Charlene wrote:You made a false determination as to my motives for posting this post.

More likely it's the healthy skepticism members express when another member asserts a cause that isn't consistent with observations from others over the years. In this site's history, there's been dozens of similar claims. For example, hot baskets versus cold baskets, sub-degree changes in brew temperature readily impacting taste, 58mm versus 58.5mm tampers, and on and on. Some stood up to scrutiny, others did not.

We do not consider expressions of skepticism as a personal attack. If you want to convince others, the next step is blind taste tests as I outlined earlier. If you don't care if others agree or disagree with your assertions, ignore them and enjoy your espresso.

Hi Charlene,
Seems many of us lever machine users...aka lever-heads, find distribution to be even more critical to shot consistency than with our former pump driven machines. In fact, I'd wager (a small wager) that to most home and professional baristas distribution is THE most important element of their routine. There are probably (at last count about eleven gajillion different distribution/smoothing techniques. The key is to find one that works for YOU and stick with it. Same with dosing the identical amount per shot (with the same coffee of course).

So, I'd be curious to see how close you could come in taste satisfaction carefully dosing and tamping with your auto tamper, and using your lovely manual tamper. Of course, it is important that both pistons cover the inside of your basket as close as possible. A tamper that is loose fitting is an invitation to channeling, or the dreaded "donut" extraction. This doesn't mean get rid of your auto tamper if the results are close, especially if you like the speed and lack of angst associated with manual tamping.

BTW, appreciate your service.

Hi Robert,

I am on the path of discovery as to a process that works best for me for optimally distributing grinds. A stable and repeatable method of effective distribution must come first. Presently, I am studying the O.C.D. methodology.

Theoretically speaking, if distribution is nominal and consistent, incrimental changes in tamper pressure wont make any difference. Thus, if additional pressure does improve the extraction, it indicates a distribution problem.

This QP tamper is interesting in the quest in that I can incrementally add or subtract pressure in two pound increments and log that. In other words it is 'stepped' as opposed to an 'unstepped' manual tamper.

In that regard, the tamper serves as a quantifiable diagnostic tool.

On the tamper clearence issue, both the QP tamper and manual tamper have removeable pistons which allows for exchanging them for pistons with closer tolerences relative to the filter basket sidewall. As a side note, the filter baskets are stamped, not machined, so that is an issue to consider.

There's more I want to say but the clock says I don't have the time right now. Dang!

Laters

Hi Robert,

After studying the O.C.D. Method I decided against it. Even though there is a version 2.0, the cost and the results of an OCD study done by Socrates Coffee lead me to settle in on using the WDT method of grinds distribution going forward. That, coupled with advice on nominal tamping pressure of 60 pounds, is now part of my prep routine. Fortunately, the auto tamper provides that tamping pressure.

So far, it is working splendidly. The results are quite pleasing.

IMAWriter wrote:Hi Charlene,
Seems many of us lever machine users...aka lever-heads, find distribution to be even more critical to shot consistency than with our former pump driven machines. In fact, I'd wager (a small wager) that to most home and professional baristas distribution is THE most important element of their routine. There are probably (at last count about eleven gajillion different distribution/smoothing techniques. The key is to find one that works for YOU and stick with it. Same with dosing the identical amount per shot (with the same coffee of course).

So, I'd be curious to see how close you could come in taste satisfaction carefully dosing and tamping with your auto tamper, and using your lovely manual tamper. Of course, it is important that both pistons cover the inside of your basket as close as possible. A tamper that is loose fitting is an invitation to channeling, or the dreaded "donut" extraction. This doesn't mean get rid of your auto tamper if the results are close, especially if you like the speed and lack of angst associated with manual tamping.

BTW, appreciate your service.

Charlene wrote:Hi Robert,

After studying the O.C.D. Method I decided against it. Even though there is a version 2.0, the cost and the results of an OCD study done by Socrates Coffee lead me to settle in on using the WDT method of grinds distribution going forward. That, coupled with advice on nominal tamping pressure of 60 pounds, is now part of my prep routine. Fortunately, the auto tamper provides that tamping pressure.

So far, it is working splendidly. The results are quite pleasing.

Charlene, maybe someone else suggest the OCD. I'm sure it's a fine product, but I didn't mention it in my comments to you.

60#'s of pressure? Not sure, but couldn't you actually damage your baskets? Speaking of which, the baskets from EPNW (They're called "HQ precision baskets") are a nice compromise between a VST and normal OEM. Also, the more expensive IMS baskets are very fine. IMO, THESE basket choices are significantly more likely to affect your shots than going from 30# to 60".

Occasionally, and you'll forgive me if I'm incorrect here, It sounds as if you are either pulling our collective leg(s), or just so deeply wound up with minutiae, as opposed to just getting comfortable with the process of grind, distribute..with or without WDT, a nice level tamp, and go.

BTW, WDT is not distribution in the basket per se, it's "mixing the grind" so as to distribute into the basket a consistent degree of fine and slightly coarser grind evenly in the basket. The next step is choosing a method to level/smooth the grind in the basket in preparation for the tamp. Some people just grind, then tamp down the little cone a good grinder creates.

I'd suggest imbibing a nice glass of California Chardonnay BEFORE your espresso routine, so as to relax you a bit. ;>D Kidding, of course.
Merry Christmas.

Hi Robert,

Merry Christmas to you and your family! We've been having a great one here!
Also brewed some of the best espresso I've ever tasted. That is a very happy milestone

Interesting information on EPNW baskets.

I doubt 60 lbs is a risk to baskets. Know why 30 pounds was generally accepted as standard?
It had less to do with espresso than it did for ergonomic concerns.

On the advice I read about using 60 pounds of pressure, I can provide the citations for that if you're interested.
It is from a respected teacher of espresso making. I am also a teacher, of applied electrical engineering, now retired.

I am currently in student mode and serious about learning the craft of creating espresso. That might give a little insight as to the level of interest in details.

I am also quite interested in roasting coffee beans and am studying that as well. Would love to have something like a software controlled Huky to roast with.

As for the rest, that's pretty funny! My shields go up only when needed otherwise, I am normally laid back and a cut up

I wanted to tell you, I love the looks of lever machines and would have seriously considered buying one were it not for my physical limitations which is also a reason why I chose a tamping machine.

I don't know which "respected teacher" of espresso is telling you to now push with 60 pounds of force, but this is starting to get absurd. What's next, a machine shop press? You're not seating bearings.


You're drastically overthinking this whole procedure. I'm glad the ergonomics of the PuqPress solve your own specific ergonomic issues, but some of your comments are spiraling this thread into odd territory.

Then you didnt follow the hyperlinks on the WDT write up here on H-B.

/weiss-dist ... nique.html

/weiss-dist ... steps.html

Which referenced respected teacher Kent Bakke in the included link to this multi-page article: https://web.archive.org/web/20050308102 ... le2p2.html

As an engineer, perhaps you would be interested in a more evidence based approach than anecdote?
This group is helping dispel the myths of old.
http://socraticcoffee.com/2015/07/the-i ... xtraction/

But this is not a new idea, https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en# ... _cpGrcXVcY
Michael Teahan's work has already been mentioned.

If you want a super compressed tamp, IMO the best option is a nutating tamp. Doesnt require 60 lbs of pressure , and it will slow down the shot , and has the added benefit of eliminating donut extractions. Unfortunately the puqpress can't do this.