Posted Thu Mar 17, 2005, 10:34am Subject: Re: I'm about to just put the names on the wall and start throwing darts....
JonR10 Said:
???? I don't see the logic in that. Wouldn't you still pull ~2 ounces in ~25 seconds? The difference is that for the S1 basket that water will contact MORE coffee grounds by weight or volume (unless you use a 58mm triple).
Each drop touches more grounds on the way through, but it moves faster due to the fact that the path is longer and narrower. There is still the same amount of water in contact with the grounds for the same time in a 25 sec, 2oz shot. Don't know if this makes a difference, but I doubt it. I believe The M3 uses a 58mm basket, although I suspect that is more due to default than design.
Allaeh Senior Member Joined: 22 Feb 2005 Posts: 18 Location: California Expertise: Just starting
Espresso: Expobar Brewtus Grinder: Mazzer Super Jolly BABY!!!
Posted Thu Mar 17, 2005, 9:23pm Subject: Re: I'm about to just put the names on the wall and start throwing darts....
KittJ Said:
So I am happy with the Brewtus and I haven't seen any real dissapointment by any of the owners. WLL chose to bring it in without some of the aesthetic add-ons, but seems willing to order them for those of us who want to dress it up. Kitt
I'll jump on the bandwagon. It is not true that each drop of brew water passes through more coffee per say, only that the geometry is variable. The 53mm PF, holding the same 17 or so grams of grounds merely present a taller filter bed through which the brew water must pass. This is not new territory; all one has to do is google "filter beds" or "packed column beds" to get oodles of hits from the chemistry and geological fields. More than enough casual reading for the average bloke...
I would lean in favor of the 53mm S1 basket based on extraction principles alone. The only drawback I can think of would be thermal gradient issues with a taller filter bed, who knows??
And that geometry affects the flow path of the water. Taking it to an extreme will highlight the point I am trying to make. If you spread 17g of coffee out so that it is about 1mm thick, and probably about the diameter of a CD, then each drop of water (if you could manage to distribute it) would only pass through a small proportion of the grounds. OTOH, if you packed a double into a very long drinking straw, each drop of water will touch pretty much all the grounds on the way through.
I would lean in favor of the 53mm S1 basket based on extraction principles alone. The only drawback I can think of would be thermal gradient issues with a taller filter bed, who knows??
What are these extraction principles? I don't have the interest in filter beds to spend all day reading up about them. If you push the same amount of water at the same temp and pressure through the same coffee grounds for the same length of time, how would one extract better than the other. The only advantage I can think of for the reduced diameter is perhaps reduced channeling.
Posted Fri Mar 18, 2005, 5:35am Subject: Re: I'm about to just put the names on the wall and start throwing darts....
JeremyR Said:
I don't have the interest in filter beds to spend all day reading up about them. If you push the same amount of water at the same temp and pressure through the same coffee grounds for the same length of time, how would one extract better than the other. The only advantage I can think of for the reduced diameter is perhaps reduced channeling.
Don't forget that the S1 basket HOLDS MORE COFFEE than the standard E61 doubles, so chances are you can get a nicer shot using the S1 than using any standard E61 setup (of course the bottomless triple setup holds even more coffee than that per shot).
All the conversation about geometry and physics is theoretical at best and you can argue each side but the S1 basket holds about 18-20 grams of coffee rather than 14-16 grams in a normal double basket and THAT is what makes a difference in the cup (no calculations required).
So you could possibly assert that this particular 53mm portafilter does indeed cause each drop of water to contact more grounds just because there are more grounds to work with.
I think you nailed it. This is what is important to me. And I think that this is most important to alot of other 'geeks.
We can debate the merits of machine design and the science of coffee extraction all day, but what counts on a practical level is taste and repeatibility.
It seems that all the machines mentioned in this thread produce great coffee (when done right) and provide repeatible results (if done right).
Jeremy
"I've appeared before every court in the state. Often as a lawyer." - Lionel Hutz, Esq.
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.
= No New Posts since last visit 