Versalab M3 Grinder - Page 3

Behind the scenes of the site's projects and equipment reviews.
lino
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 years ago

#21: Post by lino »

Great pictures! Nice to be able to see what is inside.

Just to be sure I understand...

The washer is the soldered brass or copper part? Could also be called "cleaner"?

At first when I read "washer" I was thinking of a flat disk with a hole in it, such as you find under a nut. Sounds like the other meaning of the word washer is being used?

ciao

lino

Abe Carmeli (original poster)
Team HB
Posts: 845
Joined: 19 years ago

#22: Post by Abe Carmeli (original poster) »

lino wrote:Great pictures! Nice to be able to see what is inside.

Just to be sure I understand...

The washer is the soldered brass or copper part? Could also be called "cleaner"?
You are right Lino, and I corrected the name. It is a wiper. I think an equally valid question is why a disk with a hole in it is called a washer. What exactly does it wash? :).
Abe Carmeli

Advertisement
User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
Posts: 13872
Joined: 19 years ago

#23: Post by another_jim »

Nice disassembly and pics, saves me snapping my poor ones when I take a look.

Were there any grinds trapped in the burr housing? One of the M3 claims was that this had been eliminated.

I've done two blind test cuppings so far:

* One of a slightly tainted coffee with one cup from each grinder. I had gotten the taint from shots, but not at my previous cupping (done with the mini before the M3 arrived). One cup was very vivid, and much worse, because the it was vividly tainted; the other was mute and blah. I was very relieved to find the vivid cup was the M3's. :)

* The other was of a 90 plus rated coffee, cupped in a "triangle-test." This involves six cups, three from each grinder, arranged in two groups of three, each with one odd cup (from the other grinder). The task is to identify the two odd cups. This one had me sweating. In one group, one cup was a lot more vivid when breaking the crust, and I decided it should be the odd M3 cup mixed with two from the Mini. In the other group, I looked for a dull cup, and had a very tough time, settling in, very tentatively, on one suspect. However, the task got wonderfully easy when the cups cooled, since the M3 cups stayed clear and bright, whereas the mini cups got muddy with overextraction. (My tentative suspect proved guilty) :D

I'll do more tests (when I feel like tempting fate again); but we're down to 1 in 18 the results being chance, 17 in 18 that the M3 grinds distinctly better for french press or cupping. In terms of the grinds resisting overextraction (or having fewer fines), I'd rate the difference a complete certainty, since the cup differences in both tests became utterly obvious as the cups cooled.

This bodes very well for me, since I bought the grinder on the premise that fines are what makes SO espresso from very bright coffees, delicious when brewed, undrinkable as espresso. So far the shots I've had follow this theory. The M3 shots are considerably snappier than the Mini shots (the good part of acidity), but have never been acrid, sour, or lemon-peely (the bad part of acidity).

These results are preliminary. I judge them pretty conclusive on the brewed front, but very subject to revision from blind tests on shots.

lino
Posts: 130
Joined: 19 years ago

#24: Post by lino »

Hey Abe,

I agree completely on the word washer...
To get off topic a bit, just for kicks, I looked up the etymology...

Looks like no one else knows why it's called a washer either, though several sources I checked did agree that it likely originated with "someone or thing that washes". None knew, however, the logic that takes "washing" to disk with a hole in it.

ciao

lino

espressobsessed
Posts: 65
Joined: 19 years ago

#25: Post by espressobsessed »

Excellent write-ups gentlemen. I'm curious how the grinder would perform next to ditting or mahlkoenig.

And Abe, nice shots of the burrsets. If I had a fireplace, I'd ask for hi-res images to hang above it. Seriously. Beautiful.

Cheers,
Jimmy

Abe Carmeli (original poster)
Team HB
Posts: 845
Joined: 19 years ago

#26: Post by Abe Carmeli (original poster) »

another_jim wrote:Were there any grinds trapped in the burr housing? One of the M3 claims was that this had been eliminated.
No such luck Jim. The housing was loaded with grinds and did not look any cleaner than a Mazzer. In fact, it was even messier, since it has an extra set of burrs. The funnel also had grounds on its internal walls. It is advisable to brush the funnel walls quickly, 2 circular sweeps, after you finish grinding.

EDIT: I opened the grinder again today and realized why I saw a lot of coffee in the housing in the above comment: It was leftovers from the top funnel. I should have turned the grinder on before opening it to clear those out completely. Having done so today, it was pretty clean in the housing and on the burrs. The burrs were as clean as the Mazzer.
Abe Carmeli

Abe Carmeli (original poster)
Team HB
Posts: 845
Joined: 19 years ago

#27: Post by Abe Carmeli (original poster) »

lino wrote:Hey Abe,

To get off topic a bit, just for kicks, I looked up the etymology...

Looks like no one else knows why it's called a washer either, though several sources I checked did agree that it likely originated with "someone or thing that washes".
LOL, Lino, while we are on the subject, see if you can figure out why we start things from the top. Isn't the top somewhere one first needs to climb up to? :wink:
Abe Carmeli

Advertisement
Abe Carmeli (original poster)
Team HB
Posts: 845
Joined: 19 years ago

#28: Post by Abe Carmeli (original poster) »

espressobsessed wrote:And Abe, nice shots of the burrsets. If I had a fireplace, I'd ask for hi-res images to hang above it. Seriously. Beautiful.

Cheers,
Jimmy
Thanks Jimmy, I'm saving that one for you, just get a fireplace already :D
Abe Carmeli

User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
Posts: 13872
Joined: 19 years ago

#29: Post by another_jim »

HB wrote:Looks nice Jim!

Despite having a so-called infinite adjustment, the Mini's espresso grind range is a rather narrow band. So I have a question for our test panel: How does the granularity of the M3's adjustment compare to a Mazzer's?
Oops, I missed this. The threading on the M3 is finer (about 5:3 as fine according to Andy's measure, and my gap between espresso and FP) and the barrel rotates very easily, unlike the spring loaded Mazzer system which tends to jerk a little. So grind adjustments can be made a lot finer. The drawback of the system is that one has the extra steps of loosening the lock screw and retightening it (firmly -- lots of torque on the barrel, and I've had slippage when I was careless tightening it)

Unfortunately, since I stop shots by pour color, "who cares about time and volume", this feature is largely lost on me. But it is ueber-precise enough to please anyone.

The repeatability factor is another story - that is, returning to a grind setting after making an excursion to grind for FP or some other blend. Since this is a single dose, no retained grounds, grinder; this is a very legitimate criterion to hold it too -- it's been designed to switch between coffees and grind levels. I will test this at some point.

User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
Posts: 13872
Joined: 19 years ago

#30: Post by another_jim »

Abe Carmeli wrote:
No such luck Jim. The housing was loaded with grinds and did not look any cleaner than a Mazzer. In fact, it was even messier, since it has an extra set of burrs. The funnel also had grounds on its internal walls. It is advisable to brush the funnel walls quickly, 2 circular sweeps, after you finish grinding.
Hmm. Time to start weighing, I guess.