Hello All,

I want to know if anyone uses this measurement with 225ml? I never seen anyone with this ratio and is curious about it. Poured with this ratio for a while now and it tasted great.

Was using 1:16.66 previously with 15g to 250ml. Equipment used are V60 hario 01 and comandante grinder 26 clicks and I do pulse pour without going much above the grounds. I like to use the pour to agitate my grounds. Similar like 4:6 technique but not letting the grounds dry and pouring slowly at about 5g/s. Usually finished around 2:30-2:45 max.

Would like you guys to give me honest opinion if I can do better brew with a different approach maybe.

Thanks in advance!

I primarily use a 1:15 ratio and have done many brews at 15g/225ml. There's nothing wrong with what you're doing if you enjoy the results. But I have the sense you are just looking for other ideas to try out, so I'll share what I personally prefer. It is more of a fill-up method, with a 30 second bloom and then a slow-medium pour rate up to 225g. This allows a higher brewing temperature and finer grind. I stir the bloom and then do a controlled pour in a spiral/concentric circle motion to allow even dispersion of the water through the grounds.

Yes I want to try and improve it but running out of ways to do it. Thought of you guys who maybe knows more about doseage to ratio being used.

I have tried continuous pour with 225ml but cup was a bit bland. Maybe I have to grind finer like yours.

Thank you for sharing!

Sugssugi wrote:Hello All,

I want to know if anyone uses this measurement with 225ml? I never seen anyone with this ratio and is curious about it. Poured with this ratio for a while now and it tasted great.

Was using 1:16.66 previously with 15g to 250ml. Equipment used are V60 hario 01 and comandante grinder 26 clicks and I do pulse pour without going much above the grounds. I like to use the pour to agitate my grounds. Similar like 4:6 technique but not letting the grounds dry and pouring slowly at about 5g/s. Usually finished around 2:30-2:45 max.

Would like you guys to give me honest opinion if I can do better brew with a different approach maybe.

Thanks in advance!

smaller doses need a bit of a finer grind. the larger the dose the more coffee the water has to travel through and slower the brew so you adjust the coarseness to compensate but the opposite is true for smaller doses as they would normally run a little faster. I would say your slower pour technic may be a useful approach to slowing the brew but you can also try grinding finer. The bloom is important to wet the grinds as quickly and as thoroughly as possible. Recently Hoffmann and Rao have advocated a 3:1 ratio for the bloom and a vigorous swirling to wet all the grinds. The goal is to have all the grinds wet within 10 seconds and this will give you a more even extraction throughout the brew. I also create a concave hole in the middle that some call a "bird's nest" and I have even used a solid cone pressed down in the dry coffee bed to make a thin layer of coffee around the walls. Part of the problem with v60s is it has a deep bed of coffee in the centre and without sufficient agitation, dry pockets form at the bottom and this is the reason for the swirl and is also why I try and make a thin layer of coffee to get rid of this deep pockets during the bloom and get all the coffee wet as quickly as possible. I find my cone-press method with agitation wets the grinds more efficiently than agitation alone.

another concern about v60 brewing is the right amount of agitation during the dilution stage (when you're pouring your kettle). you want to make sure you move the stream of water throughout the entire coffee bed and you also don't want to be too high that it creates a splash (but still high enough to agitate the slurry). low and slow and moving throughout.

Those are just my tips but results are what really drive the brew. if you like what you're getting you might want to stick to what you're doing.

I have been using finer grind at 24 clicks and 3 pours including bloom now. Bloom at 1:3 ratio as well. Everything else the same. And it tastes good as well haha.

I don't agitate my bloom and not sure if I should do it because I don't like manual agitation like inserting spoon or swirling (even though swirling is the better option for me). Maybe I should do it? Haha. Oh and I don't make caves for my bloom too. It's just a normal bloom haha.

But yes, you are right about the agitation. I don't really know how much of agitation to make using my pour. I just try to pour gently in orbits around the center and wash down the sides using my last few seconds of final pour.

Thank you for the feedback

I think the key is experiment changing one variable at a time. I think it depends on the coffee you use too (for example i tend to brew hotter and a little finer the lighter roasts)

Personally i would suggest you to experiment with 3 phases, 1) blooming, 2) agitation, 3) percolation. For 15g and 1:15 it would be

Temp depending on roast
1) Blooming with 42g of water (40 seconds) make everything wet
2) Agitation with 63g of water pour fast and as high as you can without splash making concentric circles
3) Percolation 120g of water pour slowly and low (you can use melodrip or dripmasterb but they arent needed)

You should finish with about 193ml of beverage, the time depends on the grind, i would advise quite fine for the method. 3 minutes is a good reference

If you want to experiment with different ratios or dosages, you can use my calc (it's in spanish but i think you will get the point anyway) http://www.felipecorvalan.cl/calcucafe/ there is also the 4:6 method by Tetsu Kasuya on the calc. Looks better on PC, but works on mobile too.

UPDATE: I made a new version in english here, which also rounds the weights to 1 dec so its easier to read: http://www.felipecorvalan.cl/coffeecalc/

Wow this looks fascinating. Those pours are calculated to the single digits haha. I will try it tomorrow and report back here.

At the moment I am pretty happy with my technique, but with coffee I always feel there's room for improvement every time. That is why I came here to explore and aim to improve my brew.

I am still on 15g:225ml but different way of pouring. Just playing with technique and grind size now. I am also looking for a really simple and repetitive technique so it will be more consistent. So this morning I did my pour with grind size 26 clicks:
1. Bloom 45g for 40s.
2. Pulse pour 45g each time with 30s gap until finish at 225g.
Result was really good. Cup was surprisingly sweeter than I thought it would be. I was brewing new bag too. Washed ethiopia yirgacheffe. And yeah it was a long brew, almost hitting 4min mark. It was why I was surprised by the sweet cup. Should have expected the long brew with these washed beans.

I am still adamant about doing agitation because I am afraid it will cause inconsistency across my brew. Just trying to keep everything as consistent as possible. Only agitation I would do is by pouring. Not sure about pouring fast though haha.

But anyhow, thank you for the suggestion. Will get back with the result

This has our attention. PO here 95% of the time.

Sugssugi wrote:Wow this looks fascinating. Those pours are calculated to the single digits haha. I will try it tomorrow and report back here.

At the moment I am pretty happy with my technique, but with coffee I always feel there's room for improvement every time. That is why I came here to explore and aim to improve my brew.

I am still on 15g:225ml but different way of pouring. Just playing with technique and grind size now. I am also looking for a really simple and repetitive technique so it will be more consistent. So this morning I did my pour with grind size 26 clicks:
1. Bloom 45g for 40s.
2. Pulse pour 45g each time with 30s gap until finish at 225g.
Result was really good. Cup was surprisingly sweeter than I thought it would be. I was brewing new bag too. Washed ethiopia yirgacheffe. And yeah it was a long brew, almost hitting 4min mark. It was why I was surprised by the sweet cup. Should have expected the long brew with these washed beans.

I am still adamant about doing agitation because I am afraid it will cause inconsistency across my brew. Just trying to keep everything as consistent as possible. Only agitation I would do is by pouring. Not sure about pouring fast though haha.

But anyhow, thank you for the suggestion. Will get back with the result

I really do not pretend its THE way to brew, it's just based on my own experience and preferences. Each month i try 3 new coffees form same roaster (different roaster each month) and i brew several variations at once and i try them and i compare and note which preparation i liked more.

Then i just translated what i have done to numbers/proportions. So far i tried 18 coffees, so not much. and i made myself a calculator so i dont need to be doing math each time. (i placed a shortcut to the website on my phone homepage and thats it)

I'm just a consumer, i have no credentials or huge experience. I know that for example new method of Tetsu Kasuya is extremely simple! (4:6 is a little consufind in my opinion). At the end, each one should see what works better for ourselves.

I really don't think brewing as science, is more like art, i'm just a nerd who prefered to extract "rules" to simplify my life, specially for when i brew for more people and normal quantities varies

Snidel337 wrote:I really don't think brewing as science, is more like art, i'm just a nerd who prefered to extract "rules" to simplify my life, specially for when i brew for more people and normal quantities varies

methodical approaches like what you're doing are going to deliver the most consistent results. If you just guess then one of these days you'll brew something amazing but won't know what you did to make it. I think your calculator is also great. If I may suggest something it would be helpful to round the numbers to 0.1 decimal places or perhaps have another input to put in your desired accuracy. Most people may have 0.1g accurate scales but people out there have 0.01g as well or there may be people using regular kitchen scales at 1g accruacy. If there was an input for the desired accuracy (defaulting to 0.1) then there's no guessing and it's simply a reference for whatever scale you're using.