trundle wrote:Is one of these methods better than the other to get rid of the build up behind the shower screen?

DeGaulle wrote:Opinions seem to vary. My retailer told me that if I regularly backflush, removing the screen isn't really necessary.

Codyjphoto wrote:You can never clean too much.

Rather than guess, I'd draw water through the group after each method, let the samples cool, and then compare the taste.

I get puzzled when I read comments like this, because I don't experience anything like the gunk in that Dutch video in my HX E61. I back-flush three times at the end of each day and do a chemical clean every three weeks, roughly 75 shots. I let the cleaner sit in the machine for ten minutes before flushing out. If I examine the shower screen after that, it's squeaky clean. If I examine it mid-cycle, there's very little residue.

I partly attribute this lack of gunk to my IMS shower screen which seems to do a better job keeping the machine clean that many stock screens, but that can't be the whole story. Why do others get a build-up when some of us don't?

The IMS shower screens make a big difference.

I pull about about 2 shots per day. I scrub the shower screen with water and a pallo brush after each shot, and backflush once a day with water. Once a week, I backflush with Calfiza. Before switching over to the IMS screen, I would take the shower screen apart after backflushing with Calfiza to clean what's left every other week.

When I was using the stock Vivaldi Mini shower screen, backflushing with Calfiza alone was not sufficient to keep everything clean and I would have to take the shower screens and dispersion disk out every 2-4 weeks for a manual scrub.

Once I swapped over to the IMS shower screens, I noticed that backflushing with Calfiza once a week was more than adequate. After switching to the IMS shower screen, I would dissassemble the shower screen after backflushing with Calfiza and noticed that everything was super clean after two weeks. Next, I tried leaving it for 3 months and only backflushing with Califza once a week and it was just as clean. Since then, I've stopped taking apart the shower screen.

To me, it seems the biggest difference here was that the IMS shower screen has much smaller holes and does a remarkable job at keeping the coffee particles from going into the system.

Is everyone using the IMS Nanotech shower screen or the regular one? Was planning to purchase a new shower screen to replace the stock one I have on my Mara, but unsure if one is better than the other.

I have the regular version without nano coating. I've heard the nano coating can get damaged with stuff like Calfiza so you should verify before choosing.

I wasn't aware that there were so many options, e.g. nano and teflon. I have this basic model:

https://www.coffeeparts.com.au/ims-show ... ompetition

I initially bought one for better distribution of water onto the puck, as the stock one I had in my machine at that time seemed poor. The increased cleanliness was a bonus. I just pulled the screen out to check which model I had, and close to the next scheduled three-weekly clean there's hardly any residue on its top side. There's also much less residue going into the drip tray with this screen (I use a plastic container to catch the grinds from running a flush to clean the screen after a shot, so the drip tray only gets the output from the bottom outlet of the three-way valve). I regard the IMS screens as an inexpensive way to improve machine cleanliness.

Yeah. I have the equivalent version for my Vivaldi Mini

You guys are real trouble makers Due to reading this thread, I couldn't help myself...turned the Magister upside down and pulled the screen. Clean as a whistle. But I messed up the portafilter gasket in the process and had to pop in my last spare

We do two doppio shots a day, every morning and sometimes two more in the afternoon. At the end of each session, we backflush with plain water. Once a month, we backflush with Cafiza.

In addition to our month-end cleaning, we replace the portafilter gasket about once a year. There is usually a buildup of crud under the gasket. I doubt any of this affects the shots in any meaningful way, as it's not in the water path, just a blind alley, as it were.