another_jim wrote:I said the Rancilio single basket is unusable (the challenge of posting an uncut video of using one in a successful naked extraction still stands) .

Is there a prize?

I don't know if there are any specific rules to this challenge, but here is my attempt. The video shows grind, tamp and extract; for the sake of brevity I skipped the temperature surfing. Other than almost dropping the portafilter on the floor, I thought it went well.

Here is the video in three formats:

original file off the camera - 96MB
resized to 320x240 - 32MB
resized to 320x240 and encoded with MPEG4 codec - 9MB

Not the greatest quality, the lighting is rather poor. But then I never considered video production a requirement when we were doing kitchen renovations

Not bad looking. But a 2 ounce pour in 22 seconds from single basket is not an unchanneled shot; it's a 100% channeled shot. What you made is closer to a Swiss cafe crema than an espresso. Still , you've done better with this baslket then I ever did.

another_jim wrote:Not bad looking. But a 2 ounce pour in 22 seconds from single basket is not an unchanneled shot; it's a 100% channeled shot. What you made is closer to a Swiss cafe crema than an espresso.

Not 2 ounce, but "a touch over one ounce" ie greater than one ounce but less than one and a quarter ounces (that was a 2 ounce shot glass that I filled half full); unless I'm missing something, that is a single espresso.

another_jim wrote:Still , you've done better with this baslket then I ever did.

Well that does a newbie's heart good!

Crema counts as part of shot volume, even when it disappears in a flash. In any case, I don't do volume, I don't do time; I do flow rate, I do color. What you had would be lungo-ish for a double. For a single, it's a gush.

another_jim wrote:I don't do volume, I don't do time; I do flow rate, I do color.

I'm trying to reconcile that statement; flow rate is volume of flow divided by time of flow. So what you are saying is that the volume that ends up in my shot glass is less than the actual volume of the flow because there is excessive crema that dissipates before the shot is finished. Is that correct? It hurts, but I think I can wrap my brain around that...

Going on the assumption that I understood you correctly, I made some more attempts this morning increasing the dose and tightening the grind. I ended up at 8 grams. Here is the result:

original file off the camera - 44MB
resized to 320x240 - 13MB
resized to 320x240 and encoded with MPEG4 codec - 3MB

This had a much nicer mouth feel than yesterdays attempt. Thanks for your help Jim.

That's was a good single pour. I owe you a good dinner; but you have to come to Chicago to redeem it.

What I meant by flow and color is that it is either a lot better or a lot more satisfying not to time shots or measure their volume, but simply go by how the flow and how their color is. This takes practice, but a lot less if you get used to paying attention to them. A single's flow is like a "mousetail," i.e. just a bit faster than a dribble. With a double spout PF, there are two mousetails for a double; but there's no pithy name yet for the right flow from a naked double.