Hi all, Some more WDT ideas. I have been useing a six inch mini wisk that I found in a kitchen store( .49 ) with very good results. The biggest problem I had was getting my dose right. I use mostly triple baskets. My grinders are a Rocky and a Super Jolly, both doserless, which tend to be clumpy so the WDT works very well for me. I found that timing my grind I can get my dose spot on, 23 sec for Rocky/ 9 sec for Jolly. Again thanks to John and all.

Jim

RapidCoffee wrote:I've still got dissecting needles to send out if you'd like to give this a try. You'll find them easier to handle than a safety pin.

You've got mail.
I'll give it a shot and see what difference it makes. Oh, and the lil container allows me to rotate a number of times as I dose (I grind 17 grams at a shot, so I pull the dosing lever like mad to get out all the crumbs). I can even rotate the container *as* I pull the dosing lever. It's day two with the two group Astoria, so I'm still going through some 'growing pains' with her. As soon as I get a routine that I'm pleased with (its drinkable at the moment, but I have to think about it...) I'll start changing variables and pull the ole optometrists trick.

puffinjk wrote:Hi all, Some more WDT ideas. I have been useing a six inch mini wisk that I found in a kitchen store( .49 ) with very good results. The biggest problem I had was getting my dose right. I use mostly triple baskets. My grinders are a Rocky and a Super Jolly, both doserless, which tend to be clumpy so the WDT works very well for me. I found that timing my grind I can get my dose spot on, 23 sec for Rocky/ 9 sec for Jolly. Again thanks to John and all.

Jim

A mini-wisk sounds like a GREAT idea. You should get excellent distribution and declumping. My only concern would be basket geometry. None of my wisks are small enough.

- John

Psyd wrote:Oh, and the lil container allows me to rotate a number of times as I dose (I grind 17 grams at a shot, so I pull the dosing lever like mad to get out all the crumbs). I can even rotate the container *as* I pull the dosing lever.

We all develop routines to overcome grinder design flaws. Sooner or later someone will design a grinder that grinds quietly, evenly, and quickly, and distributes grounds in the PF uniformly w/o clumping. In fact, it may already have been done - for only $1250...

Psyd wrote:As soon as I get a routine that I'm pleased with (its drinkable at the moment, but I have to think about it...) I'll start changing variables and pull the ole optometrists trick.

Sorry pardner, ya lost me there.

RapidCoffee wrote:Sorry pardner, ya lost me there.

"Like this... or like this?" "Better here.... or here?" "One... or two?"

Side by side comparisons changing only one variable at a time in small increments, bracketing the results, moving on the thee next variable.

And folk that have used the M3 suggest that it isn't particularly clean, nor is it particularly fast. Great first step though. Soon we'll have one that solves those problems and costs no more than my present truck.

[STANDING]"Hi... I'm Ron, and I am an espresso cheater"[\STANDING]

First, I want to thank John for his persistence in getting a WDT through the post office to me! Thanks!

Second, I don't know if cheat is the right word. Are the Stockfleth move or the Chicago Chop cheats? I think they are all alternate methods of achieving even distribution and a consistent dose. The advantage of the WDT for the home basista is achieving that goal easier. A professional barista pulls more shots in a day than I probably will in a year, so they are much more practiced at dosing, leveling and tamping. I pull two or three triples a day, so anything that helps me be more consistent and get better results is a valuable tool, not a cheat.

Dogshot wrote:Split from The Buyer's Guide to the Quickmill Vetrano by moderator...

[snip}with my apologies (RJ)


a) sure a pro would eschew this technique, as it takes more time than a NSEW, chop, or Stockfleth, and would lead to less through-put (ie.$); but it involves less pawing of the coffee, and is clearly a more consistent method of achieving even distribution. Sometimes the HB is in a better position to strive for absolute quality.

b) A naked PF will show gross errors (as Ken puts it) in the puck, the puck itself acts as another sign of errors, and the taste will show all errors. The Weiss Distribution often gives perfect NPF pours, perfect to near-perfect pucks, and my worst pours using the WDT taste miles better than my best NSEW pours.

It has made such a difference to my extractions that I hope that any reader who has not tried the WDT to give it a try before considering a new machine or grinder.

Mark

I agree with all that the WDT would be impractical for the PRO Barista, but wow!...
I tried it for the first time tonight...even used an Organic Yoghurt container...that is, the yoghurt was organic...haha
Before tonight, with Anita and Mazzer SJ I was getting, at most times wonderful sweet 1 1/2oz doubles, and the occasionally good triple ristretto...although my consistency was not what I would have liked....I utilize the Stockfleths for distribution, and a NSEW "Staublike" tamp...no tapping....my shots resisted blonding till around 23-25 seconds...using home roasted commercial "green" blends..
Well, I cut down the yoghurt cup, grinded, and flipped the SJ lever and watched ALL my precious coffee enter the PF, surrounded by the cup...I stirred using an implement similar to that described in the good "Dr." Weiss' article....
A careful leveling...the grind WAS fluffier (a poor man's Versalab?)..and un-clumpy...then my usual tamp..I wanted to change nothing but the distribution....
a cooling flush....then the pour...wow...the beads, all even across the bottom of my NPF....the pour perfectly centered, something not always the case with me....25 seconds later still no blonding!...at 30 seconds, a 1/ 3/4oz triple shot...
For this test, I used Monkey blend...the shot was certainly more "expansive"...can't think of another word...the flavors we're slightly separated, not as jammed together....
I believe the extra 30 seconds to perform the WDT to be worth it...for me...
Many thanks to Mr. Weiss, HB for allowing free thinkers to express new and important techniques for us non-pros.

RapidCoffee wrote:Hi Dave. There was a post several weeks ago on CG, describing the use of an electric scribing pen for settling the grounds. I was intrigued enough to haul out an old massaging vibrator (don't ask ) and give vibration a try. It didn't work very well, but an engraving needle or electric toothbrush might work better.

Hey, I finally got around to making a short video of this and posting it up on YouTube. The key, in my opinion--if there is one--is the frequency and strength of the vibration. As I noted in the comments on the video, I'm NOT suggesting this is this is practical, or that it even beats the WDT. It was just an interesting experiment and might warrant further research.


Jack