Basket Overdosing; time for a serious re-evaluation! - Page 8

Beginner and pro baristas share tips and tricks for making espresso.
User avatar
Jasonian

#71: Post by Jasonian »

Psyd wrote:I'm guessing that you're referring to the Silvia? It's set at stock. The machine that I'm having issues with is the Astoria, though. Miss Silvia is pulling shots like a trooper! Every shot out of her seems to be syrupy smooth, beginning to blonde at 27 seconds, and pushing just under two ounces. And, they're tasty! The Astoria was pushing 9 bar when I got her, and I had to drop her down a stop when the local water pressure went up (?!?) and then when it went back down, she ended up at 8.5. the espresso was a lot nicer after that, so I never did tweak her back up to nine. But it's a rotary pump adjustment, not an OPV.
Right, sorry.

Have you tried using your Silvia's filterbasket in the Astoria?
Owner - AJ Coffee Company
HB Rocks!

User avatar
Jasonian

#72: Post by Jasonian »

EspressoObsessed wrote:I've been trying this on my Silvia. I can get a good taste, but there seems to be less crema which dissipates more rapidly. Any thoughts? My beans are fresh, purchased weekly from Intelly.
I've had this happen as well, but it doesn't happen with every coffee.

I wouldn't worry about the crema so much unless it's affecting the flavor.

I've had some coffees not even a day off the roast that gave almost no crema, but tasted absolutely divine.

Then again, I've seen some old crop coffees yield less crema than normal as well.

There's no set formula for the formation of crema in the cup, I've found.
Owner - AJ Coffee Company
HB Rocks!

User avatar
Psyd

#73: Post by Psyd »

Jasonian wrote:Right, sorry.

Have you tried using your Silvia's filterbasket in the Astoria?
I'm using the LM ridged 14g in the Silvia right now, and the 18g ridgeless in the Astoria. I have tried the 14g stock Astoria a few times (so I'd have a 'standard' baseline to compare to) but I'm having some luck lately. I'm all over the place at the moment, posting wise, as three of these threads seem to be one giant thread of my experiences. Almost like there is a Jim, a Spock, and McCoy thread...
Espresso Sniper
One Shot, One Kill

LMWDP #175

User avatar
Ozark_61

#74: Post by Ozark_61 »

Just catching up on this intriguing thread. I will look forward to trying it out once I borrow a pressure gauge to turn down my OPV. One thought - is all this 'spring / no spring', 'French / Chinese' ramekin make any difference? :lol: I just tare my basket in the PF and then dose if I want to check weight. As long as your scale weight limit is at least a pound or two, I don't see where taking the baskets out would help. I do understand that teaspooning your dose into the basket probably helps your distribution, but to simplify matters, I might try just dosing into the basket directly in the pf.

I wonder what the % of dissolved solids from all grounds in the basket look like for a double from a 18gm basket vs. a 14gm basket. I would think that you are extracting a higher % of available solids and at a more even distribution from all available grounds vs. a 18gm basket where certain portions of the basket are going to be over / under extracted based on available solids.

Geoff
Ken Fox wrote:I haven't used anything but bottomless PFs in a very long time. I'm simply weighing the receiving vessel (a ceramic ramekin in my case), using the TARE function on my 0.1g scale to zero it, then putting 14 or 15g into the ramekin.

User avatar
cannonfodder
Team HB

#75: Post by cannonfodder »

The percentage of TDS would vary by the grinder used. Jim has documented that in the Clash of the Titan Grinders. I have to admit, I actually purchased a TDS meter just yesterday. Got a nice one off eBay with the appropriate metering resolution. I see some TDS measurements coming to my reviews in the near future.

Geoff, I wont forget to get that PF in the mail tomorrow, sorry about that.
Dave Stephens

k7qz

#76: Post by k7qz »

cannonfodder wrote:I would not worry about the wet puck. It makes sense it would be wet because of the increased headspace. There is more water on top so some may be left after the 3-way opens. Don't worry too much about how the puck looks, as long as the espresso tastes good.
Agreed. A 14 gram dose yields a wet puck for me here as well. The shot tastes great however and the only downside I've noticed is that the puck doesn't pop out of my PF cleanly as one neat unit but makes for more slop in my knockbox.

My new hundreth gram digital scale (I know, overkill- but I couldn't resist. Besides I can always use it for reloading or so I told my wife...) should be sitting on my doorstep tomorrow. Looking forward to playing with this a bit more!

Ken Fox (original poster)

#77: Post by Ken Fox (original poster) »

Ozark_61 wrote:As long as your scale weight limit is at least a pound or two, I don't see where taking the baskets out would help. I do understand that teaspooning your dose into the basket probably helps your distribution, but to simplify matters, I might try just dosing into the basket directly in the pf.


Geoff
the issue is strictly one of cost; you can buy a scale that will give a 1/10g resolution for about $30, but it will only hold a maximum weight of about 300g which is considerably less than your typical PF, bottomless or otherwise. If you put more than 300g on such a scale, you will not get any reading and you risk damaging it. You can get scales in 1/10g resolution that will accommodate more than 300g, but they cost a lot more. Alternatively, you could go with a scale with a 0.5g resolution which is probably sufficiently accurate to use for these purposes. I do NOT believe that a scale with a 1.0g resolution is accurate enough, as such a scale will have an error margin of 1g or more in each direction, way too much to produce the shot repeatability that I have referenced.

I personally think that teaspooning the dose into the PF accomplishes next to nothing, as very little basket prep is needed when you use low doses like this.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955

User avatar
RapidCoffee
Team HB

#78: Post by RapidCoffee »

Ken Fox wrote:the issue is strictly one of cost; you can buy a scale that will give a 1/10g resolution for about $30, but it will only hold a maximum weight of about 300g ... I do NOT believe that a scale with a 1.0g resolution is accurate enough, as such a scale will have an error margin of 1g or more in each direction, way too much to produce the shot repeatability that I have referenced.
As Goldilocks might say: 1g accuracy is too low, 0.01g is overkill, and 0.1g (roughly the weight of one bean) is just right. 0.1g precision digital scales are now priced so reasonably that every home barista can afford one. For example, the Triton T-2 scale (pictured on page 1 of this thread) has a capacity of 550gx0.1g, and is available on eBay for $20 shipped. If you prefer to tare the portafilter, you can find a 2kgx0.1g scale for as little as $40.
John

DavidMLewis

#79: Post by DavidMLewis »

RegulatorJohnson wrote:seems to me that an over-dosed/under extracted shot, would have less caffeine, than a under-dosed/more well extracted shot. 2 ounces from 18g would have less caffeine than 2 ounces from 14g more is extracted from the smaller dose because it will be more thoroughly extracted.
The ranges measured by Jim Schulman ran from about 17% to about 22%, more or less, with different grinders varying in how much the extraction changed with dose. The conicals seemed to change less than the planars. Even at something close to the extremes, 17% of 18 g = 3.1 g extracted solids, and 22% * 14 g = 3.1 g extracted solids. So even if you don't take into account the flatter extraction slope of the grinders Ken has been using, it's unlikely that the amount of caffeine in the lower-dose shot has gone up, and if you do it's quite likely that it's gone down.

Best,
David

User avatar
Ozark_61

#80: Post by Ozark_61 »

DavidMLewis wrote:The ranges measured by Jim Schulman ran from about 17% to about 22%, more or less, with different grinders varying in how much the extraction changed with dose. The conicals seemed to change less than the planars. Even at something close to the extremes, 17% of 18 g = 3.1 g extracted solids, and 22% * 14 g = 3.1 g extracted solids.
Perfect, that's what I was wondering. Now you have to wonder if you can increase that 22% to ? Oh.. yet another test - taste 22% vs. 60% etc! Zen espresso... how little grounds could one use to extract a double, young grasshopper?




Also - my single baskets hold 14-15gms - should I expect similar results as with 14gm in a 18gm double basket?


Dave - no problem, thanks!