HBchris wrote:For those that have this tamper, or a tamper style such as this, when you get in a new coffee how do you determine the depth level to make the tamper.

As I am assuming, when changing coffees, the tamper depth would need to change.

mrespresso23 wrote:Seriously thinking about getting me one, but need some reassurance.
Anyone using it with a Linea Mini?

Some open questions:
1. Should I go with 58.5 size?
2. Thinking about the palm wood with depression, but given that it is lighter, I am not sure if it wouldn't be better to go with SL or the all metal one.
3. Flat / Convex - I'm thinking convex.

If you're using it with a Linea Mini, please do share your thoughts and choices on the above questions.

Randy G. wrote:I feel like I missed a week of class in an advanced engineering course, and upon returning to school feeling quite lost. Has someone come up with some evidence that a tamping method based on force-priority is inferior to a tamp that is solely based on depth? Is not tamping about the goal of compressing a mass of coffee that offers a consistent amount of resistance to the flow of water throughout its three-dimensional area. To achieve that don't we desire two things - consistent compaction and a level bed of coffee?

These various depth-priority tampers will possibly present a level tamp, and can be used to create a tamp at some force, but the odds of both happening every time is relatively slim without multiple adjustments throughout the day in a commercial environment, or by luck as much as anything else in a home environment. In either case, they seemingly depend on on a precise volume of coffee when compacted which is more difficult to measure than a mass of coffee.

And in terms of a level tamp, I theorize that it is easier to get that AND a measured or sensed tamping force by having your fingers on the top edges of a standard tamper's base and using tactile feedback by sensing the top of the basket and the top edge of the tamper's base concurrently.

So these have replaced the long-used mass of coffee with the need for a volume of coffee to get a level tamp through their design. And they have replaced tamping force with depth to make use of their leveling feature. And you get both when you add a dash of luck (getting the correct volume and grind to get the correct compression when the tamper bottoms out on the top edge of the basket) There are tampers that allow a level tamp every time, and some that give some sort of feedback for tamping force (which is overrated to an extent).

Isn't this just making things more complicated? Adding variables instead of eliminating them? I don't weigh myself in the morning with a ruler, so why by restricted to tamping to a depth to get the desired compression? And the design of the handle (the mushroom "handle") eliminates the ability to feel the how level the tamp is when the handle does not seat on the basket at the end of the tamp in instances where the device does not hit the basket.

And even if we discount all of that and say that the only thing that matters is level and just smash the coffee down because after about 35 pounds of "force" it really doesn't matter any more, why not use a tamper that is specifically designed to tamp level every single time without fail like the "Easytamp 5 Star Pro" or the 'Great Leveller"? Or just use a tamper and tamp level?

After spending years learning how to eliminate variables this all seems counter intuitive and counterproductive to me. And, maybe, just like these new "puck" tampers, I am overthinking this... But if we want to complicate this, I think I would rather have a rechargeable tamper with a built in vibrator that creates an even distribution before tamping. A number of jokes just came to mind, but let's not go there.