Added to Cart
80,000 vs 100,000 Puffs
The advertised gap is 20,000 puffs.
100,000 ÷ 80,000 = 1.25, so WASPE’s headline figure is 25% higher than Marsilen’s.
That 25% difference is only a comparison of the numbers printed in the specifications. It is not proof that a WASPE device will run 25% longer in normal use.
The problem is that one “puff” is not necessarily measured the same way by every manufacturer. A short machine draw uses less liquid than a long draw. Airflow, power, the pause between draws and the point at which testing stops can all change the final count.
If two brands want their puff figures to be directly comparable, they need to use the same test conditions and publish enough detail for the test to be understood. Without that, 80,000 and 100,000 are advertised capacity figures rather than guaranteed lifespans.
100,000 Puffs ÷ 56 mL = 1,786 Puffs per mL
WASPE gives both the puff figure and the amount of liquid, so the two numbers can be checked together.
100,000 ÷ 56 = approximately 1,786 advertised puffs per mL.
This calculation does not predict exactly how many puffs a user will get. Its value is different: it shows how much advertised puff capacity WASPE is claiming from each milliliter of liquid.
The same check cannot be done for Marsilen NOVA 4in1 from the reviewed specifications. The total liquid capacity is not clearly stated, so there is no reliable way to calculate its puffs per mL. Filling in that missing number with an estimate would make the comparison less accurate, not more useful.
1,786 Puffs per mL Is High Compared With Published Market Data
A 2026 study published in Nicotine & Tobacco Research looked at disposable e-cigarette listings from three U.S. online retailers in 2022 and 2024.[1]
Average advertised puff count rose from 3,265 puffs in 2022 to 13,980 puffs in 2024.
Average liquid capacity also increased, from 8.75 mL to 17.88 mL.
Using the 2024 averages:
13,980 ÷ 17.88 = approximately 782 advertised puffs per mL.
WASPE’s stated ratio is:
1,786 ÷ 782 = approximately 2.28.
So WASPE’s advertised puff-to-liquid ratio is about 2.3 times the 2024 average calculated from the listings in that study.
That does not show that the 100,000-puff figure is false. The research covered a specific group of U.S. retailer listings rather than the entire global market. What it does show is that WASPE is claiming far more puffs from each milliliter than the average seen in that dataset. Without a published test method, that difference deserves caution.
Puff Claims Have Increased Faster Than Liquid Capacity
The same study shows how quickly these headline numbers have grown.[1]
Average advertised puff count moved from 3,265 to 13,980 between 2022 and 2024, an increase of about 328%.
Average liquid volume increased from 8.75 mL to 17.88 mL, or about 104%.
Put simply, the puff claims grew much faster than the amount of liquid in the products covered by the study.
The highest listing recorded in the 2024 dataset was 40,000 advertised puffs. Marsilen’s 80,000 and WASPE’s 100,000 figures both sit above that range.
40,000 is not a technical ceiling for the industry. The study only reflects the products and time period it examined. Still, it provides useful context: today’s headline claims are much larger than the figures commonly seen in those earlier listings.
56 mL Does Not Verify 100,000 Puffs
The 56 mL figure gives WASPE’s puff claim more context, but it does not prove the device will deliver 100,000 puffs.
Liquid can be used at different rates. Longer draws usually consume more liquid than short ones, and two devices can produce different amounts of aerosol even when they hold the same amount of e-liquid.
For that reason, the test method matters more than the headline number. A useful test report would show puff duration, airflow, time between puffs, electrical conditions, the number of devices tested and the point at which the test was stopped.
650 mAh vs 650 mAh
Both products list a 650 mAh rechargeable battery.
The published capacity difference is:
650 mAh − 650 mAh = 0 mAh.
So there is no battery-capacity advantage in the published specifications.
That does not mean the batteries are identical. 650 mAh tells us capacity, not cell quality, charging control, heat protection or short-circuit protection.
The lifetime puff figures should also be kept separate from battery capacity. These are rechargeable devices, so the same battery can go through multiple charges before the liquid is used up.
CDC notes that defective e-cigarette batteries have caused fires and explosions, including incidents during charging.[2] Without independent electrical testing, the shared 650 mAh figure is not enough to compare battery safety or long-term reliability.
40 × 40 × 112 mm vs 47 × 47 × 118 mm
Marsilen NOVA 4in1 is listed at 40 × 40 × 112 mm.
WASPE 4-in-1 is listed at 47 × 47 × 118 mm.
That makes WASPE:
- 6 mm taller, or about 5.4%;
- 7 mm wider, or about 17.5%;
- 7 mm deeper, also about 17.5%.
Using the published outside dimensions as a simple rectangular box:
Marsilen: 40 × 40 × 112 = 179,200 mm³ ≈ 179 cm³.
WASPE: 47 × 47 × 118 = 260,662 mm³ ≈ 261 cm³.
That gives WASPE an external rectangular bounding volume about 45% larger.
This is useful for understanding the size difference, but it is not the same as internal capacity. The body contains a battery, electronics, structural parts and unused space, so a 45% larger outer volume does not mean 45% more usable space inside.
Four Chambers and Four Heating Sections
Both models use four flavor sections.
Marsilen describes NOVA 4in1 as having four independent pre-filled chambers with separate mesh-coil heating sections. WASPE lists four flavors together with four 1.0 Ω mesh coils.
What those specifications confirm is the use of separate liquid sections and separate heating elements. They do not automatically confirm that the entire path from the chamber to the mouthpiece stays completely separate.
So “four separate reservoirs” is a reasonable hardware description. A stronger claim such as zero flavor crossover would need direct testing of the complete airflow system.
1.0 Ω Does Not Mean the Same Heat Output
Both products publish a 1.0 Ω mesh-coil specification, which means their stated coil resistance is the same.
Ω means ohms, the unit used to measure electrical resistance.
Resistance is only one part of how a coil behaves. Voltage, power, airflow, coil design and the liquid itself can all affect temperature and aerosol output.
So two 1.0 Ω coils do not necessarily perform the same way in two different devices.
That number also tells us nothing about which device produces lower-risk aerosol. CDC states that e-cigarette aerosol can contain nicotine, volatile organic compounds, very small particles and metals including nickel, tin and lead.[2]
“20mg” Is Not the Same as “20 mg/mL”
Marsilen’s reviewed product information uses the wording “salt nicotine: 20mg.”
That wording needs to be read exactly as written.
mg measures an amount.
mg/mL measures concentration.
They are different measurements. If the product information does not include the “per mL” part, it should not automatically be rewritten as 20 mg/mL.
The same standard applies to WASPE. A nicotine figure from one WASPE model should not be copied across to another model unless the manufacturer clearly states that the same formulation applies.
CDC states that most e-cigarettes contain nicotine, which is highly addictive, and that nicotine can harm the developing adolescent brain.[2]
No Public Data Proves Better Build Quality
There is no published failure-rate data here that would support calling one product better built than the other.
A useful comparison would need figures such as leak rates, battery-cycle results, electronics failures and results across more than one production batch.
Dimensions, battery size, coil resistance and puff claims do not answer those questions.
Customer comments can point to individual problems, but they cannot establish a reliable failure rate. One failed unit does not prove that every unit has the same issue, and one trouble-free unit does not prove consistent quality across a production run.
No Public Data Proves Lower-Risk Aerosol
The available specifications also do not support a claim that Marsilen produces lower-risk aerosol than WASPE, or the other way around.
That would require independent testing of multiple devices, ideally from more than one production batch. Relevant measurements would include nicotine delivery, metals, volatile organic compounds, carbonyl compounds and particle emissions.
CDC states that no tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, are safe and that scientists are still studying their short- and long-term health effects.[2]
80,000 puffs, 100,000 puffs, 650 mAh and 1.0 Ω are product specifications. None of them is a health-risk measurement.
48 E-Cigarette Products Are Currently FDA Authorized
FDA’s current list contains 48 authorized e-cigarette products.[3]
FDA states that these are the only e-cigarettes currently authorized for lawful sale in the United States.
The names Marsilen and WASPE were not found on the FDA authorized-product list reviewed for this article.
That finding should be read narrowly. It means those names did not appear on the list when it was checked. It does not automatically answer every question about a company, another product name, another country or future regulatory changes.
FDA also makes clear that marketing authorization does not mean a product is safe or “FDA approved.”[3]
Do Not Put E-Cigarettes in Household Trash
EPA says e-cigarettes should not be placed in normal household trash or recycling.[4]
The devices contain lithium batteries and may still contain nicotine. A damaged lithium battery can start a fire in waste-handling equipment, while leftover nicotine can create risks for workers and the environment.
EPA recommends taking household e-cigarette waste to an appropriate household hazardous-waste collection site.[4]
Finally
The main published difference is 80,000 versus 100,000 advertised puffs, a 25% gap on paper. Battery capacity and coil resistance are the same at 650 mAh and 1.0 Ω. WASPE’s 56 mL figure allows one extra check: 100,000 ÷ 56 ≈ 1,786 advertised puffs per mL, around 2.3 times the 2024 average calculated from a published U.S. retailer study. Its published dimensions also give an external bounding volume about 45% larger. Those figures make the specification differences easy to see. They still do not establish real-world lifespan, battery quality, build consistency or lower-risk aerosol without independent testing.
Sources
- Nicotine & Tobacco Research / PubMed Central: Trends in product characteristics of disposable e-cigarettes sold by U.S. online stores between 2022 and 2024.
- U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Health Effects of Vaping and CDC e-cigarette health guidance.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration: E-Cigarettes, “Vapes” and Other Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) Authorized by the FDA. Current FDA list: 48 authorized products.
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: How to Safely Dispose of E-Cigarettes: Information for Individuals.
