Hi all, I'm not sure if there is even any interest in this topic but it's on my mind and I know there is a lot of great experience out here, so I'll ask:

I have a Cona D I brew my wife's coffee in. It does a great job but it's fragile and occasionally stalls out. I was wondering how you good folks would compare (mostly the quality of the coffee produced) a Brikka Moka pot to a Cona Vac pot?? Extraction? Sediment? Smooth/sweet/bitter?? Just based on the coffee, which would you choose?? I understand many brewing techniques do not compare to each other well (How would I compare my Europiccola to the Cona??? They are too different) Is that the case with the Brikka and the Cona?? I expect the strength of the coffee produced in the Brikka will be too intense for her and I will wind up adding hot water to dilute it.

Thanks for your thoughts, (I did a search looking for this and didn't find anything but if this has been discussed, my apologies and please provide the link!)

Ken

(and apologies for the dup from CG but it hasn't gotten any traction there)

There really isn't any comparison; both will brew at very different temperatures. Personally, I haven't used moka pots for ages because I feel that they tend to burn most beans. By contrast, vac pots tend to extract brighter flavours by virtue of the lower temperatures. It may be that a really light roast Brazilian would perform very well in a moka pot, but the same thing would be unbearable in a vac pot. I seem to remember moka pots producing a richer extraction.

... I'm sure others will chime in.

Thanks for the input, Luca. Kinda suspected that...

Apparently, no one else has compared these two traditional styles. Someday I may try a Moka pot. Right now I'm learning the ins and outs of the Aeropress. Interesting device. I've gotten several very good cups from it.

Ken

The Brikka's a fun little device to brew with, having the little gizmo that produces "crema". The crema it's advertised as creating is pathetic, but it's fun watching and listening to it try. It can be tricky to brew in this pot without coffee gushing over in the final climactic brewing moment, but getting it right is part of the fun. Most Italian families actually use this kind of brewer (most without the crema gizmo) in their homes. It makes a more bitter cup, and you could call it rich. There's really no sediment. I used to frequently brew with it and enjoyed it. It seemed to produce a more caffeinated kick than other brewing methods, so I layed off. I recommend buying one just for kicks, especially if you can get a good deal on one in a department store in Italy, or on eBay.

Still, having said all that, and since you're asking about the quality differences between the two brewers, I recommend the Cona for your girlfriend. You're looking at two completely different beverages here. Or go with a french press or something similar like the Evo. They're not as fragile and won't stall. These will all make a fine cup of coffee.

Thanks NEC, I'll keep an eye out. It sound like fun. I guess the thing I read about it I didn't really care for was the advice that said you should use it every day for good results. I doubt it would ever be more than a novelty for me. I enjoy my La Pavoni too much!

Ken

I don't see any reason why they'd have that advice, unless by "good results" they mean more use of their product and therefore less use of competitors' products, plus more exposure for them when others see you use it. I suppose Bialetti would view that as good results.

NewEnglandCliff wrote:I don't see any reason why they'd have that advice, unless by "good results" they mean more use of their product and therefore less use of competitors' products, plus more exposure for them when others see you use it. I suppose Bialetti would view that as good results.

Perhaps. What they said was the flavor develops as the pot "seasons" and this needs to be kept "fresh". Allowing the pot to sit for periods lets the seasoning "sour" and scrubbing it off means reseasoning. Does this in any way "hold water"??

Thanks!!

Ken

Yes, that does hold some water. Calling it fresh is reaching, but having older coffee oils and residue dried onto it would be less fresh. One things certain and that's that the internal parts are very difficult to access and clean. Soaking in cleaner is really required.

NewEnglandCliff wrote:Yes, that does hold some water. Calling it fresh is reaching, but having older coffee oils and residue dried onto it would be less fresh. One things certain and that's that the internal parts are very difficult to access and clean. Soaking in cleaner is really required.

Interesting because the things I've been reading say to never ever do that. Just rinse it out with hot water and let it dry. No soap. You always hear that about cooking in cast iron as well and that is exactly what I do. No soap, ever.

Ken