Aspire Triton 2 Vape Tank Review: The Triton is Back
The Aspire Triton 2 is the follow-up to the Aspire Triton tank that impressed some, depressed others, and left everyone wanting more from Aspire. The design team at Aspire heard the call of the masses and came back from their brainstorming sessions with a significantly improved sub-ohm tank.
Some of the criticisms leveled at the original Triton were that it could not be disassembled. This feature meant that a faulty coil, broken glass tank, or any other flaw or damage would require the whole thing needed to be chucked out. It looks like that is no longer a problem with the Triton 2 that is easily taken apart.
And although the first Triton had a 3.5ml capacity, the designers at Aspire decided to get rid of that extra 0.5ml and settle for a straight-up 3ml. It is an interesting move, and I’m curious why they decided to lessen its capacity, rather than push it up to an even 4ml.
Some of the great things about the first Triton can still be found on its successor. For example, the dual coil option that lets you switch between direct-lung and mouth-to-lung vaping, the Pyrex glass tank, and the option to include an RTA assembly, which, unfortunately, must be purchased separately.
Some of the other features of the Triton 2:
- Stainless steel build
- Japanese organic cotton wicks
- Top-fill system
- Heat sink to prevent burns
- Locking mechanism to prevent leakage
Here’s what you’ll receive in your Aspire Triton 2 box:
- One Aspire Triton 2 tank
- One pre-installed Clapton coil atomizer (0.5ohms)
- One extra Kanthal coil atomizer (1.8ohms)
- One spare Pyrex glass tube
- User’s manual
The Aspire Triton 2 has fewer aesthetic embellishments as its predecessor, and the absence of the metallic shield is the most notable (and the most welcome, quite frankly). The tank doesn’t overwhelm with its metallic finish, and in its place is the simple glass tube that comes with a replacement should it ever crack or break.
The top-fill tank has a locking mechanism on it, which is a holdover from the first Triton that also featured a “fill” and “vape” twisting apparatus with its accompanying logos of an inlet for the former and a face vaping for the latter. This locking mechanism was something I did and still do, find redundant.
I can appreciate that Aspire wanted to make a leak-proof tank, and that’s fine, but if that’s what you want to do, then just make a leak-proof tank! Like the iSub Apex from Innokin or the iJoy Exo XL that were leakless and didn’t need an extra mechanism to make them so.
Anywho, the rest of the Aspire Triton 2 looked and felt more or less like the original. It stands at a towering 67mm (with drip tip) and has a diameter of just above 22mm; 22.5mm to be exact.
This impreciseness, again, didn’t make sense since they could have either made it thinner and taller, and therefore have added more tank capacity, but instead Aspire chose to make their tank 22.5mm.
There are two bottom airflow holes, just like the first Triton. There is a stainless steel mouthpiece with a heat sink underneath to prevent the mouthpiece from getting too hot, just like the first Triton. So, you can see where I’m going with this. Apart from the removal of the metallic glass shield, much hasn’t changed with the Aspire Triton 2.
Filling the Aspire Triton 2
The top-fill mechanism made for some easy filling and the two fill ports were wide enough to get a good amount of juice in there. And I know I complained about the locking mechanism as being redundant, but after fiddling with it for some time, I could see why it would be useful.
After filling most tanks, you put away your e-juice, or whatever else you’re doing, and with the exposed tank standing, you can always tip it over and drop it when you’re closing it up again. With the locking feature on the Aspire Triton 2, that problem is no more. You fill the tank, lock it, and then you can safely attach the heatsink and mouthpiece.
But, one thing you may not notice (I didn’t) is that after filling your tank you cannot leave the fill holes exposed. With the fill holes exposed, the juice holes in the chimney will stay closed, so your wicks will not get juiced, and we all know what that means (dry hit).
So even though you may think you can just screw the top cap back on and not have to lock the device, the taste of burnt cotton in your mouth will tell you otherwise. And make sure you never do it again.
I started vaping with the pre-installed direct-lung, sub-ohm coil in the tank and started within the recommended range of 40-45W. I found, however, that pushing the wattage ever so slightly above 45W to 50W didn’t hamper flavor production, although the mod I was vaping with, the Wismec Mini, did start to heat up just a bit, but not in a too-hot-to-hold way.
I kept the airflow valves loosey-goosey to get the most out of the cloud production and the tank performed amazingly well. Switching out the coil to the above-ohm 1.8ohm Kanthal coil after a few days, I found that the draw was a little loose with the airflow valves all the way open; closing them up lead to a tighter draw and a more flavorful vape cloud.
The clouds were not particularly thunderous, but at 1.8ohms, and with a recommended wattage range of between 10-13W that kind of action is not to be expected. I decided to be a bit reckless and pushed the 1.8ohm coil to around 15W and then, to 20W but I noticed the vapor slowly getting more and more bitter.
So I would definitely recommend staying within the recommended ranges on both coils, although you could take it up a little with the sub-ohm coil.
Comparing the Aspire Triton 2
I think I’ve been making comparison throughout this review to the Triton 2’s predecessor. But since there have only been slight modifications made to the Triton 2, I think it would be better to find another comparable sub-ohm tank.
I thought following the Greek mythology bent would be appropriate and decided on the Herakles Pro Sub Tank since it also comes with two coil options, both ohm and sub-ohm, and has similar physical dimensions to the Triton 2.
The Herakles became notorious for having significant leakage problems, although a newer version was released that took care of that problem. The Herakles has six independent juice ports compared to the Triton 2’s two, which made for more juice getting into your wicks but also led to all those leaking problems.
The shape of the Herakles is a bit odd since it widens in the center, but it has never been something that I saw as a problem. So, even though it was a leaker in its previous iteration, I still think that Herakles can still out-perform the Triton 2 in the flavor department at least.
What I Liked
The designers at Aspire were wise to remove the one thing people didn’t like about the first Triton: the cumbersome metal chassis, so that was much appreciated, along with the parts that can all be removed and cleaned.
Although dual coil options are something standard with most tanks, the Aspire coils are well-made, machined, and perform great. There are also several different coil options including a nickel one for temperature control mods and the RTA tank for a rebuildable atomizer.
The stainless steel, Kanthal coils, and the Japanese cotton wicks are the most to thank for the supreme flavor the Aspire Triton 2 is able to produce.
Things I Didn’t Like
I’m on the fence about this one; sure, it makes sense and makes leaking a thing of the past, but forgetting to lock the thing can also lead to some terrible-tasting dry hits.
Less e-juice capacity
I didn’t understand the reduced tank capacity. Freeing the glass tube from the metal casing meant, in my mind at least, that you could increase the e-juice capacity, not reduce it. Hopefully, the designers at Aspire will hear my cries and take care of this on the Triton 3.
No RTA Option
An RTA option would surely have put the Aspire Triton 2 ahead of its predecessor, and the fact that you have to buy one, rather than have one already included is a downer.
I was expecting a lot with the updated Aspire Triton 2, only I didn’t see much difference between the original Triton and this newer version. Sure, the metal casing was gone, there was a spare glass tube, but everything else stayed the same.
The two atomizers included in the package performed nicely, which was a change from the other coil options on the older Triton that landed on either side of 0.5ohms, at 0.3 and 0.4, respectively, and weren’t as great at producing rich, bountiful flavor.
I would recommend this tank for its ease of use and its versatility regarding coil options, but I think there are many better-performing tanks out there.
I give the Aspire Triton 2 a shoulder shrug of 7/10.