Londinium R24 vs. ACS Vostok - Page 2

A haven dedicated to manual espresso machine aficionados.
Cuprajake
Posts: 551
Joined: 2 years ago

#11: Post by Cuprajake »

Londinuim 1yr parts only warranty
Acs 2 yrs parts only

Cuprajake
Posts: 551
Joined: 2 years ago

#12: Post by Cuprajake »

Ps

Ones 58mm the other 54mm if that matters to you

Advertisement
daveyb
Posts: 151
Joined: 11 years ago

#13: Post by daveyb »

The LR24 is an old machine, initially brought to the market around Xmas 2012, following the traditional lever concept. By this I mean, absolutely NO method of controlling any of the parameters we now take for granted on the new hybrid levers. The machine was aimed at the medium to medium dark drinker and to a point, especially as seeing as it has no opposition in the prosumer market, was very successful.
Londinium then realised that they were ostracising the largest sector of the market, the lighter bean section. So, they began making changes to the L1 as it was then known. These changes were solely to accommodate lighter bean users. The L1 became the LR which in turn became the LR24. True, it has a module in it that allows you to alter the pre-infusion pressure via temperature control, but you do not have ANY control over that temperature, just the bar pressure. In other words, people are assuming the water temperature alters in accordance with the bar pressure changes, but they have no idea as to what it is changing to.
How useful is the ability to alter bar pressure? Well, Londinium lovers will tell you it is amazing and makes such a difference whereas most others suggest it makes diddly squat difference. If it is amazing, then what do you make of the Evo's ability to alter boiler temperature independently and the same with the cartridges in the group head?
I think the answer to your initial question is this. If you want to have a machine, that every time you use it you are effectively putting on a blackout mask and guessing and hoping that with the addition of a little fairy dust, everything will work out ok then choose Londinium. If you want a machine with a far superior group (the LSM group is also heavily customised for ACS and costs twice the price of the cheaper Fiorenzaro group) that allows you total control over your shot, then choose the ACS route.
Why would anyone pay way over the odds for an outdated machine that will limit all your espresso making capabilities? No doubt there will be howls of derision from Londinium owners, but it is what it is. The market is more than big enough for both machines, but please do bear in mind that Londinium do not make their machines. They take orders from their New Zealand base, then pass them onto Fracino in Birmingham, England who manufacture then box the machine up. They then stick a Londinium sticker on the box and it is dispatched. This means Fracino are adding their costs onto the production value of the machine, then for sticking a label on a box, Londinium are adding their mark up. This is probably the reason that the Londinium range are so expensive when you consider what it actually is that you are buying.

User avatar
HB
Admin
Posts: 21983
Joined: 19 years ago

#14: Post by HB »

daveyb wrote:The LR24 is an old machine, initially brought to the market around Xmas 2012, following the traditional lever concept...
Thanks for the alternative viewpoint! I have no opinion on either of these lever espressos machines, but I'm fine with disagreement. However, to other contributors, please let me remind you to stay on topic and not comment on other's comments unless it advances the discussion. With that recommendation in mind, I've removed some off-topic commentary on your post and put this thread on a short cooldown. Thanks.
Dan Kehn

poison
Posts: 474
Joined: 18 years ago

#15: Post by poison »

It's almost like there are 2 camps of espresso people: those who do espresso by numbers, and those who do espresso by feel (or left brain vs right brain, or however you want to frame it).

If all that is true, when I pull better shots on my e61 hx than shops with dual boiler la marzoccos or some guy with a 16 step work flow and fancy prep gear, I'm doing it 'blindly' and by accident.

Neither approach is wrong, both can achieve excellent and equal results. A decent should be a superior machine, but it's humorous how many decent owners are trying to mimic the londinium profile. All I know is I dont want to drive an iPad when I make espresso, instead I prefer reliability, longevity, and simplicity......even if it's limiting in one way or another. I also drive a stick shift, never owned an automatic, despite modern autos being far faster and more capable than even the best driver on a stick.

LevaMayBe (original poster)
Posts: 5
Joined: 1 year ago

#16: Post by LevaMayBe (original poster) »

Thanks to all for the great discussion and facts. Some of these points I knew, and some were new to me. Poison's comments were right on the nose for me. I am a hybrid. I like the experience, instinct, reliability, and feel, but I also want the data. I have tried both a grouphead thermometer and a flow control valve and manometer set up on my HX machine. That was why I tried the Decent and really did like it, although I would not be too addicted to the graphs. I think on balance the ACS is calling to me. Love the Londinium, Brian Quan has a good video on it, but I really value the data and control that the ACS offers, the ability to stop the shot, the LSM group, and the faster heat up time. Dave Corbey has some great videos of it and of ACS. I have to say its steam and hot water wands are stunning...though there may be technical objections to their length. I did look at the Nurri - fantastic - but I cannot stretch the budget that far. I look forward to more interaction with the group. Happy pulling!

Cuprajake
Posts: 551
Joined: 2 years ago

#17: Post by Cuprajake »

Has Brian done any follow up vids,

Last time I looked he wasn't even responding to the comments on the actual vid

Advertisement
The Bone Ranger
Posts: 38
Joined: 5 years ago

#18: Post by The Bone Ranger »

Reading posts on HB these days feels a bit like Olympic judging, where one must disregard both the highest and lowest judging scores. Onwards!
daveyb wrote: How useful is the ability to alter bar pressure? Well, Londinium lovers will tell you it is amazing and makes such a difference whereas most others suggest it makes diddly squat difference.
I'm curious, then, what people believe adjusting the preinfusion pressure on a Londinium actually does, because leaving all other parameters the same but adjusting PI makes an easily identifiable change in flavour in the cup. Adjusting PI even half a bar lower can be the difference between a shot that is ashy and bitter, versus one that is chocolatey and delicious. It sure seems like a temperature change...

Likewise, filter roasts perform best with a higher PI, and darker roasts best with a comparatively lower PI.

So, if one believes the temperature isn't changing when adjusting PI, why does the end result seem like the temperature has changed?

User avatar
CoffeeMac
Posts: 198
Joined: 13 years ago

#19: Post by CoffeeMac »

The Bone Ranger wrote: So, if one believes the temperature isn't changing when adjusting PI, why does the end result seem like the temperature has changed?
After I first got my Compressa, I was curious about how much PI pressure could impact puck temperature while pulling the shot. So I got a thermocouple, high speed data logger, drilled a small hole in the side of a cheap basket so the thermocouple could be embedded in the center of a puck, prepped the basket as I normally would and pulled several shots at various PI pressures. This, I think, is the best if not only way to really understand the actual brewing temperature of any espresso machine: while actually brewing real espresso.

I detailed my findings with various charts and plots over on the Londinium forums, so I won't repost here. But my takeaway was: it's complex.

Higher PI pressure did yield a higher peak brew temperature. The fundamental nature of a lever is a naturally declining temp and pressure profile, so the temp had a certain ramp up to the peak when the water first entered the puck and a certain ramp down as the shot progressed. And it wasn't always an especially smooth curve. I'd have to go review my findings, if I recall correctly the "area under the curve" of the time vs brew temp plot correlated well with PI pressure.

After doing this detailed experiment and analysis, I stopped worrying so much about "precise" measurement and perceived control. With the Compressa I have PI pressure as a control variable, just like you have a PID setting on many other machines. And both can be used to adjust the brewing process to extract the best out of any bean.

The consequence is that you can't compare recipes between a Compressa and the various other pump machines. And after my experiment, I would say it would be hard to compare recipes between any two different models of espresso machines. You just have to stop focusing so much on the numbers, and focusing more on the taste using whatever control your machine provides.
Eventually you will end up with a lever.

LMWDP #706

Primacog
Posts: 871
Joined: 2 years ago

#20: Post by Primacog »

The Bone Ranger wrote:Reading posts on HB these days feels a bit like Olympic judging, where one must disregard both the highest and lowest judging scores. Onwards!



I'm curious, then, what people believe adjusting the preinfusion pressure on a Londinium actually does, because leaving all other parameters the same but adjusting PI makes an easily identifiable change in flavour in the cup. Adjusting PI even half a bar lower can be the difference between a shot that is ashy and bitter, versus one that is chocolatey and delicious. It sure seems like a temperature change...

Likewise, filter roasts perform best with a higher PI, and darker roasts best with a comparatively lower PI.

So, if one believes the temperature isn't changing when adjusting PI, why does the end result seem like the temperature has changed?
I suppose that what an lr24 owner knows for sure is the effect of a change of pressure rather than a change of temperature. Without a sensor within rhe grouphead to tell u if the temp has changed and by how much, you won't have any idea if the change in taste is actually caused by a tangible change in temperature and by how much. However u can know for sure the relationship between pressure level and the taste of a particular grind of beans.
LMWDP #729