www.eccocaffe.com: custom coffee roasted in Northern Italian style

Titan Grinder Project - Page 6

Behind the scenes of the site's upcoming equipment reviews.

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by HB on Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:44 am

RapidCoffee wrote:One final post before I pack it in for the night. When I got home today, I found a wooden box awaiting me from H-B's newest sponsor... Inside was a bag of PT's Bella Vita, a northern Italian style espresso blend, and wow! 12oz of Ethiopia Yergacheffe Biloya. :D

Many thanks to Jeff and the rest of the crew at PT's Coffee Roasting for their contribution to the TGP!

Nice! As a reminder, PT's Coffee is offering 20% off through July 1st to HB members. Just enter promo code HB ROCKS at checkout.
Dan Kehn
User avatar
HB
 
Posts: 7007
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Location: Cary, NC

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by ntwkgestapo on Wed Jun 20, 2007 9:29 am

Ken, you have reinforced my wish for a Cimbali Grinder! I've always liked the Jr. grinder for it's adjustability and size (altho I've got OLD kitchen cabinets with over 24 in of space!). I'll stay with my little hand grinder (and do some playing with my SBux Grinder(s) now that I have a better understanding of them) until the Max/Jr grinder comes out (by then I should have recouped the spare bux to afford one!)..

Great test and THANKS to ALL for doing this Titan Grinder project!
Steve C.
I'm having an out of coffee experience!
LMWDP # 164
ntwkgestapo
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Feb 22, 2006
Location: Salem, VA USA
www.dailygrind.com: artisian roasted coffee and espresso equipment
www.dailygrind.com: artisian roasted coffee and espresso equipment

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Wed Jun 20, 2007 11:38 am

After a few weeks of use I decided to take the burrs off the Kony to see how dirty it was inside. The Kony opens up like every Mazzer I have used. You simply remove the hopper and unscrew the upper burr carriage.

I was surprised by how much coffee the grinder held onto, there were even some chunks sitting in the grind chamber.
Image

The upper burr was also caked with a relatively thick layer of coffee. A large chunk fell off as I was unscrewing the carrier.
Image

I used a stiff brush to clean the upper and lower burrs and used the air compressor to blow out the lower assembly. Getting all the caked on fines cleaned out is tedious and in the end I settled on 'pretty clean'.
Image Image

The cutting surfaces of the burrs are still very sharp. I had only run around 5 pounds of coffee through the Kony. That is barely enough coffee to break it in, these grinders were designed to chew up that much coffee in a day and will take years of home use before the burrs are dulled enough to replace. I actually shaved some skin off a finger while cleaning the burrs.

Image
Lower Burr

Image
Upper Burr
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 3878
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by RapidCoffee on Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:55 pm

Ken Fox wrote:In actual use, the first thing I noticed with my new Max grinders was that it seemed that grind adjustments were easier, and needed less often. By this I mean, that changing in between different coffees, or adapting to changes in coffee as it aged, or dealing with weather and humidity changes -- all of which normally require grinder setting adjustments on the Junior and Cadet grinders, seemed to require less adjusting or in some cases no adjusting in order to use the Max to get good espresso shots with proper time/volume relationships. In addition, the "quality" of the grinds are different; from the Junior, they are like grains of sand, but from the Max, even with robust doser thwacking, one gets small clumps. These are not "bad clumps," however, and the basket dose is easily distributed and packed, with no added channeling evident on a bottomless portafilter. I also noticed a small and subjective improvement in shot quality with the Max, but of course that sort of conclusion is pretty easy to talk yourself into, especially as a means of justifying a recent (and expensive) purchase.

Personally speaking, I find these results interesting however from my perspective, after using the Max daily for more than a month, I think the most persuasive reason to buy one is the increased certainty of getting a good shot without excessive fiddling with grinder settings. Although I had made the observation about the setting being less critical on the Max before I set up this tasting trial, the proof of that observation came as I used the grinders in this testing. Before my friend Bob came over for the tasting, I dialed the grinders in with the Rocket Coffee Roasters Classic Espresso blend. It took SIX double shots, 5 of which were sink shots, to get the Cadet dialed in. With the Max, there was one sink shot, one mediocre shot, and beautiful shot for the 3rd. Midway through the actual tasting when we switched the grinder machine pairs, I had to toss one set of shots because the Cadet needed to be adjusted to go from the vibe machine to the rotary. Not only that, but I needed to make small adjustments on the Cadet a couple of other times during the 10 shot trial. I never adjusted the Max, not even once, from start to finish of the testing including the switchover from pairing it with the rotary to the vibe.


My experience with the Robur and MXK conicals echoes your observations. These conical burr grinders make it easy, almost effortless, to dial in the correct grind adjustment. Coincidentally, it also took me only three shots to dial in each conical, beginning with an overly fine factory setting that choked the pour. New beans often required only one grind adjustment.

The grind adjustment seems more finicky on my flat burr Super Jolly, and it's not as easy to obtain a "pretty" extraction. Grinds are clumpier, to be expected from a doserless grinder. But it should be noted that the burrs on this grinder are two years old. Your comparisons are more valid because the grinders match up better.

Taste is another issue. The conical burr grinders produce a different taste profile, not necessarily better.

Believe it or not, these cuppings comprise a lot of hard, tedious work. So a big thanks to Ken and Bob for performing these experiments.
John
User avatar
RapidCoffee
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Dec 11, 2005
Location: Rapid City, SD

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Wed Jun 20, 2007 3:20 pm

RapidCoffee wrote:My experience with the Robur and MXK conicals echoes your observations. These conical burr grinders make it easy, almost effortless, to dial in the correct grind adjustment. Coincidentally, it also took me only three shots to dial in each conical, beginning with an overly fine factory setting that choked the pour. New beans often required only one grind adjustment.

The grind adjustment seems more finicky on my flat burr Super Jolly, and it's not as easy to obtain a "pretty" extraction. Grinds are clumpier, to be expected from a doserless grinder. But it should be noted that the burrs on this grinder are two years old. Your comparisons are more valid because the grinders match up better.

Taste is another issue. The conical burr grinders produce a different taste profile, not necessarily better.

Believe it or not, these cuppings comprise a lot of hard, tedious work. So a big thanks to Ken and Bob for performing these experiments.


Thanks for your kind words, John. One reason why it took so many grind adjustments for me to nail the grind (on both grinders) was that I decided to change the dose downwards a bit, but in a reproducible way, at the same time I was using a coffee new to me (the Rocket Coffee Roasters Classic blend). I decided that distributing and fingersweeping to a flat basket was the way to go, instead of my usual "mound" on top which adds an extra couple of grams. Any student of the factors in shot making knows instinctively that the most powerful factor is the dose in the basket, which dwarfs tamp and even grind in determining the shot parameters.

As in the freezing experiment, I did all the basket and machine preparation, and Bob's job was simply to stop the extractions at the first sign of blonding. Since I did all the dosing, packing, flushing, and starting of shots, this eliminated the possible problems that could come with two different persons preparing the shots. Once I was sure the pours were proceeding normally, say after 10 seconds, I went to the tasting table and turned my back on the machines, leaving the balance of the extractions to Bob's discretion.

One huge PITA every time I've done these types of trials is getting the machines set up to produce shots at essentially the same temperatures. I believe I have (finally) figured out why, as detailed in another post on the Gear forum having to do with boiler fill levels. I'm going to standardize those consistently at a lower level, and hopefully this will eliminate one huge time waster that has preceeded all of my simultaneous blind tasting trials.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1070
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by another_jim on Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:41 pm

Ken Fox wrote:I'm going to quote from a couple of paragraphs from Jim's analysis without going into any of the numerical underpinnings, which I am going to let Jim explain for himself in a subsequent post


Ken only did 10 shots, tasting 6 himself, and having Bob taste four. However, since the design was balanced, and the preference for the Max was strong enough, the result edged into statistical significance. I'm pasting in the report below for the one or two people who can tolerate the excruciating boredom of fully presented statistics:

Table:

             DATASET:
             --------

#     MA    TA    PR    FA    CR    MF
01    ro    ke    -2    -1    +1    -2
02    ro    ke    +2    -1    +2    +2
03    vi    ke    -2    +2    -1    -2
04    vi    ke    -2    -1    -2    -2
05    ro    ke    -2     0    +1    -1
06    vi    ke    +2    +2    -1    +2
07    ro    bo    +2    +3    +2    +2
08    ro    bo    +2    +3    +2    +3
09    vi    bo    +1    +1    +1    +1
10    vi    bo    -2    -3    -2    -2

Each row represents a pair of shots, one ground on the Max, one on the Cimbali Cadet (same as the Junior, with new burrs), presented to the taster simultaneously and unidentified. The numerical scores are comparative. Negative indicates a preference for the Cadet, positive for the Max. 3 is a large preference, 2 a distinct preference, 1 a mild preference. Tasters are instructed to avoid 0, no preference, if at all possible.

MA is the machine on which the Max shot was pulled: "vi" for vibe, "ro" for rotary. The other machine was used for the cadet shot.
TA is the taster for that pair of shots: "ke" for Ken, "bo" for Bob
PR is overall preference, -3 to +3, +ve means better for the Max grinder
FA is flavor/aroma strength, -3 to +3, +ve means better for the Max grinder
CR is crema appearance, -3 to +3, +ve means better for the Max grinder
MF is mouthfeel, -3 to +3, +ve means better for the Max grinder





              ANOVA SUMMARIES
              ---------------

HOW TO READ THE SUMMARIES

The block labelled "coefficients" shows the effect of each of the variables:

-- The variable labelled "(Intercept)" shows how much the Max (+ve) or Cadet (-ve) was preferred **after** all the other variables are eliminated. This is the paydirt variable.

-- The variable labelled "mavi" shows the difference the machine made. If it is negative, Cadet shots taste better on the vibe than the rotary, if positive, Max shots taste better on the vibe than the rotary.   

-- The variable labelled "take" shows the difference the taster made. If it is negative, Ken likes the Cadet more than Bob, if it is positive, Ken likes the Max more than Bob

-- I could explain the interaction term "mavi:take," but your head would explode. It's in there to remove the remaining extraneous factor from the payoff variable, the intercept. It is not meaningful by itself.

Of the columns, the "Estimate" and the Pr(>|t|) are important:

-- Estimate is the degree to which the Max is preferred. This is in the same scale as the original data.

-- Pr(>|t|) shows how often this result could occur by chance if there were no differences at all. A value less than 0.05 (5%) is mildly significant. A value less than 0.01 (1%) is very significant.

I have left out the statistics for the model as a whole, since the purpose is to get the individual variable's affects, not to predict the exact tasting outcome.


OVERALL PREFERENCE

Coefficients:
            Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept)    2.000      1.467   1.363    0.222
mavi          -2.500      2.075  -1.205    0.274
take          -2.667      1.894  -1.408    0.209
mavi:take      2.500      2.679   0.933    0.387



FLAVOR/AROMA STRENGTH

Coefficients:
            Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) 
(Intercept)    3.000      1.106   2.714   0.0349 *
mavi          -4.000      1.563  -2.558   0.0430 *
take          -3.667      1.427  -2.569   0.0424 *
mavi:take      5.667      2.018   2.807   0.0309 *



CREMA APPEARANCE

Coefficients:
            Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) 
(Intercept)   2.0000     0.6972   2.869   0.0285 *
mavi         -2.5000     0.9860  -2.535   0.0444 *
take         -0.6667     0.9001  -0.741   0.4869 
mavi:take    -0.1667     1.2729  -0.131   0.9001 



MOUTHFEEL

Coefficients:
            Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept)    2.500      1.424   1.756    0.130
mavi          -3.000      2.014  -1.490    0.187
take          -2.833      1.838  -1.541    0.174
mavi:take      2.667      2.600   1.026    0.345





ANALYSIS

The Max did a better job in all the categories. For the significance of the result see below.

There is a big surprise in the "mavi" variable; add or subtract it from the intercept term to see what I mean. In essence, the Max spanked the Cadet when it was paired with the rotary, and did slightly worse when paired with the vibe. Bob liked the Max a bit more than Ken did. The direction of the coefficients are consistent across all four of the taste attributes.

This outcome is consistent across all the taste categories. This consistency adds to the significance of the result, since if the result were just chance, it would be like flipping 4 heads in a row. This can be seen when all 4 taste categories are used in a single analysis

A: Done so that there are 40 data points:

Coefficients:
            Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)   
(Intercept)    2.3750     0.5577   4.258 0.000141 ***
mavi          -3.0000     0.7887  -3.804 0.000533 ***
take          -2.4583     0.7200  -3.414 0.001598 **
mavi:take      2.6667     1.0183   2.619 0.012829 * 


B: Done with 10 data points, scores added together and divided by 4

Coefficients:
            Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) 
(Intercept)    2.375      1.032   2.302   0.0609 .
mavi          -3.000      1.459  -2.056   0.0855 .
take          -2.458      1.332  -1.846   0.1144 
mavi:take      2.667      1.883   1.416   0.2066 


CONCLUSION

My conclusion is that the Max grinds an immediately perceivable better shot on the rotary Cimbali than the Cadet or Junior grinder. On the Vibe machine, the edge disappears completely. Whether this conclusion about the Max applies to all rotary and vibe machines is unknown. However, the results warn that one needs to check for  an interaction between conical grind quality and the pump being used.
User avatar
another_jim
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Chicago

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by another_jim on Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:01 pm

RapidCoffee wrote:One final post before I pack it in for the night. When I got home today, I found a wooden box awaiting me from H-B's newest sponsor... Inside was a bag of PT's Bella Vita, a northern Italian style espresso blend, and wow! 12oz of Ethiopia Yergacheffe Biloya. :D

Many thanks to Jeff and the rest of the crew at PT's Coffee Roasting for their contribution to the TGP!


I'd like to join into the thanks. This has got to be the most impressive packaging for coffee I ever got. Talk about taking the coffee as wine analogy seriously, here's coffee shipped in a claret box.

Also, a long sleeved tee is always welcome

Finally, and most importantly: the actual bag is the best I've seen -- strong, with a wire seal that won't fall off, lots of airtight layers, and a one way valve. Roasters, if you think your coffee is great, this is the bag for it.

I'll report on the coffee once I get a chance to drink some. As luck would have it, my Eva Solo and Zoshirushi came in today as well, so I'm as handsomely set up for brewed as for espresso.
User avatar
another_jim
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Chicago

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cpl593h on Wed Jun 20, 2007 9:21 pm

If you testers ever feel strung out of your minds from taste testing, bananas offer a nice comedown from too much espresso.
User avatar
cpl593h
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Oct 20, 2005
Location: Santa Cruz, CA

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Java Man on Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:23 pm

cpl593h wrote:If you testers ever feel strung out of your minds from taste testing, bananas offer a nice comedown from too much espresso.


I think we need to set up some double blind tests to verify this. :wink:

Rick
Java Man
A.K.A. Espressopithecus
Java Man
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Mar 06, 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Thu Jun 21, 2007 4:02 pm

Java Man wrote:I think we need to set up some double blind tests to verify this. :wink:

Rick


this works especially well if you are so hyped up from caffeine that you start scratching under your armpits and grunting, like an orangatan.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1070
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by RAS on Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:33 pm

Thank you Ken for your analysis of the difference between the various Cimbali grinders. I've had a Junior grinder for about a year now, and my appreciation for its capabilities, and its ease of use, continues to grow. That being said, I'm very interested in the hybrid Max/Junior grinder T.J. says may be in the works.

Reading about the combination-burr grinders got me thinking about burr RPM. Seems the (120 VAC/60 Hz) speed for most planar grinders is between 1400-1600 RPM, while a conical is between 300-500 RPM. I'm assuming that with a planar/conical combination, there is just one rotational rate for both sets of burrs (can't see there being reduction gears for the conical burrs). And, I'm assuming that the selected rate would be at the slower end to accommodate the feed-character of the conical burrs. If that assumption is correct, how well do planar burrs do at a slower RPM?
Bob
RAS
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Location: Orange County, CA

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Thu Jun 21, 2007 9:42 pm

RAS wrote:Thank you Ken for your analysis of the difference between the various Cimbali grinders. I've had a Junior grinder for about a year now, and my appreciation for its capabilities, and its ease of use, continues to grow. That being said, I'm very interested in the hybrid Max/Junior grinder T.J. says may be in the works.

Reading about the combination-burr grinders got me thinking about burr RPM. Seems the (120 VAC/60 Hz) speed for most planar grinders is between 1400-1600 RPM, while a conical is between 300-500 RPM. I'm assuming that with a planar/conical combination, there is just one rotational rate for both sets of burrs (can't see there being reduction gears for the conical burrs). And, I'm assuming that the selected rate would be at the slower end to accommodate the feed-character of the conical burrs. If that assumption is correct, how well do planar burrs do at a slower RPM?


The slow RPM conical grinders, as far as I know, do so via a belt drive. The old Cimbali DRM conical planar hybrid grinder, the one that Schomer used to wax eloquent about, was belt driven.

The Max is direct drive. I believe the rotational speed is 1350 RPM.

I can't really explain any more about this since I don't really understand anymore than what I have already typed. The Max does NOT have the rotational speed of a belt driven conical grinder.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1070
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by IMAWriter on Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:02 pm

RapidCoffee wrote:snipped
The grind adjustment seems more finicky on my flat burr Super Jolly, and it's not as easy to obtain a "pretty" extraction.


Ahem...perhaps using the...um....Weiss Distribution Technique might solve your clumpimg problem...haha...sorry, I couldn't resist!
Great reading here... :)
User avatar
IMAWriter
 
Posts: 395
Joined: May 09, 2005
Location: Brentwood, TN

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by AndyS on Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:50 pm

Ken Fox wrote:The slow RPM conical grinders, as far as I know, do so via a belt drive.


Robur uses a planetary gear drive, which fits into a Mazzer case with the same form factor as the direct drive grinders.
-AndyS
AndyS
 
Posts: 648
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: NY

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Sun Jun 24, 2007 9:10 pm

My time with the Mazzer twins (Kony and Super Jolly) is coming to an end and they will soon move onto the next lucky tester. My life has been hectic to say the least over the past couple of weeks, so I have not had an opportunity to post my thoughts and observations, something I will remedy with this conclusion.

The Kony was the focus of my grinder pair and the Super Jolly a point of reference and comparison for planar (or flat) burred grinders. As such, most of my time has been on the Kony. I must say the experience has been eye opening and to be quite blunt, disappointing. With the buzz on the Internet about conical grinders, I was expecting nothing less than a 'religious experience'. But then I am getting ahead of myself.

The grinders arrived at my home several weeks ago, much to the lament of the UPS delivery man. If you are contemplating purchasing a Kony, let me forewarn you: It is big and heavy. It shows it commercial pedigree in both design and materials. There is no plastic on this machine (other than the hopper). From the polished aluminum top, stainless steel doser and cast body everything about this grinder is heavy duty. The Kony measures 25.5 inches tall (with hopper) 9.5 inches wide and 16.5 inches deep (from grounds catch tray to back).

Image

The electronics are easily accessible and repairable by removing 5 screws in its base. Four of those screws also hold the feet on and the fifth holds on the grounds drop tray. Once removed the base drops right off. Mounted to the base are all the electronics. If a part fails, it can easily be repaired to get the grinder back into service. That is a very important feature in a commercial environment.

Image

The burrs on the Kony are 63mm conical. If you are familiar with Mazzer grinders, then the burr assemblies will not hold any surprises. The lower burr is bolted to the grinder's spindle and is the rotating half of the burr assembly. The upper burr is mounted in a carrier that rides atop three stiff springs. The entire assembly is held in place by the large adjustment collar, which is standard on Mazzer grinders. To clean the burrs, simply unscrew the adjustment collar and lift out the upper burr carrier.

As I pointed out in a previous post, I was surprised at the amount of coffee that cakes up in the burr assembly. An occasional disassembly and cleaning would be a wise decision. You could also try running a handful of Grindz burr cleaner through the machine to periodically clean it.

Image Image

Dosers tend to be a love or hate relationship. The doser on the Kony is the standard Mazzer doser with one exception. There is a counter on the right side of the doser and that counter is attached to the switch. When the power switch is in the ON position, the grinder auto grinds every 12th pull of doser handle. That is a handy feature in a busy cafe but an annoyance in the home environment. Thankfully there is an override position so you can switch the grinder on manually for grind per dose operation.

Build aside, the real measure of a grinder is how well it grinds.

The grind from the Kony appears uniform and light to my eye. The grind speed on the Kony is slower than that of the Super Jolly. A side effect of that slower grind speed is more clumping of the grounds. This is where a doser comes into play. A vigorous thwacking of the doser handle while grinding breaks up those clumps. Using that method I could get a relatively clump-free dose in my portafilter.

Image

The Kony does not like to have an empty hopper. As the hopper empties, the grind changes. As long as you keep a modest amount of coffee in the hopper (about 3 shots worth), it will buzz away. Those who pre-measure coffee and drop in enough for one shot will be disappointed. Without that top pressure pushing the beans through the grind chamber, the grind shifts. It starts out even, then gets progressively coarser as the bean load lightens. Most of the time, I kept a quarter pound of coffee in the hopper and had no grind consistency issues. I would use the final 18 or so grams in the hopper to do my seasoning shots after a detergent backflush.

My experience confirmed that little fuss was needed with the conical grinder. The dose took next to no work. A few quick thwacks of the doser as the beans were grinding, brief level of any high spots, a little downward tap of the portafilter to settle the dose, followed by a tamp was all that's necessary. No sweeping, no coffee torture devices, no chopping, just dose, tap, tamp. Another observation, it appears that the grounds from the Kony are more easily compacted, so be wary of updosing more than would be the case for flat burr grinders.

The Kony grinds slightly cooler than the Super Jolly. The delta is relatively small, but there is a difference when measured in the grind chute with a type K thermocouple. The temperature difference when grinding for a single shot is minimal. Both of the below graphs were generated while grinding a half pound of coffee with the grinders adjusted for comparable espresso shots.

Image

Image

I noticed right away that there was a difference in the extractions from the Kony, both in taste and appearance. The extractions flowed visually thicker. We often hear the analogy that espresso "should flow like warm honey" during a proper extraction. The shots from the Kony most definitely flow like warm honey. The crema is very abundant and retains a deeper tone through most of the extraction.

The cup produced by the Kony is unique. The grinder appears to accentuate the lighter, more acidic tones and fruit in a blend. While the brighter flavors are being enhanced, the deeper flavors such as cocoa and leather are muted. The cup was, for lack of better terms, harsh and edgy when using lighter northern Italian style roasts. These blends tend to be brighter, a trait that the Kony exploited. Blends that tended to be a little flat were more lively. In short, the grinder brought out the subtle fruit and acidity of the deeper blends while reducing the heavier flavors.

I do not want to forget about the crema. The Kony grinds produced crema that was just off the charts. Thick, rich, persistent and top to bottom 99% crema shots. If you have never sampled an all crema shot, you should. The experience is quite unique; the closest analogy I can describe is a cup of espresso flavored mousse. The mouthfeel is incredible. Unfortunately in order to experience that you have to drink the shot right out from under the portafilter. No sipping allowed you have toss the entire shot back at once to get the full effect. Be careful though, an espresso straight from the pull is very hot. You may find that you can not taste anything for a day because you just blanched your tongue. But after a shot like that, who needs to taste food?

To verify that I was not simply imagining the difference between the Super Jolly and Kony, I decided to try a few blind espresso tasting sessions. Being the only coffee drinker in the house, this proved to be problematic, so I went with espressos prepared from one of two prepared baskets selected at random.

I adjusted both the Kony and Super Jolly to pull a 28 second, two ounce shot using 16 grams of coffee, and two identical Faema-style baskets. to help mask any apparent differences in the crema, I used the stock single spout portafilter from my Elektra A3. Removing the retaining spring from the portafilter allowed me to easily drop in a prepared basket. Each basket was marked with a tiny K for the Kony and S for the Super Jolly and then the marks were covered with a small piece of tape.

I would grind, dose and tamp a 16 gram sample from each grinder into the appropriate basket. Then those baskets were set on a table and my son would bring me one of the two baskets. I would pull a two ounce shot, allow the shot to sit for 30 seconds to allow the crema to settle and sample. I would then place the basket on the grinds catch tray of the machine I thought the sample was from and then repeat with the second shot.

My sampling covered 4 different blends from three different roasters and one coffee that I had not sampled before from either grinder. While my amateur cupping was limited and my conditions not ideal, I was still able to easily pick out which shot came from the Kony and Super Jolly 6 out of 6 times. While some may argue that such a limited sample spread over a couple of weeks are statistically insignificant, it was more than enough to convince me that the Kony produced a very distinguishable cup.

However, it's noteworthy that its unique cup characteristics were not always favorable. I found the shots to be too acidic and edgy for my palate. The Super Jolly produced a less defined cup, but with smoother edges and no harsh attacking flavors. Given all the hype about conical grinders, it was not the outcome I had expected. I wanted to fall in love with the Kony. But in the end, I found myself not enjoying the drinks I was producing. I have tried varying dose, temperature, blend, and extracted volume and never found myself having that 'heavenly experience' I was so anticipating. I did find that a slightly reduced, borderline ristretto to be more agreeable to my palate. Keeping with the 16 gram dose, I would pull 1.5-1.75 ounce shots and the edgy, almost bitter attack was reduced but still present.

So as I pack up the Mazzer brothers to send onto the next recipient, I admit being somewhat disappointed. Maybe my personal taste preference is not best suited to the Kony. I had talked myself into purchasing one before it arrived; now I am not shedding any tears over its departure. Strange.

I would like to pass on thanks to Larry of Rocket Coffee Roasters for providing a 'Clash of the Titan Grinders' 5 pound bag of Classic Espresso and even tossing in a cool T-shirt.
Image

The fresh coffee infusion was well received. I have been going through two pounds of coffee per week and even more at the onset of the project. I have put a good 7 pounds of coffee through the grinders in three weeks (I was out on business one week), talk about an over caffeinated month! A big thanks to Jim at 1st-Line for supplying us with these Titans of the grinder world.

One last parting beauty shot series of some Classic Espresso ground in the Kony and pulled on a Vibiemme Domobar Super.
Image Image Image

Image Image Image Image
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 3878
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Sun Jun 24, 2007 9:33 pm

We should all thank Dave and John for their excellently photographed and detailed posts in this thread. They have been a joy to read, and informative, to boot. And kudos to the sponsors for providing the machines and the coffee that allow this project to continue! Last of all, thanks to Dan Kehn for providing this website, without which an endeavor such as this would be impossible.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1070
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by IMAWriter on Mon Jun 25, 2007 12:47 am

Ken Fox wrote:We should all thank Dave and John for their excellently photographed and detailed posts in this thread. They have been a joy to read, and informative, to boot. And kudos to the sponsors for providing the machines and the coffee that allow this project to continue! Last of all, thanks to Dan Kehn for providing this website, without which an endeavor such as this would be impossible.

ken

I echo Ken, and also thank YOU Ken for a very enjoyable and educational look into your world of La Cimbali. I have a colleague who wants me to put together a grinder/machine combo strictly for espresso, and I'm am strongly considering the Cimbali Jr Grinder. Dan's grinder comparison is a must read for all those folks looking for a champion grinder.
User avatar
IMAWriter
 
Posts: 395
Joined: May 09, 2005
Location: Brentwood, TN

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by k7qz on Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:26 pm

Per a PM discussion with Dan:

HB wrote:An excellent question! Would you post it to the TGP thread? Dave/John may want to comment, and I'll look into your question when my turn comes up next week (Counter Culture has a Major I could borrow, if necessary).


k7qz wrote:Hi Dan, good morning!

I appreciate the recent Titan grinder series. As an early adopter of the Kony, I can echo much of what has been said regarding this grinder.

Here I stand as an average user on the board. I can remember reading people describe flavors in the cup such as "dark cherry" or what have you for a certain blend but when I tried it, I would say to myself "what are they talking about? I don't taste..." Not so with the Kony. The flavors in the cup literally leap out at you, an espresso milkshake to be sure! As Dave menioned though, perhaps too much so for some palates. I find the Kony really shines in Cappa's where the flavors of the Kony ground shot really punches through the milk.

Anyway, the reason I'm bugging you is this: I'm trying to figure out why the Robur would provide a middle of the road shot between the "blended" (muddled?) shot of the Jolly and the flavor clear or "bright" shot of the Kony? Both are big conicals. Maybe burr size or motor size makes a difference? I don't know...

It's after the fact of course but now I'm now wondering if one should consider a Major instead of a big conical. If the flat burrs provide a smoother, more blended cup and a big burr set and motor contribute to this, maybe one should buy a Major as it's the same size as a Kony and is a handful of hundred dollars less money.

Dan, a penny for your thoughts!



Dave, John any ideas for me on the Robur/Kony difference?
k7qz
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Aug 18, 2005
Location: Pacific NorWet

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by JonS on Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:30 pm

This thread has been an excellent read, and I'll add my appreciation to the growing list :D

k7qz wrote:It's after the fact of course but now I'm now wondering if one should consider a Major instead of a big conical. If the flat burrs provide a smoother, more blended cup and a big burr set and motor contribute to this, maybe one should buy a Major as it's the same size as a Kony and is a handful of hundred dollars less money.


+1 for an answer to this particular question. For a long time, a Kony has seemed like an ideal eventual upgrade to my Mazzer Mini, (in fact I was tempted instead of buying the mini) but now I'm not so sure either. What is the real impact of larger flat burrs on the extraction (or at least the grind quality as a starting point), and how much bigger do you have to go to make it worthwhile ? That probably sounds ungrateful, despite my stated appreciation for the efforts over TGP, but who would have thought we'd be left with more questions than we started out with !

Jon
JonS
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Mar 21, 2007
Location: Chesterfield, UK

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:16 pm

That is a good question, and one I can not answer at this point. Keep in mind that we were the first group of testers. The grinders have moved on to the next testers for another round of observation and testing.
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 3878
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

PreviousNext

Return to The Bench