[quote="brianl"]Anecdotal evidence is all we are going to get here. That's what he asked for an what he received. /quote]

That was sort of my point.

Anecdotal evidence from who? Is it reliable and compared to what? Used it extensively?

If I was going to pick one person to take anecdotal evidence from i would pick somekne with a lot of coffee experience, multiple highly regarded grinders, multiple brewing methods (say an espro and aeropress) and significant time with the grinder.

There are only a couple hundred people with the final iteration of ph-1 with finer thread, hard locked alignment and adjustment collar. MANY of the previous owners that have owned a lido and pharos voodoodaddyed the pharos, despite Doug having explained the lack of catch up is because removing the lower bearing would reduce consistency and grind quality (seems especially relevant when discussing fines that may impact or or muddy a cup) ..thus Ryan is actually probably the single best source we have for anecdotal evidence as to how the Pharos can do for immersion.

Considering everything he should either test it vs a lido or trust his experiences and not anecdotal comments from those in situations not equal to or as qualified as himself, imo.

Regardless, I think the posts before yours summed it up. He posted on a forum, which means he doesn't have the means or experience to make his own determination, which is perfectly fine. He should have sent an email to a world class brewer instead .

Hey all. Good and lively discussion going on here.

My main problem (if it's a problem) is that I've actually used very few grinders for immersion. So I don't have a wide spectrum of references to draw from. In fact, I've only used three grinders for my Aeropress and Espro. My Pharos, Hario Slim(modded stepless), and my Vario (ceramic burrs).

And I'm far less precise and fussy about my immersion preparation than when I make espresso. So I really haven't experimented that much.

Before I got my Pharos, I was using my Hario Slim at work. And that required a frenetic workout to grind 18g or more. When I got the Pharos I said to myself, "hey, this has a big burr set and I can grind much faster, so let's give it a whirl." Obviously I cut my grinding time down significantly. And my co-workers think I have some kind of Doctor Who/steampunk device in my cubicle that also grinds coffee.

I first tried a coarse setting. But only a few times, so I could go back and try it again.

As mentioned, I've been grinding in the espresso range for my Espro. And, yes, this does result in some silt, even with the dual stage filtration of the Espro. But it doesn't bother me.

And tell me if I'm committing an indictable offense, but once I dump the grinds into my Espro I bloom first. I pour enough hot water to stir and agitate thoroughly. And then after 30 seconds from first pour, I add the rest of the water. And since I'm grinding espresso range, I press earlier, around the 3 minute or 3:15 mark. I'm using the small Espro.

To me it tastes good, but I've only used a few grinders for this brew method and it does leave some silt in the bottom. But nothing like what my Slim produced.

Also, the other day I was in a rush at home and used my ceramic Vario to grind for my Espro, which I had brought home for the weekend. I didn't want to move my Vario's settings, for fear of the dreaded drift. So I left it in espresso range. After about 3:30 I pressed. A little bit of silt but it was a nicely rounded cup.

Maybe I should get more finicky about my immersion brewing, to match my espresso prep.

I would definitely get the steel burrs for the Vario if you don't plan on using it for espresso. Definitely stellar.

FWIW Day mentioned earlier that he didn't know whether the LIDO 2 was designed for coarser grinding than the Pharos. The LIDO 2 was designed as a cupping grinder, the Pharos as an espresso grinder. But that aside, if you can dial in the Pharos to please your palate that should be sufficient.

First I want to make it clear that I am not in anyway trying to antagonize anyone. Merely saying that there is insufficient real evidence to draw large conclusions that say the Pharos can not handle coarse grinds well. Case in point, Ryan above said "there is some silt." Some readers will probably reference that in the future and refer to how the Pharos always produces more silt than a normal grinder. EVEN ON AN ESPRO! which will seem shocking when taken out of context and seem like definitive anecdotal evidence that the Pharos can not grind consistently coarse.

However, he also stated that he intentionally tries to grind close to espresso range for french press.....which is not at all the norm. I suspect anyone grinding close to espresso range for fp would find silt in the cup, no matter the grinder. In fact, his information presented doesnt really even have anything to do with a coarse grind consistency since it is not coarse.

@Ryan, we both need to start doing some coarse grinds I just dont do it because it takes so darn long....FP on a hand grinder is a pain in the butt imo, especially when needing approx 50 grams....so I will stick with my MDF for that I think, but may do some testing for a while just or the heck of it.

drgary wrote:FWIW Day mentioned earlier that he didn't know whether the LIDO 2 was designed for coarser grinding than the Pharos. The LIDO 2 was designed as a cupping grinder, the Pharos as an espresso grinder. But that aside, if you can dial in the Pharos to please your palate that should be sufficient.

I have the utmost respect for you, Gary, and have learned sooo much from your years of posts these past months. If your Pharos was not voodoodaddy modded I would consider you an absolute authority on the matter. But I cant get past the point that Doug has clearly decided not to eliminate the lower bearing, and he makes it clear that the lower bearing is critical for tight tolerances, which, based on his own posts, would be particularly critical at coarser grinds. As to the Lido2, what I meant was that the burrs themselves were not designed for "cupping" per say, but rather the grind setting mechanism was designed with coarse brews in mind. In fact, the burrs in the Lido2 were apparently modified from the Lido 1 to make them faster and, in that regard more like the Pharos. I am going to post large chunks of text below to respect Orphanespresso and not parse Doug's words and unintentionally take away from his intent.

orphanespresso wrote:Whoa...I really want to comment here but obviously my words can get parsed pretty closely so I will try to add clarity...
First, it is my opinion that any and all burr sets are designed to grind at whatever level of fineness but for the old ghost tooth burrs which were designed for coarse grinding in batch grinders. Conical or flat, the 'good for espresso ' designation has more to do with the design of the supporting mechanism than the burr itself and once a perfectly acceptable espresso or any other grind can be produced by any grinder then the 'suitability' becomes more subjective. Case in point...the small conical electric grinders can be deemed not suitable for espresso because of any number of factors independent of the actual burr set depending on current trends or even just a user preference: stepped adjustment (step less preferred), slow (fast preferred), noisy (quiet preferred)...the list is endless but I trust you get my point. Again, with the small conicals, no matter how powered a reasonably built grinder can usually grind well enough on the espresso end due to some amount of burr self centering on load ( but fall short on user preference) but a big downfall has always been coarser grinding for brew due to sloppy tolerances or build or wear of plastic parts and any number of issues that are not so much user preference but actual bad engineering.
Instead of making an ESPRESSO grinder and the caps imply some level of importance, but not precision,and assuming that the coarse end would follow we made a brew grinder and if set up correctly the espresso end of the range does follow. Many people use the Lido1 for espresso quite happily but the burr geometry is such that it can be deemed as 'slow'. User preference. So when we began working on the Lido 2, one aspect (gleaned from stated user preference, stated on this forum) that seemed important to users was speed so we changed the burr to one which is more aggressive, ie more efficient therefore faster with the trade off that, at least for espresso on hard beans some users say it is 'hard to turn' . .

In a couple of posts below

orphanespresso wrote:We are aware of the adjustability limitations of the grinder in the espresso range and rest assured we are always working on changes that we can make as we go forward...currently the Lido grinders are positioned to serve the largest market segment - brewing- with the idea that we bring in what could be called outliers as we move forward ( no offense but we observe that in the mass market hand grinders are still mostly considered quaint and hand grinding for espresso more or less outrageous).

Source: LIDO 2 for espresso

It is clear that the user interface of the Lido is much more friendly for coarser grinds than the Pharos (which could easily impact short quick comparisons between the two) but the burrs themselves are not specifically designed to be different in anyway, and Lido2 burrs would actually be even more similar to the Pharos than the Lido1 as both emphasized speed over "nibbling."

After spending way too many hours reading and comparing different threads, comments and "testing" conditions I came to my previously stated suspicions. There are a variety of extraneous factors that may have given the Pharos a less than stellar reputation on the coarse end, and it may be largely undeserved and based on very little accurate and reliable information ("Silt in ESPRO!" type information). But I am learning too much too quickly about coffee to really say I know anything definitive right now.

Of course with PH-2 on the way who really cares anymore

day wrote:If your Pharos was not voodoodaddy modded I would consider you an absolute authority on the matter. But I cant get past the point that Doug has clearly decided not to eliminate the lower bearing, and he makes it clear that the lower bearing is critical for tight tolerances, which, based on his own posts, would be particularly critical at coarser grinds.

Day, please don't consider me an "absolute authority" on anything other than advising you or anyone to be their own authority.

What you will get from here is experienced opinion. Regarding my Pharos, its grind quality has not changed in any discernible way since I modded it. The VDD mod still includes a lower bearing. I aligned it and locked it down per Doug's instructions and with Will's aluminum spacers and it maintains its alignment. With the VDD mods it's just easier to use. When I took it on a long road trip before LIDO 1 existed, the Pharos was stock.

About the LIDO 2 being a cupping grinder, I remember that designation, and some of that memory is from talking with Doug, but no matter. Perhaps it was how he designated the LIDO 1. You quote Doug about burrs being suitable over a wide range of grind coarseness. But burrs don't grind coffee beans. You need a whole grinder to do that. You quoted Doug saying the LIDO 2 is designed to be a "brew grinder," which is close enough for me.

I was one of the beta testers for the LIDO 2. Yakster and I led it through its paces. We did not do a scientific study, but we are both experienced in brewing coffee and making espresso. The Pharos was better suited ergonomically and far superior in blind cupping for espresso. Did we control all variables? No. Did we do multiple samples? No. Am I standing by my experienced opinion? Yes, in the way someone who cooks learns a technique that works and stays with it. I own LIDOs I and II and a Pharos. My LIDO 1 is #6, but I sent it in for servicing and Doug and Barb upgraded it with their improvements at the end of that production run. With the option of using a Pharos I wouldn't think of using a LIDO to grind espresso. It's just too much work, it takes too long, and the grind won't be any better and probably not nearly as good. With the Pharos it takes me 10 seconds to grind 18 gm, even with hard beans, and the flavors are beautifully layered.

My LIDO 1 is tuned to the Aeropress. My LIDO 2 is at my office, where I use it for Aeropress and Clever Dripper. They all work well. If I had to make do I could use a LIDO to grind for espresso, but I'm fortunate that I don't have to make do. At home I also have the option of electric grinders that match or outperform the hand ones.

Anyone reading my posts over time may see another bias. I'm not overly fussy about gear but more concerned about learning to use good gear well enough to thoroughly and consistently enjoy making coffee. The coffee itself is the centerpiece.

Couple things.

First, you left out the major variable of coffee and roast level. Darker roasts and lighter roasts are going to give you v different experiences with brewing depending on grind size.

Second, if you are grinding really fine to avoid bitterness, this means you are otherwise experiencing bitterness due to the difference in particle sizes.... Boulders and fines with fines causing bitterness through over extraction. So what you did is bring all particles to a similar fine size for short brew times.

This means your grinder is limiting you to the kind of grind size and brewing lengths you can do without experiencing nasty flavours.

This is a compromise that is not worth making.... I did it for quite awhile and when I got a better grinder and started grinding coarser and more consistently in particle size (and started roasting lighter) it opened up all kinds of new possibilities.

happycat wrote:Second, if you are grinding really fine to avoid bitterness, this means you are otherwise experiencing bitterness due to the difference in particle sizes.... Boulders and fines with fines causing bitterness through over extraction. So what you did is bring all particles to a similar fine size for short brew times.

The bulk of the extraction will happen pretty much instantaneously, but even with a fine grind, it's extremely unlikely to overextract in just 3 minutes. It would be different with a pourover, with flow through the bed, but in French press the coffee & water just sit together. Bitterness would more likely be down to solids getting into the cup...not that the OP is complaining about either bitterness, nor excessive fines (he isn't & says he likes the cup).

I just compared my Pharos to my BunnDitting, brewing the same coffee, same dose and temp, very similar grind size. It's a home-roasted Ethiopian Deri Kochowa, brewed 6 days post roast in a Clever Dripper. Brew ratio was about 0.9. Brew temp was 209F, steep time before starting to drain was 1 minute 45 seconds. It's my usual two Aeropress scoops for a 10 oz cup, measuring 28 gm coffee to 297 gm water. I'm not taking the time to completely dial in this coffee via either method. I'd rather add thermocouples to my roaster today. But the rough comparison is worth reporting because it confirms that the Pharos adds some bitterness, and this is probably because it yields more fines than the Ditting burrs, which are a common professional choice for brewing. The BunnDitting version seemed underextracted but entirely lacked bitterness from start to finish. The Pharos version has mild to moderate bitterness throughout and is a bit more intense in a way that I like. If I were to dial in the BunnDitting version for this coffee, I would increase the coffee dose by about 20% for more intensity, but I doubt I would get any of that unpleasant bitterness. Time to add some Wildwood creamer to the Pharos version.