Hello,
I have been quietly reading posts on this forum for a while. I just decided to join and this is my first post. I am under the perception that the bigger the burrs on a grinder the better, but I'm wondering why this would be in a home setting? Participants in this forum seem to believe it with the popularity of the HG-One and the EK43. I can see in a busy cafe that that bigger burrs grind faster and take longer to heat up. In a home setting it seems speed of grinding (within reason) and heat dissipation are none issues if you're making less than 10 drinks an hour. It seems to me that you could take Robur or EK43 burrs, shrink them way down and be able to use a smaller motor and get the same results in the cup, you would just not be able to make as many cups as quickly. In a home environment this wouldn't matter.

As a background, I have a Vario, and HG-One that was modified by Stephen Sweeney and a Mazzer Mini E. Of these, by far my favorite for espresso is the Mini E. I like it because it is clean, looks good in a home setting, is easy to use, and is built like a tank, so I could potentially hand it down to my kids. Though I like the ingenuity that went into the HG-One, I find it to be a pain to use with the weighing, WDT, needing the space to turn the crank, and most importantly I did not think shots tasted any better from it than my Mini E.

cnworld wrote:Hello,
It seems to me that you could take Robur or EK43 burrs, shrink them way down and be able to use a smaller motor and get the same results in the cup, you would just not be able to make as many cups as quickly. In a home environment this wouldn't matter.

It would be nice if that was the case, but it is not. Way back when we did the Titan Grinder Project we tested burr size and type extensively. Even ran sample through a scanning electron microscope and laser particle analyzer. Good read if you have a little time.

I've read the Titan Grinder Project, and though it's interesting, it still seems subjective. Now that the EK43 seems to be all the rage and fines are supposed to be bad, it makes conical burrs seem not as good as they once were. If you looked at grinds from an EK43 under an electron microscope and they looked more like the super jolly grinds, would it matter? I would be curious if the Titan Grinder project was done and the espresso was served to a group of people who didn't know what grinder was used and just the taste if they could even tell the difference and even if they could, would that change with different varieties of beans.

I also wonder what the engineers at Mazzer and other grinder companies think about this. It sometimes pains me to see people modify a nice grinder with cut up yogurt containers, soda bottles, and PVC pipe in the thought they're getting a better shot of espresso. Sometimes it seems some of this may be psychological.

I own the Kony that was used in that test. It makes the Rancilio Rocky I previously owned look (and perform) like something created by Playskool. What you get with the high-end bigger burrs in commercial grinders is larger, high precision bearings, massive burr mounts, and other parts that all combine to give higher precision in alignment. My wife, who has two words to describe coffee noticed the difference in the cup from the first taste. There's more to bigger grinders than just bigger burrs.

And if the taste of coffee isn't subjective, then what have I been doing the last 14 years!?

Those of us who can taste the difference may spend the money on pursuing taste... There is a distribution of tasting ability, with classifications including non-tasters, tasters and super-tasters. I would guess that many who spend the money are on the super-taster end of the spectrum.

When you are talking about a stepped, plastic filled, and pretty cheap grinder like the Rocky compared to the Kony, I have no doubt there's a huge difference. What I'm talking about is more like the difference between a Mazzer Mini and a Kony in the home setting. Assuming the same beans, grinders are dialed in right, and same espresso machine. If you wake up in the morning and make a couple shots to start the day, would you really be able to tell much difference between the two grinders? Even if you could tell a difference, might that difference change depending on the beans you use?

I'm using Mazzer as an example because I'm more familiar with them, but it seems to me when the engineers at a company like Mazzer design a line of grinders, they do it with regard to the amount of use the grinder is expected to get and not due to taste differences between grinders.

I understand that there are "super tasters" with much more refined palates than mine. I just wonder if you could take a few HG-Ones and modify them to accept different burr sets, then assuming all grinds are dialed in correctly and the same beans, if you did a blind taste test can you really tell a difference between different burr sets when you're talking about all quality burr sets. If you could tell the difference, then would it be possible to make burr sets catered to certain tastes? To me it seems when you're talking about quality burrs, there's a very diminishing return in the home setting. Could even a super taster tell the difference between Kony, Robur, and Kold burrs if they were only making One shot? Currently, it seems to me that different burr sets are made with volume and speed taken into account, not different tastes.

I think the EK43 is far from being confirmed superior at this point. It is a topic of conversation, but there are still a lot of pro shops around who have them but still don't use them for espresso.

From a purely objective point of view, bigger burrs means the coffee is in contact with the burrs longer as it makes its way through them. I think its reasonable to believe that extra surface time makes a flavor difference. The SEM photos and particle analysis from the TGP do show a variation between larger and smaller burrs.

At this point I would say that bigger burrs are generally better than smaller, but flat or conical are not necessarily better than each other.

I think what matters is the total cutting surface that the coffee comes in contact with (conical or flat) Just because of the geometry, a 68mm conical has more cutting surface area than a 68mm flat. So you would need a bigger flat to be equivalent.

Also, the more time you spend with a grinder, you develop a "tasting muscle memory". You will notice any subtle changes to it. I believe I have the worst palate ever, but even I was able to tell the difference after a simple burr change in the same grinder. After that, I'm convinced even small variations in burrs/geometry make a big difference.

cnworld wrote:Now that the EK43 seems to be all the rage and fines are supposed to be bad, it makes conical burrs seem not as good as they once were.

The EK-43 is reckoned to make more fines at espresso settings.

cnworld wrote:Could even a super taster tell the difference between Kony, Robur, and Kold burrs if they were only making One shot?

I'm not sure what you mean about One shot, but there has been a lot of blind testing done by the pillars of the community here. You say you've read the Titan Grinder Project...?