Jammin' Jars 2

Provider

Push Gaming

Default RTP

96.4%

Volatility

High

Maximum win

50,000x

Core mechanic

Cluster

What Jammin' Jars 2 is

Jammin' Jars 2 is the 2021 sequel to Push Gaming's breakout cluster slot. It keeps the 8x8 grid, the cluster-pays structure and the compounding Jam Jar wilds, and adds Giant Symbols, gold vinyl symbols and Giga Spins.

Headline return is 96.40%, volatility is high, and the maximum win is 50,000x your stake — two and a half times the original's ceiling.

It won Game of the Year at the EGR Operator Awards shortly after release, which is a meaningful industry endorsement and says nothing about whether it is the better bet.

The sequel trade, in numbers

	Jammin' Jars	Jammin' Jars 2
Released	2018	2021
Headline return	96.83%	96.40%
House edge	3.17%	3.60%
Cost per $1,000 staked	~$32	~$36
Maximum win	20,000x	50,000x
Grid	8x8 cluster	8x8 cluster

Two and a half times the ceiling, for roughly $4 more per $1,000 staked. Same shape as every sequel on this site: the tail grows, the return falls, and the money to fund the first comes out of the second.

Jam Jar wilds, unchanged

The core mechanic is carried over intact. Jam Jars act as wild and scatter, and when one takes part in a winning cluster it moves to an adjacent position and its multiplier increases, staying in play for the next cascade.

That compounding is the whole engine, in both games. A jar that participates in five consecutive cascades has moved five times and multiplied five times, with every win it touches multiplied by an ever-larger figure. Two jars in play at once, both climbing, is where the famous sequences come from.

Cluster minimum is five connected matching symbols, and clusters of 25 or more are where the serious payouts sit.

Giant Symbols and the Rainbow feature

The sequel's principal addition. The Rainbow feature — present in the original — now introduces Giant Symbols to the grid: oversized blocks covering multiple positions with a single symbol type.

On an 8x8 cluster grid a giant symbol is transformative. It creates a large guaranteed block of matching symbols, which dramatically raises the chance of a qualifying cluster and gives the jars something substantial to multiply.

This is the mechanism behind the higher ceiling. Giant symbols plus compounding jars is a bigger engine than compounding jars alone.

Giga Spins and gold vinyl

Two further additions extend the feature set: gold vinyl symbols and Giga Spins, alongside instant prizes and mega fruit symbols.

Exact trigger conditions, spin counts and modifier behaviour vary between builds and regional versions, so read the paytable in your version rather than relying on any review — including this one — for the specifics.

The structural point that holds: the sequel is a denser game than the original, with more ways for a spin to become interesting and correspondingly more ways for one to produce something visually busy and financially irrelevant.

EGR Game of the Year

Winning Game of the Year at the EGR Operator Awards is a genuine industry marker, and worth explaining what it measures.

The EGR Operator Awards are voted on by operators — the casinos running the games — and reward commercial performance, player engagement and revenue contribution. They are not an assessment of player value.

A game can be excellent for operators and unremarkable for you at the same time, and frequently is. Awards tell you a game is well made and popular; the return figure and the ceiling tell you what it costs. Both are worth knowing and they answer different questions.

Three RTP builds

Push Gaming supplies three RTP configurations for most titles, and 96.40% is the top one here.

Industry documentation notes that most UK slot sites deploy the middle tier, in the 95% bracket — roughly $14 more per $1,000 staked than the headline suggests, and enough to erase the sequel's already-narrow gap to the original.

To check: open the game in real-money mode, open the Paytable, and find the question mark "Help" section inside it.

The published numbers

Statistic	Figure
Headline return	96.40% (top of three configurations)
Maximum win	50,000x
Volatility	High
Grid	8x8, cluster pays, 5+ to win
Additions over the original	Giant Symbols, gold vinyl, Giga Spins, instant prizes
Released	2021

Which Jammin' Jars should you play?

The original if you want the better return and a cleaner game. 96.83% against 96.40% is a real if modest edge, and the compounding jar mechanic is intact in both.

The sequel if you want the bigger ceiling and the denser feature set, and accept about $4 more per $1,000 staked for it.

Unusually, this is a sequel where the case is defensible either way. The gap is small enough that preferring the newer game's mechanics is a reasonable choice rather than a mistake — which is not something we can say about most of the sequels covered on this site.

Whichever you pick, check the build. A middle-tier configuration on either makes the comparison moot.

Stake sizing in practice

• Check the build first — Paytable, then the Help section.
• Budget 300 spins. The value is concentrated in rare sustained chains.
• Watch the jar multipliers rather than the win amounts — the multiplier tells you what kind of sequence you are in.
• Do not raise stakes after dead spins. Jar positions reset every spin.
• Take a large result off the table; a giant-symbol sequence with high jars will not repeat soon.

Where this fits in a session

Jammin' Jars 2 is a deliberate high-variance session at a decent price. The giant symbols give the grid more to work with than the original, and the compounding jars remain one of the best-designed mechanics in slots.

Budget 300 spins at a stake divided down to fit, accept that most spins produce very little, and treat a big sequence as the session's story rather than its plan.

If you want the studio's mechanics at far gentler variance, Wild Swarm at a 97.03% headline is the accessible entry point in this catalogue.

Common misconceptions

The first is that an award-winning game is a better bet. Operator-voted awards measure commercial performance, not player value.

The second is that jar multipliers carry between base-game spins. They do not — each spin starts fresh.

The third is that 96.40% is what you are playing. It is the top of three builds, and the middle tier is commonly deployed.

Who this suits

This suits a cluster-slot player who wants a bigger ceiling than the original at a modest cost, and who has verified the build. The giant symbol addition is a genuine improvement to the mechanic rather than decoration.

It suits poorly anyone on a small budget, and anyone who assumed the newer game must be better — here it is closer than usual, but the original still returns more.

FAQ

The sequel pattern, now documented five times

Jammin' Jars 2 raises the ceiling two and a half times and drops the return 0.43 points. That is the fifth instance of the same trade we have now documented across four separate studios.

Original	Sequel	What changed
Jammin' Jars 96.83%, 20,000x	Jammin' Jars 2 96.40%, 50,000x	Ceiling ×2.5, return −0.43
Immortal Romance 96.86%, 12,150x	Immortal Romance II 96.10%, 15,238x	Ceiling ×1.25, return −0.76
Honey Rush 96.50%, 9,000x	Honey Rush 100 96.20%, 50,000x	Ceiling ×5.5, return −0.30
Sweet Alchemy 96.52%, 3,000x	Sweet Alchemy 100 96.20%, 15,000x	Ceiling ×5, return −0.32
Chaos Crew 96.30%, 10,000x	Chaos Crew 3, up to 30,000x	Ceiling ×3

The reason the pattern is universal is commercial rather than technical: a bigger headline number sells, and a better percentage does not. Once you know that, the shiny new version of a game you liked deserves a check rather than an assumption.

In fairness to this particular sequel, 0.43 points is the second-smallest premium in that table, and Giant Jars is a genuine mechanical addition rather than a cosmetic one. This is a closer call than most.

Instant Win coin prizes

Alongside Giant Jars, the sequel adds coin symbols awarding immediate cash prizes independent of clusters.

Instant-prize symbols are now common across the industry and they serve a specific design purpose worth naming: they give a spin that produced no cluster something to show for itself. A grid that fails to form a winning combination but drops a coin has "paid", even if the amount is trivial.

That improves how the game feels without improving what it returns — the coin values come out of the same fixed percentage. Recognising the mechanic as a smoothing device rather than as added generosity is useful, because it appears on dozens of modern releases and always works the same way.

The practical implication for reading a session: a spin that pays a small coin and nothing else is a losing spin dressed up. Track the balance rather than the frequency of "wins".