www.espressocare.com: expert repairs with an italian touch

Titan Grinder Project - Page 13

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

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by N104RX on Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:16 pm

Hello to everybody,

this is my 2nd. post on HB (yeah!) but I've been lurking for a while and been following the Titan topic very closely.
First of all, Thanks to all the guys who put such enormous effort into this great project.

During the last months I had a wonderful time reading all the posts, - getting side tracked every once in a while- (links to other forums), but finishing the 12 pages after all.

Of course I got infected with the upgrade virus and Christmas offered a wonderful opportunity to introduce a Mazzer Kony to the household.

I thought it might be interesting what a "Beginners" (2 years experience) impression might be.

My original setup consisted of an Elektra A3 and a Mazzer Mini.
I am using Terroir's Daterra North Italian Roast with excellent results for about a year now.
I dose to about 16g for a 25-30sec. 1.5-2 oz. double shot (give or take).

After the Kony upgrade I experienced an enormous increase in consistency.

I rarely have to adjust grind settings compared to the Mini.
My Mini also appeared somewhat over sensitive to temperature changes (I live at 8000ft.)
I haven't encountered this phenomenon with the Kony.
Dosing and distributing appears easier. I mainly attribute this to less clumping of the grounds.
Out of 10 pulls I see an average of 7 very nice and 2-3 "So-So" extractions (I am using a naked PF) whereas during my Mini years I was regularly producing at least one "sink shot" out of ten.

What's not so great?

It's more difficult to clean. Since I didn't want to destroy the hopper, I have to remove it to save at least some of the unused beans.
To get old coffee grounds out of the chute (no problem on the Mini) I use compressed air from the burr side because there is a micro switch blocking access from the doser side.

How do the shots taste?

Well, - I would say more balanced. This could also be attributed to the more consistent and better extractions I am achieving.


In my opinion the goodies outweigh the baddies by a huge margin.
Would I upgrade again and spend a huge amount of money on a grinder?

Absolutely!


Cheers


Wolfgang
N104RX
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Nov 12, 2007
Location: Cloudcroft, New Mexico

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Theodore on Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:51 am

Ken Fox wrote:I have a somewhat similar scale with an accuracy up to 0.5g, which can handle 3kg if memory serves. It was made by Escali and cost around $55 from Amazon. It is considered a "lab scale." I think that 0.5g accuracy would probably be sufficient for these purposes.

What I'm finding, however, is that at least with conical grinders (and I'm considering the Max as a conical for these purposes, as well as my new Compak) that, at least with doses around 14g, I'm having no distribution or resultant channeling problems simply dosing into a ceramic ramekin and then transferring the coffee into the PF. I'm also finding that the process takes very little extra time as I need to do less cleanup afterwards from grinder mess as the ramekin sits nicely on the grinder PF forks, and catches all the coffee coming out of the dosers. It is also very easy to distribute 14g into a double PF basket with a teaspoon which takes about 2 seconds.

I don't know whether planar grinders would have problems with this approach, although I could pull out my old Junior or Cadet to test it. Jim has previously reported that the lower doses one encounters in Italy don't result in the channeling that we commonly see in places using larger doses of coffee.

ken


When you use different doses, you keep the same basket, having a big one, or different?
Espresso uber alles.
Theodore
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Dec 26, 2006
Location: Athens Greece
www.klatchroasting.com: USBC champion, voted 2009 'best micro-roaster'
www.klatchroasting.com: USBC champion, voted 2009 'best micro-roaster'

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Tue Jan 08, 2008 10:13 am

Theodore wrote:When you use different doses, you keep the same basket, having a big one, or different?


I have standardized on 14g, at least for the time being. I have only one type of basket I am using now, although I have many others and could change if I wanted to, but see no benefit to changing.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Theodore on Tue Jan 08, 2008 10:44 am

Ken Fox wrote:I have standardized on 14g, at least for the time being. I have only one type of basket I am using now, although I have many others and could change if I wanted to, but see no benefit to changing.

ken


Thank you Ken.I also have 7,9,14,16,18,21g baskets and use the 16 or 18g ones.
Theodore.
Espresso uber alles.
Theodore
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Dec 26, 2006
Location: Athens Greece

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:28 pm

Most of us (people in general) spend our lives looking for happiness. We search in vain for that perfect moment in time when it seems the universe stops and takes notice of us. That moment in time has arrived for me. I am in Shangri-La, the isolated utopia where all is well, even if for a short time. I have discovered a land where the espresso flows not only in quantity but also of the highest quality. Where espresso machines are plentiful and conical grinders grow as if they are trees.

Image

God I love this hobby!
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 4097
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by caeffe on Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:33 pm

Dave -

for those of us who can't identify that family shot, can you let us know what we're looking at?

I can see 4 grinders and 3 espresso machines - and can make out the elektra a3, elektra a leva, and is that a cremina club? as for the grinders i see a cimbali (max hybrid?), macap something and 2 mazzers.

well, identifying them is one thing but how about letting us know what each one of these grinders and machines gives you on your palate? I for one am seriously green with envy....
caeffe
 
Posts: 184
Joined: Oct 10, 2007
Location: socal

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:00 am

All in due time. They are the titan grinders, or part of them. Left to right, Kony, Robur, Elektra A3 (my machine) Cimbali Max hybrid (my grinder) Macap, Elektra Leva (lever smackdown machine) and the Lusso (another lever smackdown machine). I just got them out of the boxes so thoughts will come later.
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 4097
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:56 pm

I have enjoyed having the Titan grinders in house this week. Jim had done a very good job shooting out the Titan grinders and I have little else to add to his well thought-out and thorough testing. My observations are just that a brief note about and my opinion of the grinders.

When the Titan grinders kicked off I had the pleasure of being the first to use the Mazzer Kony and Super Jolly. They once again grace my home with their presence as the project winds down. Along with them, I have the Macap MXR and Cimbali Max.
Image

My original thoughts still apply for the Kony. It reflects the typical Mazzer build quality, heavy construction and commercial quality. When I originally received the Kony a few months ago I noted that the cup it produced was bright and acidic to the point of tasting harsh. A few months later the grinder has had more than a few pounds of coffee run through it and it has been shipped across a lot of states. It is no worse for wear than when it arrived at my home fresh from the factory. Of all the Titan grinders, I still find the Kony to produce the most acidic cup. While I have no means of conducting a blind cupping, I still try to keep an open mind and not bias my opinion.

The cup is a little less harsh than I remember. That could be due to the added break-in the burrs have received or I have simply become use to the brighter flavors that the conical grinders produce. I would guess the latter of the two options. The Kony combined with my Elektra would bring out the acidity and lighter fruit notes in blends that are heavy in the deeper earth/chocolate/nut blends but when I use a blend that is high in African and other acidic and fruited beans the acidity becomes too overpowering for my palate.

This time I have the Mazzer Robur on (or rather beside) the espresso bar. It is as big as it looks in the photos. There is nothing small or 'home' about this grinder and this is the SMALL Robur at 110v. The large Robur has even bigger burrs and run three phase 220 volts. From its arm straining weight to 8 amp power requirements this truly is the king of the countertop grinders.
Image
Kony, Robur, Elektra A3

It shares most all the same traits as the rest of the Mazzer grinder line. The trademark Mazzer gray paint, the grind adjustment ring, doser (which is slightly taller than that of the Kony and Super Jolly), timer switch, etc... If you have ever used a Mazzer Mini, you will know how to use the Robur. You have to be quick on the doser lever and power switch; otherwise you will grind a lot more coffee than you wanted. The Robur is fast, noticeably faster than any of the Titan grinders. Grinding a double basket worth of coffee just takes a few seconds. The Robur has a duty cycle of 35 seconds on (max) and 60 seconds off (minimum). The Robur is at home in a commercial environment.
Image
La Marzocco Swift, Mazzer Kony, La Marzocco Linea 4 group

The cup the Robur produces can be summed up by one word: consistent. The flavors are clean and bright without being overly acidic. I believe it produces a much rounder cup character than the Kony. All the flavors play in a symphony, yet there enough separation in flavors to be picked out each. The cup is also forgiving. Even when you are cursed with a spraying jet from the bottom of the basket the cup is still very drinkable. When using a bottomless portafilter the Robur produces visibly stunning shots with dark chestnut and brick red tiger striping. Shot after shot, you have a consistent cup almost to the point of being boring. There is never a surprise, no 'God shots' but at the same time almost no sink shots. Just what a busy café needs.

The Macap is another first time experience. The variant I have is the MXKR. The body of the MXKR is shorter than the Kony and is more home friendly, until you add the hopper. The hopper is still smaller than either of the Mazzers holding 3.3 pounds. It is also noticeably lighter at only 35 pounds and uses the smallest motor of all the Titan grinders (250 watt). I never thought I would call a 35 pound, $880+ dollar grinder a lightweight.

There are a couple of things that struck me as odd, one of which is the thick lexan doser and the doser full cutoff switch. The lexan looks nice but I can see it getting scratched up after a couple years of use. Inside the doser is a doser full cutoff switch. That is nothing new, most commercial grinders are equipped with them. However the one in the Macap protrudes very far out into the doser which makes sweeping the grinds out of the grind chute a bit awkward. This part is all plastic and relatively fragile. The paddle that activates the switch broke off early in the Titan Grinder Project. Even with the switch flap broken off, the switch assembly sticks out nearly half way into the doser making cleaning the grinds out after a session awkward. The grinds discharge chute on the Macap is quite wide (around the size of the Robur) and short so it retains a relatively small amount of grinds.
Image

Of all the grinders, I dislike the switch on the Macap the most. It is located on the right side of the body. The switch is a rocker style and illuminated but covered with a stiff plastic cover. It appears to be exactly like the switch on the Cimbali Max. I would imagine that removing that stiff plastic cover would make the switch easier to work as it did when removed from the Max. So if the switch is the same as the one used on the Cimbali Max, why do I dislike it the most? Location. Again, this is relatively trivial and after some use reaching around the grinder to hit the switch would become automatic.
Image

The MXKR is the slowest of all the grinders. The motor turns at a slow 400 rpm which will theoretically reduce the amount of heat created during grinding. The slower grind speed also gives the user a more leisurely working pace. You are not hurried to thwack the doser a couple of times then turn off the power before you grind two shots worth of coffee like the Robur. I would say it grinds at around the same speed as the Mazzer Mini. That put it in the 'home' market speed; in a commercial environment it would be a bit slow. The motor has a listed duty cycle of 1.5 minutes on (max) and 5 minutes off (min).

I also found the Macap to be the nosiest of all the grinders. While grinding is not a quiet process the motor gave off a resonating low pitch growl. The doser also has a very sharp clack when used and sounds much louder than the other test machines. It may have been simply the pitch which was much higher than the other grinders or It could have simply been the location on the espresso bar causing a bit of acoustic grief. The wife had had her fill of listening to it after the second day and my kid thought it sounded like a garbage disposal with a spoon in it. I do not know if this is a trait of the Macap or if my sample unit was simply abnormally loud but everyone in the house agreed, it is loud and annoying specifically the sharp pitched clack-clunk of the doser.

The MXKR is of a stepless design. To achieve this, the upper burr carrier has an indexed and toothed ring that engages a worm gear located at the rear of the grinder. The adjustment is fine and precise. It appears to stay put; I did not notice any creep in the adjustment ring while grinding beans. Either side of the adjustment has a thumbscrew making it easy to adjust be you left or right handed. Make note, there is no Start here mark on the ring for reference. When I received the test machine I cranked on the grind adjustment just to see how smooth it was and got it way out of adjustment. I went through a quarter pound of beans getting it dialed back in. Once you have it set, you may want to put a small mark on the adjustment ring as a reference point. The worm gear gives you a nice and precise adjustment, but makes large changes, like going from espresso to French press, a very big pain. As a single mode grinder (espresso, drip, French press) it is a very nice grinder but if you are looking for a quick adjustment between brew styles, the adjustment ring on the Mazzers is much easier and faster to change.
Image


Now onto what really counts. The grind on the MXKR is very nice and on par with the rest of the Titan grinders. The slower grinding speed does appear to create more clumps but thwacking the doser while grinding breaks up most of them. The cup from the MXKR is very good. I find it bright and lively but with more balance than the Kony and not as acidic. While it does not equal the range of flavors and consistency produced by the Robur it is very good and nearly one third the cost making it a bargain hunter's favorite.

The Cimbali Max is the unusual grinder of the bunch. The Max uses a hybrid burr set with a conical assembly that grabs the beans and does the initial large chunk breaking of the beans. Those conical assembles then feed the broken beans into a 64mm flat burr. That flat burr is unlike most. Since the conical portion has done the coarse grinding and is forcing the beans into the flat burr, the flat burrs are made of a small tooth. Most flat burrs have on outer course grind portion, a middle medium grind and then the fine grind teeth at the outer edge. Those outer fine grind teeth compose the entirety of the Max's flat burr. Another interesting point, while the Robur has the largest conical burr set of all our test machines (71mm) if you add up the conical and flat grinding surfaces of the Max they are over 80mm in surface area.

The Cimbali Max is more industrial looking with it square stainless sheet metal body. The Max is also the shortest of all the Titan grinders. It is shorter than the body of the Robur and is with the hopper on the Max. The Max measures 18.5 inches tall with the hopper so depending on the arrangement of your kitchen cupboards, the Max may fit under them. That is a feat none of the other Titan grinders can approach without modification.
Image
Elektra A3, Cimbali Max

A quick note about the Max bean hopper. Unlike the rest of the Titans with their funnel shaped bean hoppers, the Cimbali has a square hopper to match the body of the grinder with a tapered inner bottom. The hopper cannot be removed without undoing three screws inside the hopper. The hopper and doser are tinted a dark brown versus the clear parts on the rest of the Titan grinders. I have a little theory about this. Coffee beans are light sensitive, they degrade quicker in the presence of light, like beer and wine which are also bottled in tinted glass. I would guess that Cimbali had the same idea when making the bean hopper/doser. The tinted plastic cuts down on the amount of light that strikes the beans and helps preserve their freshness. How long does this extend the life of the beans (if at all), I do not know. They never sit in the hopper long enough to go stale.

I like the ergonomics of the Max over the rest of the grinders. The doser handle is large and horizontal unlike the vertically mounted doser handle on the Mazzer line. It is easy to grasp with a soft rubber cover and works smoothly. I also prefer the power switch location on the Max. It is oriented on the front right of the grinder just under the doser. It can easily be pressed with your thumb while you thwack the doser, no need to let go of the doser handle to fumble for switch. The power switch is a green rocker switch with a stiff plastic cover over it just like the Macap pictured above. The plastic cover makes operating the switch somewhat awkward. The cover can be removed or cut off; once free of the cover it is much easier to hit the switch. A footnote about the switch, it can be retrofitted with the push button switch used by the Cimbali Jr.
Image

The Max has a stepless adjustment like the rest of the Titan grinders but it has a detent every half turn of the adjustment knob. The adjustment is fine and you can stop between clicks on the adjustment shaft if you wish. Like the Macap, this small adjustment interval makes dialing in a precise grind easy but large swings, like espresso to French press tedious. However, the Max uses an index ring that is marked from 0 to 40 with half number marks. Each click of the adjustment knob is a quarter adjustment so it takes 4 clicks to go from an index of 5 to 6. To go from espresso (a 5 on my index depending on bean) to French press (a 20 on my index) it takes 60 clicks of the adjustment. The Max appears to hold zero, so if I do adjust it for French press I can swing back to my starting mark for espresso and be right on the money.
Image

The adjustment knob protrudes from the right side of the case and is covered with a knobby rubber cover. I find it the easiest to adjust the grind on.
Image

The Max produces a nice grind on par with the rest of the grinders. The Max spins its burrs in the 1400
RPM range which is much faster than the pure conical grinders. That increase in the burr speed translates to an increased grind speed. The Max does not equal the speed of the Robur but appears to be slightly faster than the Kony. As with all the Titan grinders, the Max has a doser full switch in the doser, and it is obnoxiously large. The flap is even with the back of the doser lid but hangs down just short of the doser star. You can still clean out the grind chute with a long bristled brush but removing that flap would be high on my list of first thing to do. The grind chute is wide and short and holds relatively few grinds. The clumping is minimal and thwacking the doser while grinding breaks up most of the clumps.

The cup the Max produces has that signature bright and clean flavor produced by all the Titan grinders. I would place the cup balance somewhere between the Robur and MXKR. I get a more acidic and lively cup than the Robur but with more body than the MXKR but not quite as overall balanced as the Robur. The Max requires a little more attention to grind setting than the other conicals. With the Robur you may make one grind adjustment over 3 days, the Max may take two adjustments. It still requires much less attention than the typical flat burr grinder and when it is dialed in, it will give the Robur a run for its money.

I find the grind quality very good on all of the Titan grinders and any of these would serve a lifetime in a home environment. A few closing comments and observations. Conical grinders do produce a different cup profile than flat burrs. The general consensus is that there is a correlation between the burr size and cup, essentially bigger is better. In my limited experience, I believe that analogy also holds true for flat burrs. The conical grinders are designed to work with a full bean hopper and are sensitive to the weight in the hopper. As the pressure exerted by the beans in the hopper diminishes, the grind drifts and the shots start to run fast. At what point does this shift happen, it appears to be around 30 grams but I have not conducted any tests to confirm this, it is just a general observation. To overcome this drift I keep the same amount of beans in the hopper when grinding. I leave about 30 grams of coffee in the hopper. As long as I maintain that 30 grams (or whatever you choose) the shots will consistently flow the same.

So in the end, which grinder do I prefer? The Robur. Its combination of balanced cup and consistency still brings it out on top. Coming up a close second is the Cimbali Max. While the Cimbali needs slightly more attention than the Robur, when it is dialed in it will give the Robur a run for its money and at a fraction of the price which is why I purchased one. I also like the ergonomics of the Max over all the grinders. The Macap and Kony round out the list. While I prefer the build of the Kony over the Macap, I preferred the cup from the Macap over the Kony. Keep in mind, these are only my opinions, a lowly home barista, based on a couple of weeks use with my espresso machine. Your mileage may vary.

I have enjoyed my time spent on the Titan Grinder Project, it has been an enlightening experience.
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 4097
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by zin1953 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:52 pm

Thanks, Dave for your obviously thoughtful post. Much appreciated!
A morning without coffee is sleep. -- Anon.
zin1953
 
Posts: 938
Joined: Dec 27, 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA USA

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm

Once again, thanks for tying it all together, Dave.

I would add only a couple of things. Most of the possible issues for home use, with the Cimbali Max, have been corrected in the hybrid version that Chris is selling. This includes the height of the hopper and the on-off switch design, plus the removal of autodosing. The finger guard in Chris's version is easily removed if desired with a dremel tool.

The other thing to add would be to throw the Compak K10 WBC conical grinder into the mix. I have posted about my issues on this grinder, the most serious of which are the design, most particularly as it involves the ability of the grinder to survive being shipped. My own grinder, shipped along with that of Jim Schulman from Spain, did not survive the trip in one piece. Compak now has a USA office and they have assured me that the grinder has had some design changes to address the "shipability," plus that it will only be shipped in the USA on a pallet. If this grinder is sufficiently changed to address these issues, then it really needs to be considered in this group.

Jim Schulman has considerably more experience with this grinder than I do, plus the added benefit of being able to compare it to the other titans, something I cannot do with the exception of the Max. Hopefully he will chime in also, in a summary sort of way, about how he thinks this grinder fits in. For myself, I felt the Compak delivers excellent grind quality, on a par with the Cimbali Max, however it requires less frequent drive adjustments than the Max to get the grind spot on. On an appearance and size basis, the Max wins for use in a residential kitchen.

I believe that the Max wastes less coffee in typical home use than the Compak, however the Max is unsuitable for those who want to change coffees frequently, especially during any one grind session. I doubt any of these grinders are really all that good for this sort of use, but then, that is just my opinion.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by AndyS on Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:53 pm

cannonfodder wrote:I have enjoyed my time spent on the Titan Grinder Project, it has been an enlightening experience.


Great writeup, Dave, thanks very much.

Ken Fox wrote:I felt the Compak delivers excellent grind quality, on a par with the Cimbali Max, however it requires less frequent drive adjustments than the Max to get the grind spot on.


Can someone pleeeeeeeeze explain why some of the grinders require less frequent adjustments? Fewer fines=less formation of a compact layer at the bottom? It's puzzling....
-AndyS
AndyS
 
Posts: 707
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: NY

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:01 am

AndyS wrote:Can someone pleeeeeeeeze explain why some of the grinders require less frequent adjustments? Fewer fines=less formation of a compact layer at the bottom? It's puzzling....


Andy,

You're one of the only few F'n certifiable geniuses I know. If you can't explain it, why are you askin' us retards?

Fondly,

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by jesawdy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:53 am

AndyS wrote:Can someone pleeeeeeeeze explain why some of the grinders require less frequent adjustments? Fewer fines=less formation of a compact layer at the bottom? It's puzzling....


Andy, does your personal experience differ? I seem to recall you having a Mini or some such more conventional grinder in the past.
Jeff Sawdy
User avatar
jesawdy
 
Posts: 1593
Joined: May 12, 2006
Location: Black Mtn, NC

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:59 am

AndyS wrote:Can someone pleeeeeeeeze explain why some of the grinders require less frequent adjustments? Fewer fines=less formation of a compact layer at the bottom? It's puzzling....


Boy, I wish we could. It was not from lack of trying. How many times have you seen a group of coffee nuts do a partial analysis and scanning electron microscope analysisof coffee grounds trying to explain it. Something that without John (RapidCoffee) would have been completely impossible given the very high cost of having something like this done if you were to send samples off to a lab on your own. Maybe we are all just fooling ourselves into thinking they do not take many grind adjustment tweaks although I do not think we are. But nothing we have done points to a scientific reason.

A case in point, a couple weeks ago I attended Barry's Christmas party along with Jim and a few others (that is his 4 group LM and Swift in the Robur photo and our Robur). To test out the no changes needed I ran 3 different coffees through the Robur including a single origin to see how much the grind needed adjusted. Knowing that the conical appear to be particularly picky to the above the burr bean load I paid particular attention to the amount of coffee I loaded in the hopper (around ¾ full). On each occasion, the Robur needed one very minor grind adjustment to dial in the shot when going from blend to blend. A minor adjustment being one to two notches on the adjustment ring. Once it was set, it was never adjusted again until the beans reached to just above the hoppers black color. At that point the grind appeared to start to shift. I would then add more beans, or change the blend again. I did this all night and went through what I would estimate to be around 8 pounds of coffee. The entire time the grind adjustment was a set it and forget it function.

I do have one more grinder that I have not unboxed to play with, the Fiorenzato Doge conical. I would like to get it out if for no other reason than having seen/used it. Fiorenzato is a new brand to me, I have never used one. Unfortunately I have been home all week with a pretty severe bought of the flu which has a nasty habit of changing your taste so trying to do a real comparison of it versus the others would be almost pointless, or take another week for me to fully recover.

Another theory I have, there is such a thing as a grinder/machine pairing along with a coffee/grinder pairing. Each grinder brought it own subtle difference to the cup accentuating different flavors. Espresso machines also tend to follow this path with different machines producing slightly different cups, and in some cases drastically different cups. So depending on what your flavor/roast preference is, there is an ideal grinder/machine/blend combination. My equipment (Elektra A3) tends to produce a cleaner and brighter cup than many machines. Combine that with a grinder like the Kony and you get a very bright and acidic cup. My personal preference for coffee is lighter roast bright and fruity blends heavy in Africans. Combine those three and you have an extremely sharp and acidic cup, much too acidic for my taste. However, take that same machine/grinder and add a dark roasted blend with lots of Sumatran and other deep heavy bodied coffees in it and the earthy note is reduced and the more subtle floral, fruit and sweetness comes out.

The same process using the Vibiemme Domobar Super, Elektra Microcasa Leva, and Ponte Vecchio Lusso produces a different cup. So depending on the attributes your espresso machine produces, you can balance the cup with your selection of grinder. So maybe there is a bit of merit to having two different grinders on the espresso bar.
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 4097
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by AndyS on Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:20 pm

jesawdy wrote:Andy, does your personal experience differ? I seem to recall you having a Mini or some such more conventional grinder in the past.


To be honest, I haven't pulled a shot with the Mini in a year, so I don't really remember what it was like. I guess for the sake of Science, I should try it again. But I don't wanna! :-)
-AndyS
AndyS
 
Posts: 707
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: NY

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by AndyS on Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:24 pm

cannonfodder wrote:Maybe we are all just fooling ourselves into thinking they do not take many grind adjustment tweaks although I do not think we are. But nothing we have done points to a scientific reason.


I had a long phone conversation with Philip Search today and asked him what he thought about this. He took a shot at an explanation: the burrset and other internal parts on small grinder heat up and cool down very quickly. This affects the way the grind comes out and necessitates frequent adjustments. The big grinder are more massive, more stable temperature-wise, and therefore more stable grind-wise.

That's as close to a believable explanation as I've heard. Or at least it's a partial explanation.
-AndyS
AndyS
 
Posts: 707
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: NY

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by cannonfodder on Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:41 pm

That would also put some reasoning behind the bigger is better theory be it flat or conical. That would make your monster 220 3 phase Robur even more stable than our smaller burr 110 grinder. So as the steel burrs and parts heat, they expand. As they expand the distance between the burrs would decrease making the grind finer and finer the longer the grinder ran. Then not only would burrs size come into play, but also the RPM of the grinder assuming a higher speed produces more heat. So you would have to find the balance point between burr size and burr speed to minimize all the factors. Then there is ceramic, would using ceramic burrs like those on the Swift resist heating more than steel and get you the same effect in a 64mm flat burr as the 83mm conical steel burrs in the 220 Robur. The more we try to answer, the more questions we make.
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 4097
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:56 pm

AndyS wrote:I had a long phone conversation with Philip Search today and asked him what he thought about this. He took a shot at an explanation: the burrset and other internal parts on small grinder heat up and cool down very quickly. This affects the way the grind comes out and necessitates frequent adjustments. The big grinder are more massive, more stable temperature-wise, and therefore more stable grind-wise.

That's as close to a believable explanation as I've heard. Or at least it's a partial explanation.


He needs to rethink his explanation.

We are talking about differences among commercial grinders used in occasional domestic service. A Cimbali Junior or Mazzer Mini does not have its burrs heat up much in the sort of use that we home users put those grinders to, anymore than does a Robur, a Compak K10, or a Cimbali Max. It is quite honestly absurd to think otherwise.

The people making and posting about these observations are not using these grinders in cafes (where it doesn't much matter) but from their experience in a home setting. In a cafe, it doesn't matter if you pitch 2 or 3 shots down the drain every time the ambient humidity changes, if you are going to grind enough coffee in a shift to make 200 doubles. In a home, we notice this sort of thing because we are low volume infrequent users.

I think that Michael Teahan's explanation makes the most sense. It all revolves upon the length of the cutting/grinding surface, regardless of the type of burrs. Conicals have larger cutting surfaces than do most planars, and that is the explanation.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by RapidCoffee on Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:46 pm

Ken Fox wrote:I think that Michael Teahan's explanation makes the most sense. It all revolves upon the length of the cutting/grinding surface, regardless of the type of burrs. Conicals have larger cutting surfaces than do most planars, and that is the explanation.

I agree. Preliminary (and I stress preliminary) SEM and particle size measurements indicate that Titan conicals (Robur, Macap MXK) produce more regularly shaped grind particles with a wider range of sizes and more fines, compared to the flat burr Mazzer SJ. This is what you might expect from a longer grind path.

Particle properties (size and shape) lead to different packing characteristics in the coffee lattice and unique extraction characteristics that affect the pour. I doubt heat plays much of a role, but I could be wrong. It would be great to get some real-time heat measurements of the microenvironments created on the burr surfaces during grinding, but I'm not equipped to do that.
John
User avatar
RapidCoffee
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: Dec 11, 2005
Location: Rapid City, SD

Link to "Titan Grinder Project"by Ken Fox on Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:06 am

RapidCoffee wrote: It would be great to get some real-time heat measurements of the microenvironments created on the burr surfaces during grinding, but I'm not equipped to do that.


John, I'll send you some burr resistant thermocouples. :P

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

PreviousNext

Return to The Bench