Lost Vape has built a reputation for delivering stylish, high-performing pod systems, and their Ursa Nano 2 and Ursa Nano 3 are no exceptions. While both devices cater to mouth-to-lung (MTL) enthusiasts, each model brings distinct features to the table. In this review, we’ll compare these two pod kits in terms of design, features, and performance, and conclude which might be the better choice for you.
Design
The Ursa Nano 2 stands out with its dynamic laser-etched backlit panel and ten vibrant color options, such as “Astro Space” and “Chrome Soul.” Its construction combines durable zinc alloy with premium-quality plastic, providing a lightweight yet robust feel. The ergonomic bio-fit grip enhances comfort, making it an ideal daily driver for vapers who prioritize style and convenience. At 83.7mm tall and weighing just 85g, the Nano 2 strikes the perfect balance between portability and aesthetics.
In contrast, the Ursa Nano 3 takes a sleeker and slightly taller form at 113.5mm. Its zinc alloy chassis exudes a premium and modern vibe, with a compact, lightweight build that easily fits in a pocket or purse. While its color options are less diverse than the Nano 2’s lineup, the Nano 3 compensates with an understated elegance that appeals to minimalists.
Features and Performance
Ursa Nano 2
The Nano 2 comes equipped with the Quest 2.0 chip, offering a wattage range of 9-22W and intelligent pod detection for a hassle-free vaping experience. Its 900mAh battery provides decent longevity, supported by Type-C charging for quick recharges. Additional features like auto-draw functionality, smooth airflow control, and a three-phase LED indicator make it user-friendly. The included 0.6Ω and 0.8Ω pods deliver flavorful MTL hits, further enhanced by the system’s smart airflow adjustments.
Ursa Nano 3
The Nano 3 elevates the stakes with a more powerful 5-30W output range and a larger 1000mAh battery, ensuring longer vaping sessions. Its adjustable airflow offers flexibility for both tighter MTL hits and looser draws, catering to a broader audience. The 2.5mL pod capacity is larger than the Nano 2’s, reducing the need for frequent refills. Additionally, the Nano 3’s magnetic pod connection ensures a secure fit, and the device supports a resistance range of 0.3-2.0Ω, making it compatible with various vaping styles.
User Experience
Both devices prioritize ease of use, featuring draw-activated firing and USB Type-C charging for quick top-ups. The Ursa Nano 2 shines in its simplicity, making it ideal for beginners. Meanwhile, the Ursa Nano 3 is better suited for users who seek customizable options with its wider wattage range and adjustable airflow.
However, the Nano 3’s additional features come at the cost of slightly increased size and weight. While still portable, its taller frame may feel bulkier compared to the ultra-compact Nano 2.
Conclusion
Choosing between the Lost Vape Ursa Nano 2 and Ursa Nano 3 boils down to your preferences. The Ursa Nano 2 is perfect for users seeking a stylish, easy-to-use pod kit with reliable performance and vibrant design options. On the other hand, the Ursa Nano 3 is ideal for those who want more power, pod capacity, and customization options while maintaining portability.
For beginners or those who value aesthetics, the Nano 2 is a clear winner. For experienced vapers or anyone looking for a more versatile setup, the Nano 3 is the way to go. Regardless of your choice, Lost Vape ensures a top-tier vaping experience with both models.
Read Also: Lost Vape URSA Nano 3 VS URSA Baby 3 Comparison: Which Is Right for You?