Fastest V60 I've seen on YouTube is about 1m40s while most are running 2-3 minutes. But I am finding that I can get great results, perhaps more consistently, by going even faster, like 1m10s or so. For this I use very fine grind and short ratio (e.g. 1:9). I add water later (bypass) for desired cup strength. I wonder why this method is not more popular. Anyone tried this?

bypass is normal.
fast is fine too.
its up to you how u want to brew.
u didnt mention ur grams and size.
using 03 with 10g would definitely give very fast slow, requiring finer grinds.

what matters more is extraction capacity, adjusted by heat, grind size, and contact time.
unimodals grinder also has more extraction power and will work with less ratio or contact time.
i'd suspect u r either using one, sifted the fines, or using fast flow paper like sibarist.

however most people wants to follow ratio and are not willing to change recipe, even when the ground shape/distribution requires adjustment.
and bypass is probably isnt liked or considered wrong.

its the same with espresso, using high extraction burr (and knowing it is) but still trying 1:2 in 30s.

personally i usually do coarse grinds and 1:9~11, and do bypass if the beans are strong. more on nell now, v60 only if im rushing.

I spent the last 3 years pulling Americano almost exclusively, so I have zero reservation about byapss.

Some details of my setup and brewing steps:

- plastic V60 02
- Cafec Abaca filter
- Eureka Mignon Zero fitted with 55mm Mignon Brew Pro burrs

Recipe gets tweaked for each coffee, but one example:

- 16 g coffee, SO Ethiopian
- very fine grind similar to Aeropress 1 minute brew

0:00 Medium slow pour 55 g "blooming" water (93-100C depending on coffee).
0:10 Healthy stirring to make sure there's no dry patch.
0:20 Medium fast pour to 140 g (~1:9 ratio) in circles.
0:40 Stir 4-5 times including the bed.
1:10 Drawdown completes or sometimes stopped manually to avoid the last drops of bitterness

I seem to get more consistent results with this approach across different coffees than other recipes I've found online, but that's probably just me. One thing I like is it saves time!

What is your final ratio? How much water do you add to the 140 g initially poured?

It depends on coffee, but I often add about 60g to fill my 5.5 oz cup. That makes (140+60)/16 = 12.5 ratio? I never liked the common 1:15-16 ratio as it's often too watery for my taste.

i read somewhere mentioned eureka 55mm brew burr to produce very minimal fines with even distribution, but not spectacular. i have doubts whether writer actually adjusts recipe to accommodate that differences (some burrs needs much finer grind and still wont stall), hence the result.
some also claims ssp brew to be unspectacular and too tea thin. i find that was the case with MP if i adjust grind size to be similar and use same ratio.

im usually around 160~180ml for 13~16g, tetsu's style, with or without bypass. beans dependent.

similar ratio with yours i guess.

What is meant when folks are saying "with our without bypass"?
Isn't bypass (how much you will or will not get) largely fixed by the choice of brewer? V60 is a bypass brewer, by design, so it cannot be eliminated, right?
If you choose a zero bypass brewer that's a different thing.
Am I misunderstanding something here?

radioradio wrote:What is meant when folks are saying "with our without bypass"?

They are talking about intentional bypass. Post brewing. I do it with my aeropress. I intentionally brew a lower ratio, more concentrated cup and then add water to taste.

iyayy wrote: what matters more is extraction capacity, adjusted by heat, grind size, and contact time.
...
however most people wants to follow ratio and are not willing to change recipe, even when the ground shape/distribution requires adjustment.

iyayy wrote:i read somewhere mentioned eureka 55mm brew burr to produce very minimal fines with even distribution, but not spectacular. i have doubts whether writer actually adjusts recipe to accommodate that differences (some burrs needs much finer grind and still wont stall), hence the result.

I couldn't agree more.
All those grinder "reviews" where they fix the brewing/pull parameters the same to compare multiple grinders side by side makes me cringe. I think their rationale "hey, we only change the grinder to isolate the variable" assumes all grinders peak at that setting, which doesn't make sense to me.

Depends on whether one believes that there is an optimal grind size for a particular coffee when used in a particular brew method. If you have multiple grinders then I would suggest testing that hypothesis for yourself. When you do that experiment, than I would suggest that six or so stages of sieving are good enough for assessing equivalent grind size, and that the grinders should be reasonably similar (no use comparing a blade grinder to an EK43).

Under-extracting and over-dosing as you seem to be doing can improve the taste, especially with lower-quality coffee. Traditional Japanese Kissaten methods are famous examples. In addition, some prefer the taste that results from such brew methods regardless of coffee quality, and there is nothing wrong with that.