Update report....
Battery is no doubt improved for longevity, and though it's not confirmed, it seems to draw more evenly as it drops in charge. Would also believe it packs something closer to the 3.4 range vs 3.2? No meter to check, but this battery draws nearly as well off the charge as a 3.7. Nearly being the optimum word.
Still in contention this set up does not need the LR atty (for me) and still waiting on the 2.2-2.4 standard atty. Condensation in the cartridge remains the same, but is easily controlled using the Q Tip swab method and necessary removal of the inner baffle. No leaks around the rubber cap and not sure, but this unit makes leaking near impossible. Look for the exact same action from the previous Type A tank, save for any leaking.
Atty? It runs like a champ but this is typical for the first couple of weeks. Update is only 1 week in and premature to assess the units performance in longevity. However, I would give it a 25% better rating over the previous A Tank, in this new and improved version. Atty does take a while to break in. First couple of days was low performance,and even though the primer was blown out, it did not run smooth until after about 3 tank fulls of juice.
Favorite juices are still running better flavor in the carto. Believe this has much to do with efficiency of the atty, and no need for the LR? It's slightly burning 70-30 mixes and produces a harsh TH (with some heat). Easy adjustment of the wick has not eliminated this. Removal of the tank and direct drip into spike does produce the DD affect, so it could still be the same old feed problem.
Is the wicking process not right for the LR? Or, do we have the same old not wicking fast enough for the unit as a whole.....as suggested by an earlier post? Again, if one removes the tank and drips directly into the spike, it seems to hit like a 306 bridge-less atty. Hmmmm.....could be the tank vacuum at this point.
Need time and feedback.