The Jolly produces sweet, bass heavy seductive shots when it's "on." I think all the reviewers agree on that. However, I don't think it's all that consistently on. I don't think it's as consistent as the Max, and it isn't even close to any of the conicals for reproducing the same taste time after time. However, Dan has the opposite opinion on the Jolly and Max; and the other reviewers think its consistency is in the same ballpark as the conicals, and, by inference, greater than the Max's.
It could be that the Duranium burrs are changing the grinder's properties, and I'm going to get to do this all over. Oh goodie
There's been general agreement that the TGP conicals produce very consistent pours, and are generally less finicky about the grind setting than flat burr grinders. Ken and I both noted how easy it was to dial in the conicals (or hybrids). I see this as one of the most significant results to come out of our testing thus far: not that conicals are better
than flat burr grinders, but make it easier
to obtain a consistent extraction. IMHO this is of far greater significance in a commercial environment than at home... but I'm sure others will disagree.
I compared my own (modded) SJ to the MXK and Robur, not the brand new TGP test model with kryptonite burrs. My SJ has two-year-old standard burrs, but I'd still agree with Jim. The SJ is not as forgiving in pour consistency as the conicals that I tested. Nonetheless, I think it holds its own quite well in this august company. Given my preference for slightly updosed (16-18g) double cappuccinos, the SJ flavor profile works very well.
Although I did not care for the MXK as much as Jim or Dan, that could be a combination of personal taste and perhaps an extended break-in period for the grinder. For a straight espresso shot lover, downdosing as Ken advocates, in pursuit of individual flavor clarity rather than a smooth blend, the MXK might well be the grinder of choice.