With a new toy, or coffee for that matter, have a couple of POUNDS at hand to explore the edges and see what changes.

zin1953 wrote:I have no direct experience using a Super Jolly. But, might I suggest you read the last two posts [mine, and Ken Fox's reply] in the "Can It Beat the Robur?" thread. Click here.

My take on it was that, while both the SJ and the CMH "scored" 2-0-2 against the Robur, the CMH scored better than the SJ while doing so . . .

IMHO, this is the wrong take on Jim's vastly entertaining "Beat the Robur" tests. The key word is entertainment, as noted in the very opening line of the thread:

another_jim wrote:And now for the Entertainment Portion of this Review:

The table you quoted shows the Rancilio Rocky outperforming the SJ at 2-0-2... but I don't see anyone rushing to sell their SJ in order to buy a Rocky replacement. The Mazzer Mini turned in the worst score by far (only the Pede manual came close), the Versalab M3 did poorly, and the Macap MXK scored much better for Jim than for me (I would never have scored it over the Robur).

The CMH sounds like a great grinder. But all of the "Titan" grinders that we tested fall into that category. This includes the Super Jolly, one of the most widely used commercial grinders on the planet.

John,

I'm not disagreeing with your post; I'm just disagreeing with part of your post.

The Win-Loss-Tie portion of Jim's "box score" is shorthand, and both grinders (SJ & CMH) had a record -- as I noted above -- of 2-0-2 v. the Robur. However, in terms of overall point differential, I read it as the CMH outscored the Robur by the highest margin (+4). The Macap MXK ranked 2nd, also with 2-0-2 but a +3 margin over the Robur. Finally, the only other grinder that "won" on points was the Compak WBC with a +1, but in the "standings," it was 1-1-2.

Clearly none of this means very much. Even though the test was (IMHO) well thought out and well set up, it's too small of a sample to be anything close to definitive; also, just as with wine tasting, personal palate preference covers a wide range of variation. The human palate is not a machine, and one may score the exact same shot higher/lower than another -- to wit, your take (v. Jim's) on the MXK.

RapidCoffee wrote:The CMH sounds like a great grinder. But all of the "Titan" grinders that we tested fall into that category. This includes the Super Jolly, one of the most widely used commercial grinders on the planet.

I agree, John. 100%!

I just don't see the "Beat the Robur" test as a good way of comparing grinders (other than the obvious comparison to the Robur). Perhaps Jim will weigh in with a dissenting opinion. For now, I'll merely point out that, in addition to the very small sample size, the CMH and the SJ tests were two weeks apart. That's fine if you're comparing them to the Robur, but unacceptable if you're trying to compare them to one another.

RapidCoffee wrote:I don't see anyone rushing to sell their SJ in order to buy a Rocky replacement.

OTOH, at least one CGer seems to think that the Rocky beats the pants off the CMH!

SteveN wrote:Mine is coming in today so I will be at home dialing it in tonight. Any input on how much time on a pour one full turn of the adjustment knob makes?

When I was evaluating the Cimbali Max, I considered a half turn as a small adjustment (a few seconds of pour time, if that).

IMAWriter wrote:I understand the Max is louder than a Mini...is it way louder than an SJ? Or just a bit louder. I do like to use my grinder after the kiddoes are in bed.

The Cimbali has a more throaty sound and seems louder to me, but I would not say it's way louder except when run empty.

IMAWriter wrote:...will the quality/consistency of the grind be a significant enough improvement to justify selling my SJ and purchasing the Hybrid?

I had the Max for a few months and I own the Super Jolly, but unfortunately not at the same time. My gut reaction is there isn't a significant difference, though I would not surprise me if the Max edged out the Super Jolly on clump-free grounds and consistent pours, especially if your technique isn't spot on.

Hey I just got my Max Hybrid, and I am scratching my head on page 11 of the manual.

It says we MUST ground this grinder to a Equalizing Connection.

The manual claims this step is absolutely necessary.

I will call the techs at Chris's tommorow, just wondering if anyone had any thoughts.

I searched the forum and found no mention of this on any other grinder.

Not applicable in the US on 110v

First impressions?

I love this thing. My Expobar Pulser now looks kinda wimpy sitting next to it. I don't find it to be any louder then the Rocky a Compak K3 that I had. I also like the industrial built for a purpose look.

First things first, I set it up and decided to go the route of dumping a bunch of beans into the hopper. With my Rocky I would always grind per dose. After reading how the Max wants weight on the bean column I felt I would give it a shot and learn to grind by time. It took all of 2 shots to have it dialed in and pouring perfectly. The worm gear and knob for adjusting the grind is the way to go. Very simple and repeatable. Off to bed....

This morning came the ultimate test. My wife came in from her morning run and I made her her daily Americano. She had one sip and declared it the best I have ever made. After drinking one myself, I agree. Then I had another. Better then the first. At my grind setting, I grind for 8-9 seconds, dose, level, lock and load. Perfect, syrupy, even extraction. Easy as can be with no drama. I no longer need to work to overcome issues with the grind to make good coffee.

It's a winner.

-Steve

Can anyone share their dosing/distribution technique for this grinder? I'm basically just grinding and then dosing right into the PF (naked). Level off (N-S-E-W) with the edge of my scooper *I still see a few minor clumps* and tamp per usual. The pours aren't that great looking. Beans are Blackcat (roasted on the 5/16).