I was thinking about this topic too recently after making some improvements to my HX machine. It seems that the conventional wisdom is:

DB > HX > SBDU

However, I think that for most home users the following is now more accurate:

DB > PID brew boiler + thermoblock > HX > SBDU

Of course, as far as I know the CC1 and the Silvano are the only machines in the PID+thermoblock category, and the Silvano is the only one with build quality (at least from materials, appearances and brand) comparable to the prosumer HXes. It just seems like the dead-simple temperature control of the PID brew boiler is a big advantage over flushing on an HX, and if you can get good microfoam on the thermoblock then the main "brew+steam simultaneously" advantage of the HX is largely neutralized. Thus, if the tradeoff is "slightly better steaming power on an HX vs. better temp control on a Silvano", I would think that the Silvano would provide better results in the cup for most serious home users.

Maybe more consistent results, but I doubt better results than a heat exchange machine, just because most of the commercial ones are heat exchange machines it seems, and my Silvano doesn't really give me the same result as a commercial machine, not really a fair comparison though.
I've never used a heat exchange machine, it sounds like it takes a bit of getting used to, but once someone knows how to handle it, and uses it allot (maybe tests it with a scace device to see what temps they're actually getting after various flushing lengths or waiting etc) then some people seem to be able to get fairly consistent results with heat exchange. It's just a bit more work and wastes more water.

You get allot more steam power too with HX machines. I've been having a hard time getting microfoam with my Silvano, although I did manage to get it once or twice and make a heart in my cappa.

I'd love if someone did a direct comparison / taste test though.

I got a Silvano and I'm in Toronto, anyone wanna test it vs a heat exchange machine? :p

Heh, I'm the opposite, I've only used an HX but reading up on the Silvano had intrigued me. Bit far from Toronto though

After futzing with my machine (and with the help of Eric S's thermometer adapter) I'm now able to get pretty consistent results, and it didn't take that long to get a handle on making good microfoam with my machine. I guess the difference is more analagous to "stick shift vs. automatic", i.e. it takes longer to learn and get the hang of things with an HX, but once you do there are tangible benefits to it.

I would say based on my limited experience that the shots from a quality HX and the Silvano (using the same beans and grinder) are similar in taste and texture. The HX was a commercial model so the steam power was much stronger and faster (15 vs 30 sec?) I didn't watch a timer but it was noticeably faster even though I do not consider the Silvano to be a slow steamer.

The choice of grinder will make the big difference in taste if other parameters are kept constant. Also, I did not find the HX flush to be complicated - repeatable shots are not a problem when timing the flush and wait before activating the pump.

Glad to know Silvano and HX machines seem to get similar results, anyone else find the same or otherwise?

sashaman wrote:I was thinking about this topic too recently after making some improvements to my HX machine. It seems that the conventional wisdom is:

DB > HX > SBDU

However, I think that for most home users the following is now more accurate:

DB > PID brew boiler + thermoblock > HX > SBDU

Of course, as far as I know the CC1 and the Silvano are the only machines in the PID+thermoblock category, and the Silvano is the only one with build quality (at least from materials, appearances and brand) comparable to the prosumer HXes.

There seems to be a misconception about the build quality of the CC1 on the forums. The CC1 has a boiler that is Steel. Steel is much more expensive than brass, and it is healthier. In addition to that, the boiler is insulated. Only high end machines like the GS3 have steel boilers...that I found so far. This makes CC1 extremely high up in build quality and IMHO passes any single boiler in it class for build quality.

Just because a boiler is steel doesn't mean it's of high build quality. The construction of the steel could be thin, poorly welded or other aspects - such as a plastic frame - could contribute to a perception of poor build quality.

You would really have to itemize the machine in every aspect to go that far. But if a machine comes with a steel boiler that is insulated, the build quality should not be assumed inferior to a machine like the Silvano which it seems to be compared to most often. All fittings on the machine are brass also...not plastic. I would even go so far to say that the build quality could even be better than <some> lower priced HX machines. Grant you, it's not shiny and pretty but aesthetics aren't really build quality.

Also, don't forget...when you have lead in the water it won't necessarily be bad for you. However, lead in water will cause friction and eventually you will get particles from the boiler surface material in your water. This is stated from a well known engineer for espresso machines. That alone makes a steel boiler a major plus.

It's not that I have any input on the CC1, but I didn't think your earlier criteria was particularly comprehensive.

One of the reasons I went with the Silvano was consistency. I figured with a PID I'd have a stable, programmable, and repeatable temperature, which I now have. The big heavy grouphead also helps. I am aware, however, that a PID can only do so much if the design of the machine is such that temperature fluctuates greatly during the shot. The Silvano works pretty darned good to main decent temperature stability, although not to the same degree that higher end machines do. But it produces very good shots. The easily adjustable OPV doesn't hurt either. Silvano's weak spot is the steam - the TB is adequate but not amazing, and requires greater skill (and results in less consistency) in producing good microfoam. All in all, a great machine for the money, built like a tank, well designed, easily produces great shots.