It's interesting that there are so few people participating in this discussion. I really hadn't thought that much about espresso cup design before this thread and now I find myself critically evaluating my cups--interesting.
I agree that the miniature mug is out, the teapot handle is out, and, most likely, the handle-less mug is out. We seem to be back to a fairly classic espresso cup--a vaguely bowl shaped thick-bodied cup with a handle.
I had another thought--could there be some subtle marking (read: decorative element) inside the cup at the (1 and) 2 oz. point? I use a shot glass for timing and test pours but it would be nice to have these markings in my cup as well. Nothing over-the-top, just a dot or something would do it.
Speechless! To keep up with CG is a 24/7 job! If you blink, you will miss a bunch of posts...
Andy and Nancy, you know that I enjoyed talking with you guys on all aspects of cup designs, let it be the shape, material, and weight. The tour to your design studio is a treat itself.
As this moment, my favorite cup is the model Torino by d’Ancap. The shape keeps fluid from slush around in the cup when pouring latte art. The handle is just lovely. The cup is porcelain with good weight, not too heavy to make your fingers tired from squeeze-hold the cup, but enough to have that solid feel.
It's interesting that there are so few people participating in this discussion. I really hadn't thought that much about espresso cup design before this thread and now I find myself critically evaluating my cups--interesting.
Well, from the thread title it is hard to know that this is about what the perfect espresso demitasse is. Also, this seems like a conversation more than a discussion. Like the question of:
WedgeMen Said:
Which brings me to the next point- do either of you use saucers at home?
I am not "either of you", but I will still jump right in! Saucers are nice if you are sitting down drinking it, because demitasses are short and drips don't have far to go to stain table clothes.
The "wing handle" has never been something I've liked. A CG collection would be nice, but CoffeeKid has never seemed interested, at least not that I've seen, in selling ANYTHING from this website, be it coffee blends or cups. It would be nice though...
I had another thought--could there be some subtle marking (read: decorative element) inside the cup at the (1 and) 2 oz. point? I use a shot glass for timing and test pours but it would be nice to have these markings in my cup as well. Nothing over-the-top, just a dot or something would do it.
We put ounce markings inside the cups for Caffe Artigiano. We came across this forum by reading Mark's reviews and comparisons about espresso cups; very informative.
Reighlok Said:
Saucers are nice if you are sitting down drinking it, because demitasses are short and drips don't have far to go to stain table clothes.
If the saucer is to collect drips and not a half ounce slosh of liquid, can we get away from the traditional saucer design? So far we have a pretty standard espresso cup with the possible exception of a handle that fits large fingers. What if the saucer could stand on its own as a decorative element in your kitchen (or shrine) while the cup is laboring away doing test pours; when the time arrives to entertain guests the two come together as a completed piece framing your espresso?
Spinnaker007 Said:
As this moment, my favorite cup is the model Torino by d’Ancap... The cup is porcelain with good weight, not too heavy to make your fingers tired from squeeze-hold the cup, but enough to have that solid feel.
Thanks Steve for letting me dissect this cup; I measured it out and it weighs 226 grams and holds 7 1/2 ounces. By comparison, our 5 ounce tulip-shaped cup weighs 250 grams. If we are to make this "open-source" 3 (?) ounce espresso cup it will probably weigh over 200 grams. Is this getting too heavy?
snoboy Said:
I like a three ounce cup, as I do the occasional double macchiato, and sometimes a single cappucino so 3 oz is versatile for me.
I really like the look of the fat doughnut handle (but it has to be really fat). The only problem with this handle is a heavy cup will tend to rotate between the thumb and forefinger until the middle finger is braced onto the body of the cup. Some people squeeze harder and complain of their arthritis. (Just my observation) Andy
If the saucer is to collect drips and not a half ounce slosh of liquid, can we get away from the traditional saucer design? So far we have a pretty standard espresso cup with the possible exception of a handle that fits large fingers. What if the saucer could stand on its own as a decorative element in your kitchen (or shrine) while the cup is laboring away doing test pours; when the time arrives to entertain guests the two come together as a completed piece framing your espresso?
I can't remember needing anything more than the inside of the inside ring of the saucer. Going in a new direction with that might be really interesting, or you could just go minimalist and just have it end after the inside ring.
We put ounce markings inside the cups for Caffe Artigiano. We came across this forum by reading Mark's reviews and comparisons about espresso cups; very informative.
I really like this feature. I can see it being very helpful in a fast pace environment.
I also think it is fine for a demitasse cup to be on the heavier side, because it only takes 2 ~ 3 sips to finish it. Those Nuova Point must be up there as well, yes?
I also think it is fine for a demitasse cup to be on the heavier side, because it only takes 2 ~ 3 sips to finish it. Those Nuova Point must be up there as well, yes?
A friend of ours brought back some "bargin bin" espresso cups from Italy and one of them happened to be a nice thick Nuova Point. It weighs out at 167 grams and holds 2.5 ounces full to the top. One feature of this cup that confused me when I started researching interior shapes was an undercut about a half inch down from the top.
At first I thought this was a design element to retain heat or had something to do with maintaining crema. Then about a year later we switched to a more abrasive clay and the tooling we use to shape the interior started wearing out in this same area and making the same undercut. So now I wonder if this is just a happy accident, or is it implicit in the design?
I figured this was a good time to ask for an informed opinion and would this be a nice feature in the vaguely bowl-shaped, able to fit a large finger, 3 ounce, open-source espresso cup (with the possibility of some kind of abbreviated saucer) project? Andy
Symbols: = New Posts since your last visit = No New Posts since last visit = Newest post
Forum Rules: No profanity, illegal acts or personal attacks will be tolerated in these discussion boards. No commercial posting of any nature will be tolerated; only private sales by private individuals, in the "Buy and Sell" forum. No cross posting allowed - do not post your topic to more than one forum, nor repost a topic to the same forum. Who Can Read The Forum? Anyone can read posts in these discussion boards. Who Can Post New Topics? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post new topics. Who Can Post Replies? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post replies. Can Photos be posted? Anyone can post photos in their new topics or replies. Who can change or delete posts? Any CoffeeGeek member can edit their own posts. Only moderators can delete posts. Probationary Period: If you are a new signup for CoffeeGeek, you cannot promote, endorse, criticise or otherwise post an unsolicited endorsement for any company, product or service in your first five postings.
![Spinnaker007: Torino.jpg](javascript:ImagePopup("/images/21682/Torino.jpg", 640, 480, "Spinnaker007: Torino.jpg");)
![WedgeMen: Nuova_Point_undercut.jpg](javascript:ImagePopup("/images/21735/Nuova_Point_undercut.jpg", 390, 304, "WedgeMen: Nuova_Point_undercut.jpg");)
= No New Posts since last visit 