another_jim wrote:The proportions are slightly different: 240/4000 = 0.6; while 12/175 = 0.0686. Trial and error?

That would be a significant difference if the math was correct

240/4000≠0.6, 240/4000 = 0.06

But I imagine what is essentially .06 vs .07 would be an indetectable difference to most.

All this has made me wonder at the lack of mention of the Eva Solo. Especially given Jim's preferences for coarse grind, minimal agitation, and minimal percolation phase, the Evo Solo would seem to be a natural fit. You do definitely get sediment, as with a French press, but given that, it's about perfect.

Best,
David

yakster wrote:+1, I brewed up an 8 cup pot of Kona this morning in my Yama 8 syphon with the Pyrex Lox-In glass rod. It was quite good, but a bit more work to clean-up. I used to brew with the syphon every weekend, ...now relegated the syphon to more occasional use.

This is notice of unconditional waiver as of 10.27.13 from the Yama Yaks, and you are free to negotiate with any steeped team in the league.

TomC wrote:That would be a significant difference if the math was correct

240/4000≠0.6, 240/4000 = 0.06

But I imagine what is essentially .06 vs .07 would be an indetectable difference to most.

Well if we look at the brewing control chart & assume a consistent protocol & constant TDS the difference between 60g/l & 70g/l suggests a 3% difference in extraction yield...more than an indetectable difference. If we assume a constant yield, then we get 0.20% to 0.25% difference in TDS, or the difference between ideal concentration for SCAA & SCAE, versus outside their respective ideal boxes.

That's not to suggest the difference is that between a good brew & malfunction, just that you wouldn't have a hard time telling the difference.

another_jim wrote:The proportions are slightly different: 240/4000 = 0.6; while 12/175 = 0.0686. Trial and error?

One is a pour over, the other is immersion. A 12g/200g pourover also gets the same grind setting.

Thanks Marshall. I guess I should have asked a better question:

If I used my immersion grind for pourover, the water would flow through so fast that it would be very underextracted. Is it possible to slow the pour down so far that using relatively coarse grinds for pourover is possible?

This is possible, within reason, especially if you have a good pouring kettle. I think this is why some outfit their pouring kettles with flow restrictors and others opt for kettles better performance like the Takahiro kettle. I was lucky to find a nice Italian pouring kettle at a thrift store who's design seems to match the look of my Gaggia Factory and has a very narrow bore in the goose neck for a fraction of the price of the Takahiro. it was probably originally a kettle for pouring olive oil in a former life. You can see it with my Kalita Wave filters from a recent pour-over session.

another_jim wrote:Thanks Marshall. I guess I should have asked a better question:

If I used my immersion grind for pourover, the water would flow through so fast that it would be very underextracted. Is it possible to slow the pour down so far that using relatively coarse grinds for pourover is possible?

Possibly...by pouring in very small pulses. Though, you can often grind finer for immersion than people often do, limiting factor is particles getting through metal filters/screens & how closely you have to watch the time to hit your preferred yield.

If you fill up a pourover, you get a lot of dilution to start with, then a fast flow through the bed (less efficient rinsing out of dissolved solids), then as flow slows towards the end, more TDS is washed from the coffee. So it starts out relatively weak, & ends strong (compared to a pulse pour - maybe just a shade under the average TDS of the beverage, but can be equal, or even a shade more).

If you pour in small pulses the output from the pourover is much more concentrated to start with, the slow flow washes out the solids more aggressively (a little counter intuative) and the last output of the pourover will be very weak (compared to the start & to the fill & drain example, maybe just 0.3 to 0.4%TDS?).

So, to get the same (or perhaps "equivalent" would be a better term?) result (TDS & yield), from the same weight of dose & brew water, can require a massively different grind size depending on pour technique.