New Etzinger etz-I grinder - Page 5

Grinders are one of the keys to exceptional espresso. Discuss them here.
SoF

#41: Post by SoF »

bas wrote:With or without RDT?
That has nothing to do with RDT or not: it is simply the amount of ground coffee which remains stuck between the inner burr which Etzinger calls "cone" and the "cone holder"

This space fills up quickly (and you expect that the grind would fall directly in the cup, however that does not work) and the only way I found to get it out is to use something like a chopstick or toothpick

This particular area is significantly tapered, which I guess is a design fault because there would be much less issues if that was straight and also if Etzinger had not used this FRP (which requires thicker walls) but thinner metal

But again this is probably to minimize manufacturing costs, and it may not be such an issue for coarse grind (pour over, press) as for espresso

So the more I use it the more the defects I initially reported annoy me (that is the narrow opening, the weakly help magnetic collection cup and this retention) whereas I appreciate the precision of the adjustment ring and the quality of the burr set

Crimson

#42: Post by Crimson »

Thank you! i also would like to know if it grinds better than the c40.
i want a new grinder but i hate how the c40 looks and how hard it is to adjust the grind unlike the new etz-i and they are priced about the same

SoF

#43: Post by SoF »

Crimson wrote:how does it compare to the comandante C40 for pour over?
I cannot say for the C40, since I have not got one, but I can for instance compare to my Lido3

The Lido3 has a wider opening which is the perfect size for me (you can see on this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Mhj0UrlxCA around 9:36 what I mean when the guy puts the coffee beans in the etz-I and some of them fall outside, this happens to me all the time)

Both burr sets are about the same dimensions (I think that they are both made by Etzinger), but the etz-I ones exhibit a more intricate design and seem to cut way better/faster, especially for espresso

The collection cup of the Lido3 is made of plastic and held with a thread, so it does not detach on its own and it is easy to clean, whereas that of the Etzinget is aluminum but with some long shaft (holding the magnet) occupying the middle which makes it difficult to clean and this magnet is not powerful enough (the collection cup often detaches accidentally)

The Lido3 is mainly plastic where the Etzinger has only a few Fiber Reinforced Plastic parts (but could probably do without any FRP for a little $ more), other than that they are about the same external diameter (I have a regular etz-I) and both are easy to keep in hand

The crank of the Lido3 is quite short, the etz-I is longer and hence the required efforts are reduced

The adjustment of the Lido3 is simple, but not as good as the etz-I where you can switch from espresso to pour over in an instant and back again, with precision

My Lido3 is not as fast for espresso, so I keep it for coarse grind as it is

I can only guess that the etz-I burrs and adjustment are better than the C40, and if the other things do not matter much to you then go for the etz-I

Hoping these comments will help

Jonk

#44: Post by Jonk »

As we're guessing, mine'd be that the burrs are not as good as C40's. A weak guess since I haven't tried these particular etzinger burrs and of course it depends on what your preferences are.

Thank you for tempering my desire for yet another grinder, Sophie :wink:

SoF

#45: Post by SoF »

Jonk wrote:As we're guessing, mine'd be that the burrs are not as good as C40's
What I meant is that the design of the burrs of the C40 seems more "traditional" than that of the etz-I, and hence more similar to the Lido3, and that the etz-I largely outperforms the Lido3 in terms of speed

But of course we will only have confirmation after more people have used and compared the actual grinders

rennix

#46: Post by rennix »

I have a C40 Mk4 that I've been using as a fill in before I can grab another "end game" grinder and don't recommend Comandante at all. The grind is nice actually, but the customer support from Comandante is abhorrent. I'd avoid them at all cost.

jbviau
Supporter ★

#47: Post by jbviau »

Looks like this is available now from their N. American distributor: https://ghgbs.com/products/etz-i-handgrinder
"It's not anecdotal evidence, it's artisanal data." -Matt Yglesias

braxtonjens

#48: Post by braxtonjens »

This makes me wonder if those of us with etzinger burrs in our Lido grinders could swap burrs from the Entzinger hand grinders.
Maybe interesting to have another burr option for the Lido series.
“Coffee is always a good idea”
LMWDP #617

mikel

#49: Post by mikel »

I picked one up for travel, liking it so far.

For those concerned about retention, if I give it a couple raps on a surface (to clear out the area just below the burrs), I get a tenth of a gram consistently. A non-issue for me.
Pressino wrote:Yes, it is a big issue. It's a matter of human musculoskeletal anatomy and ergonomics.
To me, after actually using the grinder, this is another non-issue. Even when grinding light beans, it's not a challenge. I'm not generating the force needed to grind rocks or anything. And I'm familiar with anatomy and ergonomics (Taught biomechanics 10+ years) and motor learning. In practice, grinding coffee beans in a different direction with this grinder will not pose a challenge other than the mental challenge of controlling clockwise versus counter-clockwise movements. :D

Currently, the only change, and it is more of a preference, would be for a ball on the crank, rather than a paddle.

After it's seasoned enough in it's current pour-over use, I'll report back on espresso.

Pressino

#50: Post by Pressino »

I'm glad that you find counterclockwise grinding with the ETZ as easy as clockwise grinder rotation. I presume you're right-handed.

My comment was based on human musculoskeletal and neuroanatomy. The ergonomic asymmetry of clockwise and anticlockwise movements in tool use is well understood in the case of screwdrivers used by right and left handers to tighten and loosen right versus left-hand threaded screws. This is mentioned in the Wikipedia article on handedness. There have been a few studies of the ergonomics of clockwise and anticlockwise rotation of cranks. Here is one: https://journals.humankinetics.com/view ... e-p129.xml

The conclusion is that clockwise grinding requires less energy expenditure than counterclockwise.

Whether or not right-handers will notice any difficulty using a counterclockwise hand grinder will depend on several factors, including their individual muscular development and strength as well as the strength of their handedness. In my case I can detect the difference in rotation direction. Some, like you, will do just fine either way. My comment was intended to make others aware of the potential problem right handers may have using grinders that work counterclockwise. At the very least they may want to try it out before investing in one.