Given its importance, several articles related to the Clausius/Clapeyron equation have appeared in the Journal of Chemical Education over the past 70 years. In 1951, Brown motivated the inclusion of compressibility as done here in the present study. Likewise, the article "Putting Clapeyron's Equation into Practical Use with No Help from Clausius" by Waldenstrøm et al. , points out the limitation of the conventional form of the Clausius/Clapeyron equation which assumes change in compressibility upon vaporization is taken to be 1. The authors subsequently provide an excellent discussion on the modeling of the log vapor pressure as a function of temperature. Unfortunately, the material is likely too advanced for most undergraduate thermodynamics courses where students are exposed to the Clapeyron equation for the first time. This is similar to the more recent article "On the Clausius-Clapeyron vapor pressure equation" by Velasco et al. who likewise point out the limitation of the conventional form of the Clausius/Clapeyron equation which assumes change in compressibility upon vaporization is taken to be 1. In the introduction, they further mention that for some substances the ratio of the enthalpy of vaporization relative to the change in compressibility upon vaporization is constant, as we will show in the present manuscript. The authors used this to model the phase behavior of a range of fluids wherein the critical point was adopted as the reference state, which facilitate the use of reduced units. Furthermore, the authors developed an analytic correction to the Clausius/Clapeyron. While this work mentions that for some substances the ratio of the enthalpy of vaporization relative to the change in compressibility upon vaporization is constant, they do not provide further explanation or examples.