off-notes, nothing out of place could be found. Iâve tested other VICâs, some of which I compared to Chic Fila ice cream, and this one was similar to that, but not completely. The vanilla bean in here was very good, and paired almost perfectly with the cream/creameries. Clean finish, that lingered on the tongue, BUT, never overly heavy. For a âcleanâ VIC, this was one of the better ones, and being DAAP free, it tasted a lot richer than I expected. The final take-aways for this one were Clean, Crisp, Vanilla Bean, and Creameries. I couldnât go lower than 9.5/10 on this one.
Vienna Cream (FLAVRZ) 8% (5-19-23) â Diving BACK into it with this, the Vienna Cream turned out to be interesting. Some VCâs (Vienna Creams) have an almost âsharpnessâ to them, but this one was much smoother than expected. It did have the typical top note that defined a VC, but below that, it was actually an almost pairing of a meringue and a light butter cream frosting. Yum. Despite being just below mid-level sweet, it had aspect of a great confectionerâs sugar on the finish. Even at 8% it wasnât a âscreamerâ so it could be overpowered in a mix, but it was very tasty at that weight. Smooth but not velvety, somewhat butter cream-ery without being butter heavy, and tied together with a meringue-like center. No off-notes, and none of the âsharpnessâ that some other VCâs had, and a good, even, lighter cream flavor. Because of itâs relaxed nature, not sure if it could carry the main note, but in a mix, I could see this working out great. It felt good at 8.0/10.
Virginia Tobacco (Premium) (FLAVRZ) 6% (5-31-23) â As mentioned previously, I am NOT a tobacco-head, and donât travel in the NET circles, so if you want a REAL in depth tobacco break down, Iâm not the guy, hehe. BUT, letâs talk about this ANY way. To my tastes, AND, as a non-tobacco flavor kind of guy, this was a good one. It presented as a brighter tobacco, POSSIBLY flue cured, and with some really good earthy tones that kept it grounded. It was a brighter tobacco throughout, with just a pinch of the lower/earthy notes on the finish for clarification. It had an almost âleafyâ quality to it, and seemed mostly absent of most of the darker tones, and/or burnt aspects. It was sweetened, but I would NOT call it sweet, and it was a bit lower than mid-level sweet. Throughout the entire 3 testers, I did get an almost âgreenâ note, which is/was hard to explain, but it translated into more a a cured tobacco accent, without the darker, more smoky notes. At 6% it was full, and didnât feel like it needed to be increased at all. In closing, this one was a crisp, clean, light tobacco leaf, possibly flue cured, with an almost âgreenâ undertone, with some light earthy tones, but sans the darker smokey notes. You guys know Iâm reluctant to review baccos, and scoring them is even harder, but this one seemed to be really on target for a Virginia Tobacco, and Iâm scoring it high @ 9.75/10. Not candied like an RY4, and maybe the perfect tobacco for other not tobacco-ers like me.
Watermelon (FLAVRZ) 8% (6-1-23) â I could tell the moment I tasted this one, something was up. It didnât smell like a full on watermelon, and it didnât taste like one either. What it DID taste like, was more of a Watermelon crossed with one or more other melons. At 8% it was middling strong, and not in your face in any way. At first I thought maybe I was getting some rind from it, and further testing seemed to prove that to be true. Now while it wasnât a bad flavor, it never really took off as a juicy red watermelon, but stayed more in the medley camp. It was fairly fresh, and had good juicy notes, and nothing off-putting, or floral I personally would have preferred a much more juicy red focused approach to it. Not every one can be a winner, right ? All in, for a âSome watermelon, and some of these other melonsâ not too shabby, but as a solo watermelon, it left things a little lacking. It was an interesting vape, and I had polished off two testers before I knew it. It felt fairly placed a little lower, and at a 6.0/10
Watermelon OZ (FLAVRZ) 8% (6-2-23) â Aussies HELP me out here !!! I got into this one RIGHT on the heels of the Watermelon, and again, I wasnât getting a huge, full on watermelon. It was almost like I was getting a lot of the white fleshy part, and some rind, but none of the red. Iâm wondering if this is an Australian thing, or maybe this/these particular compounds just arenât translating for me. With THAT outta the way, this tasted much better, and fuller than the regular Watermelon, and despite not knocking it out of the park for my needs for the âredâ part of the WM, it was good. I believe it is one of FLAVRZ best sellers, so it COULD be me, hehe. I did continue to get a very good âmelonâ and ârindâ from it throughout all of the testers, and by melon, I donât mean anything like a honeydew, but still very melon-like. To my tastes, it was actually a fair amount fresher than the regular WM, and juicier. Sweetness was just below mid-level, and there were no off-notes, florals, or perfumes. I feel the need to repeat this, but even without the red sticky WM that I am/was used to not really showing up to the party, it was a damned good, and addictive flavor. Iâll def. have to rate this above the regular WM. In closing, a VERY good melon which presented as fresh, and juicy, with plenty of rind notes, and about the only take-offs (for my tastes) would be the fairly lacking âredâ watermelon notes. Judging by my scale and criteria, 8.0/10 felt pretty good. Aussies SOUND OFF on this one if youâve got experiences with Australian Watermelons !!!
Whipped Cream (FLAVRZ) 8% (6-3-23) â With this, the second to the LAST, in this massive second series, letâs get into the Whipped Cream. My experience with WCâs seems to always fall into two categories, very light, slight vanilla, and darker, richer, less vanilla. This one fell into the second category, and had far more substance than the airy light, thinner vanilla others. It had some mouthfeel, and good creamy-ness, and was very good at 8%. It shared something with ANOTHER WC Iâve tested, and that was an almost chocolate note. Of course, as SOON as I stop typing this review, I WILL be adding this to some Graham Cracker, and Marshmallow, JUST to see HOW the light chocolate notes fare in a mix. Soloâing it, they were unobtrusive, but always present. I guess the best, closest comparison might be a heavy whipping cream, with chocolate undertones. Many other of the WCâs Iâve tested were soo light and airy, it was hard NOT to over run them in mixes, whereas this one would hold itâs ground much better. Three testers later, my opinion(s) hadnât changed on this one, and I was unable to detect any squirrel-y notes. In closing, this one was a heavy whipping cream, with chocolate undertones, and a good mouthfeel, at just below mid-level sweet, that would hold itâs own in a mix, and not be run over in most mixes. I donât feel that the choco undertones were a negative, nor distraction, and will leave this one fairly high @ 9.1/10.
White Chocolate (FLAVRZ) 8% (6-2-23) â Out of the gate, I could tell this was one of the weaker flavors. It was almost stronger when tasting, than vaping. While light, it proved to be a very clean, accurate white chocolate. What I was glad I DIDN"T GET was some of the funkyness, or chalky dryness that Iâve gotten from a few of the other WCâs. Smooth, somewhat (but not entirely) creamy, with a light mouthfeel. I think that because it WAS lighter, and not overly heavy handed, some of the more subtle notes were visible (to the palate that is). Sweet, buttery, and just a hint of vanilla, with NO cocoa, just like a good WC should be. Nothing sour, dry, or out of place, and it was just at about mid level sweet. As Iâve stated regarding a few other of the flavors, about the only real take off would be the light presence. Granted soloâing putâs it ENTIRELY under the spotlight, and cannot even BEGIN to assume/predict how it will pair in recipes, but some caution should be used so as not to overpower it. All in, a good, clean, fairly relaxed WC, with none of the sourness or dryness that can plague many of them. As mentioned, taking off, but only due to the relaxed presentation. Subtly placing this one at 7.0/10.
Wild Cherry (FLAVRZ) 6% (6-3-23) â I believe this is the EIGHTIETH FLAVOR in the FLAVRZ (two series) so far. By my count, that is just a few day short of two months, for ME, and YOU GUYS on these, and itâs been a BIG HAUL. I figured Iâd leave the âScaryâ one till last (just kidding, alphabetically loaded). BUT, cherries, CAN INDEED be scary. I have been burned, and burned hard in the past, and some no matter HOW FAR you reduce them, are floral, soapy, or worse yet, medicinal. Iâm happy to say that NONE of the aforementioned were present here. I DID test this one fairly high (as far as cherries go), and it was very good, AND, unique. Unique to me, just means, I donât think I have one like it on my racks. It did present as a red cherry, but not fully a maraschino. It was not dark, or a âblackâ cherry, but stayed fairly red, and juicy throughout the entire test. ZERO off-notes (more on this later), aftertastes, or anything out of place. It leaned heavily to the natural at maybe a 75% natural / 25% artificial, and was a tick or two below mid level sweet. The uniqueness came from what I am terming the âWildâ part of it, THATâS the nuance/overtone I do not have on my racks. It is VERY hard to classify, or explain, but maybe âripeâ COULD be a close second, but even that feels not right. Needless to say, the combination of IT, and the red cherry WAS a great combination. NOW, just for you guys, I decided to try an experiment, and boost it up a little more JUST to see if I could BREAK it, and I couldnât. I had it up to 10%, and it didnât go sideways on me, but just deepened, and got bolder. Impressive. Think not, try that with most of your existing cherries and see. All in, this was a great juicy, red cherry, that had hints of a mara, but only hints, and it had a very unique âwildnessâ to it. If you have been scared OFF of the cherries, come BACK into the Cherry fold. With no real take-offs, Iâll be rating this, the 80th flavor in this run high, @ 9.4/10.
