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

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? .

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)

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.

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

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

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.

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?

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

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.

Abe Carmeli wrote:

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.

Hmm. Time to start weighing, I guess.

another_jim wrote:The threading on the M3 is finer (about 5:3 as fine according to Andy's measure

This came direct from John Bicht, who said that the thread pitch is 1/32".

another_jim wrote: 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)

But John also said that tightening the locking knob also changed the grind setting slightly, which could be a problem, I suppose.

One quick note about locking in the grinder dial knob. That knob has two jobs: to lock-in the dial, and to hold the bottom funnel. It is an extra locker in addition to the two screws and washers that hold it in place. I notice that at times, when I release that knob to adjust the dial, the funnel drops down a notch. This may take the wiper/funnel off alignment, and may cause the wiper to slightly hit the internal funnel walls when it spins.

To prevent this from happening, when I make an adjustment, I always hold the funnel up and slightly twist it as if I'm screwing it back into its groove, and then lock the knob.

Great reporting guys and I love the pictures Abe. Despite the eye bulging pricetag, I am tempted, really tempted.

Compared to the Mazzer Robur, the Mini seems slow. I wouldn't mind a slow grind so much if I weren't forced to stand their doltishly holding the portafilter. The Mazzer Mini E Doserless portafilter cradle handled this nicely (especially the "one hand" operation of the Type B). Which begs the question:

Q1: How long does the M3 grinder require for a double?

Terry had a nice looking portafilter rest machined from a block of aluminum at his SCAA booth. I looked at espressoparts.com and don't see it on sale, so it may still be in the prototype stage. Anyway, it was essentially a cutout cylinder with a ridge along the interior perimeter to accommodate the portafilter ears. Looking at the M3 grinder pictures, it appears the clearance under the exit is tight, which would make it trickier to fit in some sort of portafilter cradle.

Q2: What is the clearance underneath the grinder's exit?

For now I'll not dwell on the scary questions...

Q3: How much did this cost again? and Q4: How long does one wait for delivery?

HB wrote:Q1: How long does the M3 grinder require for a double?

18-20 secs.

Q2: What is the clearance underneath the grinder's exit?

~ 3.0"

There is no need for a stand to hold the P/F with the double spout P/F I use, it fits perfectly snug under the chute. However, if you use a bottomless P/F, a little square to hold it would be nice.

Q3: How much did this cost again?

I am not sure, but I know that they hold the deed to my house.

HB wrote: How much did this cost again?

The original price was $980, but the price is probably going to go up. They had to switch to a different (more expensive) machinist for some of the components.

HB wrote: How long does one wait for delivery?

At this point, probably not very long at all, they seem to have the parts supply situation under control.

Andy asked me to fix the grinder scale so it goes from 0 to 10 with 10 subdivisions per number. I've set it up to be printed at 200 pixels per inch, on a printer in landscape format (or at least 10.5 inches of usable space). At that sizing, the 0 and 10 positions ought to coincide when wrapped around just above the threads. If they don't for you, just resize the jpeg or psd in a photoeditor and reprint it at 200 pixels/inch (alternativetively you can not resize and reprint at a different pixel per inche setting -- this will be less accurate)

The scales are at:
http://users.ameritech.net/jim_sc.../grind_Scale_2.jpg
http://users.ameritech.net/jim_sc.../grind_Scale_2.psd

The psd file is 4 megs and can be tweaked (e.g. the metallic background can be eliminated or replaced if printing onto something fancy); the jpeg is 95%, 225Kb, and will print and resize acceptably.

I've tried to make the scales look compatible with the grinder's 19th Century English instrument look:



That's it for me painting any more scales or dials -- way too finicky for my temperament.

another_jim wrote:Andy asked me to fix the grinder scale....That's it for me painting any more scales or dials -- way too finicky for my temperament.

SURE, blame it on me!

Nice work, Jim!

Thanks for the scale Jim, nice Job. I created a similar one using word, but I think a more appropriate one would be a scale printed on translucent tape. I'll see what I can do about that.

Abe Carmeli wrote:Thanks for the scale Jim, nice Job. I created a similar one using word, but I think a more appropriate one would be a scale printed on translucent tape. I'll see what I can do about that.

If you d/l the psd, you can print it without the background on overhead plastic. If you haven't got a layering image editor, get Gimp or Pixia, both freeware, fairly decent, and read psd files.

another_jim wrote:

Abe Carmeli wrote:

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.

Hmm. Time to start weighing, I guess.

I've noticed when one zeros the grinder, getting a little burr contact, about 1 gram of grinds falls out. If this clears the burrs, there's a lot less lurking than the usual 10 grams in a commercial grind chamber.