The price of grinders in Europe differ from those in the US. Most are a more expensive, but the Macap seems to be an exception. After some extensive searching I have found the following machines at the prices listed (ex VAT):

Mazzer Mini: $470 - $600 (plus shipping)
Mazzer Super Jolly: $550 - $1200 (plus shipping)

Macap M4: $360 - $370 (inc shipping)
Macap MX: $480 (inc shipping)
Macap MXK: $930 (inc shipping)

Compac K10: $950 (plus shipping)

Right now I am leaning towards the Super Jolly or the MXK. I really want a good grinder without the need for an upgrade any time soon. If I pick the MXK I must be able to justify the price difference though (and right now I feel I am desperately searching for that excuse hehe).

The main thing holding me back is the Titan Grinder Project threads (great reading, thank you!). As an engineer the charts and analysis all appeal to me. But, bottom line... Is the taste profile of the MXK what I am looking for? I most definitely prefer sweet & chocolaty to pungy and sour flavours. I have thrown out a number of blends due to this preference. Some of this could be attributed to my skills of course, I most certainly have a thing or two to learn...

Super Jolly or MXK?

Current setup is a PID Silvia and Rocky Doser.

Dieter01 wrote:Right now I am leaning towards the Super Jolly or the MXK. I really want a good grinder without the need for an upgrade any time soon. If I pick the MXK I must be able to justify the price difference though (and right now I feel I am desperately searching for that excuse hehe).

Chris' Coffee loaned us the Macap MXK for last year's EspressoFest and it took the slow road back to Albany through my kitchen. It's now among the evaluation grinders for the Titan Grinder Project. After several months of use, the MXK was on my shortlist of grinder upgrades. I shared Jim's sentiment about the unusually loud clack of the doser (seriously, my kids and wife would complain about it). But the grinder quality was very good. Despite visible clumping, it was much easier to get even pours with it than say on my Mazzer Mini, as I mentioned in the Bench thread:

HB wrote:On a related note, Chris' Coffee loaned us the conical Macap MXK for EspressoFest last year and I held onto it for awhile afterward. The Macap is geared down to 400 RPM and the grounds "extrude" from it slowly. Based on the visual clumping, I expected uneven extractions would follow, but oddly enough, the Macap demanded less distribution fastidiousness than grinders like the Mazzer Mini that are nearly clump-free. I cannot explain why grounds with more visual clumping "lay out" better than grounds with less clumping and yet they do.

From the viewpoint of the barista, perhaps grinders can produce "bad" clumps and "harmless" clumps? Can we qualify these grinders' forgiveness factor? That's been at the top of my to-do list, i.e., understanding how the choice of equipment can contribute to realized benefits for the average home barista, not just theoretical benefits only attainable by the innately skilled and highly initiated.

My comparisons of the Super Jolly and Mazzer Kony on the same thread were surprisingly close. I expected the Kony to blow away all challengers, and yet it only squeaked out narrow victories. Jim now has all the TGP candidates plus some unscheduled entrants; I'm interested to hear his take on these three (Mazzer Super Jolly, Kony, and Macap MXK). In terms of forgiveness of distribution errors, the Super Jolly would be more demanding, though by a fairly small margin. John noted consistently brighter notes from the MXK. I wasn't comparing it side-by-side with any particular grinder at the time and didn't notice this tendency; it may reflect personal preference or the blends we happen to choose, I don't know.

BTW, the next round of the TGP will follow the final Can it Beat the Mazzer Robur? entry. We'll take your question (MXK or Super Jolly?) into consideration when deciding on the best grinder pairs for testing.

PS: Dieter's question is also cross-posted to CG.

Thanks again for the effort you guys are putting in, much appreciated!

Someone (I think it was Jim) mentioned in one of the TGP threads that the Super Jolly was less consistent, but also that grind consistency was less important in the home environment. Not sure how to interpret that... By less consistent do you mean that it produces the occasional sink shot, or just that the taste varies a bit - not necessarily to better or worse, just different each time?

If they were priced at the same level, would you prefer the SJ or the MXK? The way I interpret things the majority of the panel prefer the taste profile of the SJ. Or?

Looking forward to see if there is a difference between the duranium and regular burrs! I'm staying tuned...

One additional question...

I will be using the grinder for both espresso and FP. How does an MXK (without wormgear) compare to the SJ with regards to dialing in the grind when switching back and forth?