Hey all,

Long story short. I use my Pharos at work for my Espro press and Aeropress.

I know, I know. This goes against prevailing wisdom. Everyone says use a Lido 2 for Immersion.

But I grind much finer and cut the brew time down. Closer to espresso grind and limit to 3 minutes or so. I don't find it overly bitter and like the cup.

I bought the Pharos #1134(one of the last assembled by Doug) initially because I just wanted to have one. Already have a K10PB and Vario for espresso. Was going to pair it with a Mypressi Twist at work. Then decided to restrict espresso for home or cafes.

Co-workers look at me & my gear and think I'm nuts; but in a good way, of course.

Am I missing out by using my Pharos for immersion at work? Thoughts?

I don't see a problem as long as you can keep silt in the cup down (shouldn't be an issue with the brewers you mention).

Hey MWJB. Does the Pharos produce more fines than, say, a Lido? Or, is this just the case at coarser settings. That was my thinking behind grinding finer with the Pharos and shortening brew time.

Just as an experiment, you might try a coarser setting too. Before there was a LIDO I took a Pharos on a trip with an Aeropress and enjoyed my Counter Culture Idido coffee thoroughly at that setting. Now I might taste a difference. Then it was pretty good.

I don't have a Pharos so can't compare, but if you're not noticing fines in the cup, or bittering from suspended solids, I wouldn't worry. I don't think the fine particles are really going to damage your cup, in fact with the short steep, they'll probably be positively contributing to it. I'd be more concerned about large particles.

I haven't done a great deal of French presses with the Lido2, mostly Sowdens (around a turn out) which shows up fines a bit more, as the grounds are suspended in the brew, not sunk to the bottom. I grind just coarse enough to keep the silt down, lately I have also been sieving out the boulders (~1.2mm+) with a regular kitchen sieve.

I generally brew French presses with fine grinds anyway (broadly in typical espresso territory, e.g. well under 0.75 of a turn with Lido1, sometimes with a Turkish grinder when visiting relatives), the main problems can be stopping fines/solids getting in the cup &, if a very fine grind, dry clods of grounds that don't extract, leaving you with a weaker cup. Silt aside, I'd brew just coarse enough that the pour is enough to fully wet the grinds...if in doubt give a quick NSEW stir on filling the brewer.

As you set grinders coarser, they usually make less 'fines', but the boulders will increase.

I like the Lidos because I usually brew large pots (60-70g doses), but if I was brewing smaller pots, I'd go with the grinder that ground the dose fastest & still produced a tasty result.

Taste is king. If you like it whats the problem? Yearning for what could be will lead to nothing but trouble, haha.

I've read about people with a pharos and lido 2 on this forum stating that for brewing the lido 2 wins. I cant recall where to find such quote but i'm sure some searching would find it.

i would personally hesitate to take the anecdotal comments as law. My coneys are on pourover as i have done limited immersion but the ckncerned should translate.

There are so many variables involved in preparing coffee that it seems highly likely that the little data we have is just not reliable.

In one major comparison there was a "Throwdown" that gave a heavy preference to the Lido2 for coarser grinds. We are, of course, talking about just a couple of palettes, with a very small sample size of grinds and tastings.

Looking at just that one "Throwdown" even in that one sampling there could have been user error on the pouring of one or two cups (perhaps even a pouring style that benefited one over the other), perhaps there was some retention when changing settings-the Pharos is much more susceptible to this if not shaken properly...-- the grind might not have been perfectly dialed in for one vs the other, The scale they were using might not have allowed for precise and exact dialing in even since the PHaros does not come with one, and there could have been a bad bean here or there, or that the difference in the grinds just happened to compliment that one particular coffee or the temperature of the brew used just happened to benefit where they dialed in the Lido2 and the PHaros

All of that got really convoluted but the main point is that one single "Throwdown" is wonderful to see, but just not conclusive.

To give my personal experience:

I have been using the Pharos for pourover. I currently have a bag of CC Hologram I am drinking. There is a wonderful and very present (though slightly sour) cherry that is really enjoyable and can be smelled in the beans themselves. (It is almost a punch in the face pronounced in the espresso.)

However, by grinding for 18Grams on my v60 I can adjust the grind setting 1/30th of a turn I find that I mute those cherries and with a 5degree Celsius increase in starting temp I can have a much more simple and "plain cup" and even bring in a slightly ashy bitter taste to the end of the cup.

With 5C lower degrees and 1/30th coarser it disappears and is very complex and lovely. This is, frankly, a very small change in grind setting, and it is on a finer threaded rod than used to be used (1/2-20 thread vs I think it was a 1/2-13?). Thus it is not at all inconceivable that the settings used in any particular throwdown were off by 1/40 or 50th of a turn on the original threaded rod. or any other multitude of possibilities.

Now, for five years I used an MDF. I never once had such a wonderful coffee as this Hologram but I bought Rustico regularly....I also did not have a goosneck kettle, I did not know how to do pourover correctly, I did not have as precise a temperature reading, and I did not have as refined a palette.

So even in comparing my MDF to the Pharos I would really have to go back and spend time dialing in the MDF-and drink many drinks at various slight changes in temperature and grind setting to determine if the change was my own development, perperation, and skill, to really say the MDF was the main factor.

Thus, a single Throwdown is not conclusive, and anecdotal evidence is just not sufficient either.

To make matters more complicated there are not very many people who regularly use and alternate between the Pharos and Lido2 and have all the other proper equipment, skills, and a sufficiently refined experience to provide the necessary feedback.

Obviously a different built burr set has the ability to offer different characteristics in the cup, that seems a no brainer, but the LIDO2 was not to my knowledge designed specifically for coarse grinds, and as such the idea that it would be inherently better than the Pharos just doesn't seem logical, and that more likely than not the other factors mentioned above-grind retention, ease of precise and repeatable settings and minute adjustment control, spending the time to dial in for a particular bean on that particular grinder, experience of the user, and everything else, are what has led to the perception that the LIDO2 is truly superior for pourover, aeropress, etc.

or perhaps I am wrong. If anyone in South Carolina was on Home-Barista and with a Lido2 we could have another throwdown. But I seem to be adrift here in the south.

Anecdotal evidence is all we are going to get here. That's what he asked for an what he received. The results have been consistent. Honestly, another thrown down wouldn't be the best use of time as there's much better comparisons that I'd rather see instead. Not to mention a v60 brew is completely different than immersion brewing (or at least I think so).

Now, let's toss in the HG one, which also has the large conical burrs. I don't think it compares too favorably in the coarser grind range. Could it just be that the larger burrs magnify misalignment? maybe.

I haven't used a pharos, so take what I say for what it's worth.

I've used my Pharos for pretty much every brew method. the only thing I found that I absolutely don't recommend it for is siphon, the increased fines made for way too slow draw down.

For anything else, it makes noticably more fines than my preciso (which is what I compared it to, and which is probably pretty similar to a lido) but the actual flavor was good. I've actually made some quite excellent french presses, but you have to be able to tolerate the substantial mud in the cup. Some people just can't deal with that. For me personally I prefer the preciso but the pharos is fine in a pinch. Talking of course about brewing methods, I much prefer Pharos for espresso.

Nate42 wrote: I've actually made some quite excellent french presses, but you have to be able to tolerate the substantial mud in the cup. Some people just can't deal with that.

I'm one of those people that, whilst loving French press coffee, can't deal with substantial mud in the cup...a little haziness? Sure, it's unavoidable (though, the OP has an Espro which will eliminate most of the mud). Sink any grinds that are floating well ahead of pouring, let them drop out of the way & settle, discard the first few tens of ml before pouring the first cup (there's usually silt trapped in the surface layer).