I just backed the Timemore Sculptor 078s on Kickstarter for 499 USD.

A question to the community:

Does the vertical burrs design provide any benefits (or have any disadvantages)?

That's what I've found in the Internet:

There is no taste difference but the vertical mount is said to have lower retention.

Another quote:

They can differ in taste. The auger can act as a prebreaker, which leads to more uniform sizes chunks being fed into the burrs, which then produced a more uniform grind. The auger usually has a chunk of retention too.

It would be interesting to hear from the people who understand that.

The Sculptor's reviews are brilliant, but I am feeling a bit uncomfortable since the vertical burrs design is very rarely used (which must have a reason).

When I used a EK43, I noticed that from the static burr, the bottom area was always more dirty than the upper area. This isn't strange, it's called gravity. But the total burr area is not used evenly.
Also forces during grinding are not applied evenly. If there is flex in the grind mechanism (shaft, burr carrier), this will cause (dynamic) unalignment. Since we like our grinders to be aligned to microns, this is something to keep in mind.

Ursego wrote:I just backed the Timemore Sculptor 078s on Kickstarter for 499 USD. BTW, the "starter price" will be gone in a couple of days (and the grinder will cost 649 USD, I believe).

A question to the community:

Does the vertical burrs design provide any benefits (or have any disadvantages)?

That's what I've found in the Internet:



Another quote (but I am not sure the Timemore grinders have the auger):



It would be interesting to hear from the people who understand that.

The Sculptor's reviews are brilliant, but I am feeling a bit uncomfortable since the vertical burrs design is very rarely used (which must have a reason).

The vertical mounted is not rarely used, it was just predominantly used in grinders for bulk grinding like the EK43. Today it's also more frequently used design on filter grinders. Today we have the 4 Sculptures, Zerno, ZM, Ode, Macab Labo, Titus Nautilus and Nimbus on top of those bulk grinders.

It's a fine design as it prebreaks the coffee removing the potential need for a prebreaker zone on the burrs leaving more potential space for the other stage in design. It also by far the easiest and fastest to change from one brew method to another. it's generally faster and easier to get into the burrs and align and zero, it also generally doesn't loose its settings taking it apart (given you torque the screws the same every time). regrinding issues is also less an issue as it also rely on gravity and not just centrifugal force to expel the grind and often does not have plastic/silicone prebreaker that in many grinders results in retention inside the burr chamber and regrinding, vertical are generally very low retention by nature especially at coarser grinding.

It's not all sugar and candy though, if prebreaker chamber isn't designed correctly with appropriate slope you'll get retention in said part of the grinder, this tend to actually get worse with RDT. Due to gravity you won't use top part of the static burr nearly as much, this is especially the case on lower RPM. Static can often mean some noticeable retention in exit chute and the design is known for resulting in being messy, especially when you don't RDT. Dynamics unalignment is a more pronounced Challenge on loads og these. There tend to be less range in espresso and larger micron changes between markings.

The horizontal has 3 potential major issues
1: retention
2: regrinding
3: can be slow and a faff changing between brew methods.

Additionally it's generally a faff aligning and changing burrs as burrs are often much harder to get into, and you have a moving inner carrier that you need to fix while unscrewing the burr.

The Df range and SD Oro for example fail at all those 3 parameters and forces the use of a bellow, something never needed on vertical unless you screw up the design badly. Some incline the grinder to reduce the known issues other make the burr chamber not on axis, but all still rely heavily on correct exit chute and declumber design or you will have those issues forcing you into modding. But even the best I always found a bit muddier in brew I suspect there will always some regrinding going on with these, on day to day not something you notice but next to a vertical it's something I noticed.

Don't forget the Bentwood, as well.

TIL "faff" is a noun meaning "a great deal of ineffectual activity ".

malling wrote:The vertical mounted is not rarely used, it was just predominantly used in grinders for bulk grinding like the EK43. Today it's also more frequently used design on filter grinders. Today we have the 4 Sculptures, Zerno, ZM, Ode, Macab Labo, Titus Nautilus and Nimbus on top of those bulk grinders.

It's a fine design as it prebreaks the coffee removing the potential need for a prebreaker zone on the burrs leaving more potential space for the other stage in design. It also by far the easiest and fastest to change from one brew method to another. it's generally faster and easier to get into the burrs and align and zero, it also generally doesn't loose its settings taking it apart (given you torque the screws the same every time). regrinding issues is also less an issue as it also rely on gravity and not just centrifugal force to expel the grind and often does not have plastic/silicone prebreaker that in many grinders results in retention inside the burr chamber and regrinding, vertical are generally very low retention by nature especially at coarser grinding.

It's not all sugar and candy though, if prebreaker chamber isn't designed correctly with appropriate slope you'll get retention in said part of the grinder, this tend to actually get worse with RDT. Due to gravity you won't use top part of the static burr nearly as much, this is especially the case on lower RPM. Static can often mean some noticeable retention in exit chute and the design is known for resulting in being messy, especially when you don't RDT. Dynamics unalignment is a more pronounced Challenge on loads og these. There tend to be less range in espresso and larger micron changes between markings.

The horizontal has 3 potential major issues
1: retention
2: regrinding
3: can be slow and a faff changing between brew methods.

Additionally it's generally a faff aligning and changing burrs as burrs are often much harder to get into, and you have a moving inner carrier that you need to fix while unscrewing the burr.

The Df range and SD Oro for example fail at all those 3 parameters and forces the use of a bellow, something never needed on vertical unless you screw up the design badly. Some incline the grinder to reduce the known issues other make the burr chamber not on axis, but all still rely heavily on correct exit chute and declumber design or you will have those issues forcing you into modding. But even the best I always found a bit muddier in brew I suspect there will always some regrinding going on with these, on day to day not something you notice but next to a vertical it's something I noticed.

Would the weber eg-1 and the orbit grinder also be considered to be a vertical type grinder albeit inclined at an angle?

No these are horizontally with incline but a very pronounced incline so the effect is more somewhat in between.

My personal opinion is that horizontal motor shaft design of grinder is superior to vertical, soley for motor cleanliness. Gravity aiding in the grind seems to keep retention down better than the fan blade alone of a vertical shaft. This is probably why most of the verticals now have tilted feet (and why I keep a block under the back of my vertical shaft grinder)

the downside of course is $cost, as you need an auger feed of some sort and the grind adjustment mechanism becomes more complicated. the EG1 is a great compromise

I have an old( 1930s?) Hobart grinder that I use for pourovers, the design is very similar to the EK-43 horizontal.. Both companies having similar roots as being " Motor companies who happened to make coffee grinders"



From a Motor Guy's opinon, the horizontal is better because the grounds are less likely to fall into the motor.
From an accounting perspective the horizontal grinder needs more parts so its more expensive to manufacture/ maintain
from a Kinematic perspective... hmmm... I dont think it matters much! there are bigger variables such as motor bearing quality, stiffness of the components, slop in the adjustment mechanisms ect.. We are seeing a lot more designs go away from threaded adjustments directly acting on the burr in favor of a moveable burr stage on 3 points, which combined with the great burrs available today it comes down to simplicity... which is again where something like EG1 compromise is appealing, especially since the motor is upsidown in the right way

NelisB wrote:When I used a EK43, I noticed that from the static burr, the bottom area was always more dirty than the upper area. This isn't strange, it's called gravity. But the total burr area is not used evenly.
Also forces during grinding are not applied evenly. If there is flex in the grind mechanism (shaft, burr carrier), this will cause (dynamic) unalignment. Since we like our grinders to be aligned to microns, this is something to keep in mind.

This is pretty much why I went with a horizontal design. And the extent to which uneven wear has on the lifespan of the vertical static burr is likely quite significant. Maybe 3-10x shorter than if it were horizontal.

Just rotate the burr every time you do a periodic deep clean problem solved. Also Vertical grinders tend to be equipped with long lasting burrs stocked horizontally does not.