Zassenhaus vs. Macap M4 Stepless

by **hyoungblood** on Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:04 am

Hi everybody, this is my first post on Home Barista.

I have recently thrown myself into the world of espresso and purchased a Gaggia Achille to get started.

I homeroast with a FreshRoast +8 and SweetMaria's beans, and have a Zassenhaus 169 DG, and a Zassenhaus Turkish Mill (for work / backup).

I am currently using the Zassenhaus 169 DG, and am started to wonder if I should purchase a dedicated espresso grinder. Compared to hand mills, how much better and more consistent are the Macap M4's? Now, I know that espresso quality is largely dependent on user capability. But I would seriously consider purchasing a Macap M4, if the quality difference b/w the Macap and the Zassenhaus is substantial, as having more dependable equipment would make my life more easier and give me confidence in my equipment. Also, it gets pretty annoying after about the 3rd shot to keep going with my hand mill.

I also have gift certificates with WLL, so would almost certainly want to buy new.

Any and all help would be tremendously appreciated. Thank you!

by HB on Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:16 am

Funny, I'm looking from the opposite viewpoint.

From what I've read, manual grinder performance varies depending on the year and model, even by the same manufacturer. Still, I find the idea of pairing a lever and manual grinder appealing, if I could find one that's reasonably priced and pulls a good shot. Jim's Can it Beat the Mazzer Robur? includes a Pede grinder (you can skip directly to the fight here). That's only one man's opinion, but he thought the little guy performed admirably.

That said, I have to admit becoming a bit spoiled since the Titan Grinder Project. Yes, the Robur is huge, but it's a good kind of huge. :lol:

by **peacecup** on Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:09 am

That was only one man's opinion cuts both ways - that is, as much as I respect Jim as one HB's that seeks objective results, that was just one test with one old hand grinder. And he would admit he wasn't used to dialing it in. Also, the PeDe might have done even better (or worse, of course) with other beans, etc, and other hand grinders may have done better.

The grinder I sent Jim was the oldest in my lot - 50 years or so, with a beat-up paint job, pitted chrome, etc. I sent that one because I thought it would look nice compared to the Titans. Its a testimony as to just how well a GOOD hand grinder works, and for how incredibly LONG. I now have that PeDe paired with my Caravel for ultra-quiet office espresso, after its return trip "across the pond". Its been grinding three shots a day for the past 5 years, first with a pump, now with the manual lever. With the Caravel I can see just how fine of a stepless adjustment that PeDe is capable of - just an 1/8 turn of the adjustment makes a noticeable difference in the lever pull pressure when using the same beans and dose.

Does this mean a Zass can beat the Macap? I have no way to compare, because I've never used a such a great electric grinder (or even a good one!). Plus, my impression of Zasses, from a limited number of samples, is that they are not quite as precise as the PeDe's I've had.

If you have some way of doing some blind taste tests between the two before purchasing it might be worth a try.

PC

by HB on Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:23 am

peacecup wrote:Plus, my impression of Zasses, from a limited number of samples, is that they are not quite as precise as the PeDe's I've had.

I've read variations on this same comment here and elsewhere. Let me rephrase my concern in a the form of a question: Where could I buy a reasonably priced manual grinder and be confident that it would work well for espresso? Let's assume that I don't want to scour eBay looking for antiques and playing hit or miss.

I like the sound of Orphan Espresso's espresso grinder promise:

These hand coffee Grinders have been tested, and are absolutely guaranteed to grind coffee beans fine enough for use in Espresso Machines! Not just 'maybe', but absolutely, 100% vetted for Espresso Grind Quality!

That's one option. What about new? All I ever read is Zassenhaus this, Zassenhaus that... is there no other reputable manufacturer of manual espresso grinders in business today? Sorry if the question is naive, I'm genuinely interested.

by **peacecup** on Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:18 am

I honestly don't know if there is another company that makes new ones for espresso, but it seems like there ought to be. it would certainly be a good niche market. The new Zasses do have a reputation of being variable, but so do the used hand grinders.

I think Doug at orphan is the best bet, because I understand he'll guarantee it grinds fine enough or replace it. The higher cost is made up for in less time spent watching auctions, etc.. but of course it takes away one of the incentives of hand grinders (low cost).

In my opinion the largish plain square box shapes, or possibly boxes with carved sides, are most comfortable. I prefer a plain square box between the knees.

Also, a domed metal top, over a flat one or one with a strap brace, seems to me to provide the most stable alignment of the upper end of the axle. I.e. the blue PeDe has a domed metal top.

PC

by **another_jim** on Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:53 am

I admit to being a bit curious about hand grinders since the test. So I bought various models of grain grinders, including one with 130mm monster burrs. However none of them turned out to be particularly good for coffee, and none adjustable enough for espresso.

The entire method of adjustment (a nut on the axle) is a bit dicey for fine grinds, both in terms of burr wobble (which gets worse the larger the burr -- small burrs may work better) and in terms of getting the right fineness. So I think it can easily happen that two grinders from the same brand will produce different results

by **peacecup** on Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:15 am

I can't explain it, but almost every PeDe I've tried grinds fine enough to choke the espresso machines I've used. They've all also had a ball bearing at the bottom, atop the adjustment screw- most others don't. I admit that the top of the axle seems to wobble more or less (depending on model and wear) but with a longish axle this translates to relatively little wobble at the burr end. And they seem to grind finer and more evenly as they wear - I've always thought that this was because the burrs meshed with each other over time, but someone once suggested this is not true. Anyway the blue PeDe is quite old, and it produces a very fine even grind (don't know if it would hold up to SEM analysis though).

I never quite got what is was about the best Titan that seemed to produce the best taste - grind evenness, shape, or what. Given some of the discussions I've seen related to fines migrating to the bottom of the basket, different extraction rates on top and bottom, etc. maybe a perfectly even grind is undesirable?

PC

by HB on Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:56 am

peacecup wrote:I never quite got what is was about the best Titan that seemed to produce the best taste - grind evenness, shape, or what. Given some of the discussions I've seen related to fines migrating to the bottom of the basket, different extraction rates on top and bottom, etc. maybe a perfectly even grind is undesirable?

A consistent particle distribution appears to be the "fingerprint" of a given grinder, whether it's for espresso or other preparation methods. Particle size distributions of ground coffee goes into more detail.

Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) analysis of ground coffee offered another possible contributor:

Maybe different shapes pack differently? John offers some other speculation:

RapidCoffee wrote:The large particles appear rounder (more spherical) on the conical grinders, and more irregularly shaped on the flat burr Super Jolly. This could be a consequence of the longer grinding path in a conical burr grinder. After the initial fracturing, the 400-500um particles might still suffer glancing blows from the rotating burrs. These secondary blows could knock off small irregular protrusions, creating fines (small particles) while rounding the large particle shape. A longer grinding path would lead to more of this behavior, and so we might expect conical grinders to produce rounder large particles and more fines than flat burr grinders.

We have indeed observed more fines from conical grinders in the particle size distribution studies. However, it remains to be seen whether conicals produce rounder particles, and what effect (if any) this has on taste.

by **peacecup** on Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:42 am

So at this time what would be our "working hypothesis" as to why the best is the best (is it the Robur?). I think Jim was going to send off some PeDe grinds off for a scan, but don't know if he did.

Are fines supposed to be good or bad? Or is some mixing of sizes supposed to be beneficial? Hmm..

PC

by **another_jim** on Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:57 pm

I was hoping to have all the grinders scanned; but we couldn't get enough time on the laser sizer. I'm rather uncomfortable hypothesizing based on the scans we have. The Titans got the edge mostly because of their consistency and the very comfortable way they adjusted for grind fineness. Finding out what makes them better at this logically requires the analysis of a large sample of different coffees and grind sizes from each grinder.


Contact Us	Legal disclaimer and copyright: This content and all its parts are copyrighted, all rights reserved. Content including all text and images in part or in whole may not be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission. Home-Barista, Home-Barista.com and related logos are trademarks of Home-Barista.com, LLC. Other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. By accessing this site, you agree to the terms of service. Overall speed: , current page: s, avg: s, max: s