# Quick Mill Veloce vs Londinium I



## Lefteye

I know a couple of guys on here have had both machines but can't find much in terms of comparisons. I've read the posts and from what I can make out performance is similar and the veloce is slightly smaller Than the L1. Anyone have a preference and if so why. The cost difference is about £300 but I like the wood of the L1. What do you reckon it would cost to do that the the veloce?? Coffeechap and Dave any opinions???


----------



## Mrboots2u

There was a guy around that made wooden handles for the machines - Duncan . Ive tried to contact him twice over xmas and new year but to no avail , so I'm not sure what other options you have ....

There was a guy on Home Barista in the states that makes handles ,Xpenno is dealing with him currently

Re machines I had an L1 , never tried a Veloce. Only really the two Dave's ( not Ronnies ) will be able to give you a comparative insight into their quality , build and performance ....

I use to own a L1 , it never missed a beat , was easy to service and has great support from Reiss and a fantastic forum for support as well..


----------



## Lefteye

What made you get rid of it? Dave got rid his l1 too.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Lefteye said:


> What made you get rid of it? Dave got rid his l1 too.


Nothing about the machine , that I thought was bad or made me unhappy . I wanted to try a pump machine and be able to manipulate pressure profiles in different ways.

I had a one shot oppurtunity to buy a machine that did that at a good price and I needed to sell the Londinium to do that. Plus I dont have the finances or the room to accommodate two machines

What I've got isn't better its just different....


----------



## 4085

I have had 3 L1's!


----------



## The Systemic Kid

I've got two


----------



## 4085

I was involved in the Veloce project with BB and felt I ought to have one. They share a lot of bits with the L1, especially the important bits. I would not choose one over another on wooden handles though! I believe the QM is being issued with new, up market handles the same as supplied on a Verona, along with a bottomless. When Duncan was making handles for me they were about £25 for a pf and £5 or £10 or so for the toggle switches. The Wenge on the L1 is a much more expensive wood but if you have any 'green' ideals they are endangered/rain forest so not for all.


----------



## 7493

Personal preference but I just don't like Wenge. Marbled resin maybe.









I too would be interested in practical comparisons between the two machines though.


----------



## Lefteye

The Systemic Kid said:


> I've got two


 One for each hand?! am looking forward to the veloce demo. I wouldn't choose on handles but they look nicer. Prob would go for an oak over wenge though.


----------



## 4085

On the L1, the handles were a bugger to take off without ruining them. Reiss used to say take a hair dryer and heat the handle at the point the plastic met the steel. This if you did it long enough, around 10 to 15 minutes would let the heat travel up the screw thread and eventually make the thread locking sealant to melt allowing you to unscrew the handles. This worked the first time but subsequently, I had to resort to mole grips and a vice with brute strength! This would mean marking the Wenge which at the price they are is a shame


----------



## coffeechap

In the cup there should be no real difference in these machines ( provided that quickmill have definitely sorted out the thermosyphon issue when they messed about with boiler size), I was involved in the development of the veloce and have been a long time user of many l1s and they both ( when functioning perfect do a magnificent job at espresso)

The key differences in the machines are how they are put together, the quickmill has a cup tray which some like to have and is a slightly smaller footprint ( this comes a t a cost which I will explain) the quickmill is probably still in development and will have improvements made over time whereas the L1 is definitely a complete and finished machine. The L1 has push fit panels which makes on going servicing very easy it is also a ground up design in that stability was never compromised due to a horizontal boiler, longer foot print and lower centre of gravity. Of the two machines the Londinium is definitely the more rigid stable machine. The internal wiring of the L1 is very tidy and very well thought out whereas the veloce is quite frankly a bit of a mess, which may or may not get sorted in the future.

Both machines share the same group and are closed loop thermosythons which when cycling correctly are very temperature stable, both machines have good steam wands and are very controllable.

The veloce is backed by a two year warranty and is only available from bell barista who are well respected on here.

The Londinium has the wenge handles which I prefer but is not to very ones liking or taste, the main difference is cost in the two machines, but you get what you pay for.

Oh in relation to stability the veloce CAN ( I use that terminology as others will say never") have a tendency to tip IF the lever is pulled in correctly, this is partially due to the fact that the frame is taken from a different machine and is not a groun up design, however when used correctly it should cause you no problems .


----------



## 4085

In relation to tipping, if you park your car one foot away from a bollard, then start it in gear you will ram the bollard.

By that I mean, the Veloce, due to its design and vertical boiler COULD tip if you pull the lever in a certain way, but why the hell would you?


----------



## CallumT

But as a bigger manufacturer why not build from ground up instead of scavenging for parts from pump driven machines.

For me personally, the honest R&D and progression in the L1 would win day and night. The pricing strategy of the QM is a joke also... Built to undercut Reiss.

Edit; Essentially if they were same price I don't think many would consider the QM...


----------



## 4085

Callum, as much as I like you you are talking crap! The l1 in its early days was a walking disaster. The machine was released onto the market with hardly any testing and the result was that the consumer, like me, paid handsomely for a coffee machine which was not fir for purpose. My first L1 had more leaks than an average geyser. However, now it is a truly fine machine.

The Veloce was a put together project utilising an existing chassis, the Verona because they wanted a smaller machine, precisely so they were not just piggybacking the L1. The price has absolutely nothing to do with it. Bb gave the specs to QM and they gave them a price. Bb have an agreement with QM to buy x machines. After that, the project will be reviewed and if QM think there is any mileage in it, they will take the project over and no doubt the r & d will get done.

Having owned both machines, each has its veritable points, but you cannot say one is better than the other (unless you are just biased) any more than you can say a Verona is better than a Duetto......it is just different. The fact you own an L1 and use an L2 does not put you in a position of being able to judge. The only person who has had both machines together, is CC and at that time, the Veloce had a fault. So, you are just offering a garbled opinion based on absolutely nothing.

There are virtually no parts borrowed from a pump machine, unless you know differently


----------



## coffeechap

My my we are all getting defensive here, I agree that the L1 had teething issues in the early days however it is now a completely finished tried and tested product with absolutely no known faults or concerns, can the same be said about the veloce?

Just to be clear here, I had the very first veloce with PID and the subsequent version after the first round of revisions, so am in a very good place to express my thoughts on the veloce machines. Firstly the real reason why not much has been said about the veloce thus far is that to be honest the second version that came out was a complete pile of shite in the cup, it had a major issue with the thermosyphon not cycling and thus there were temperature fluctuations at the group of 30 degrees, which was the same with the DFKs machine, a decent shot could be had, provided the stars aligned and the temp was right. That issue basically made that machine un useable, and meant that a recall of all the machines was required to rectify the issue ( the factory claimed there never was an issue which was blatantly not true). That said the now modified machine with new boiler that works with the thermosyphon configuration is temperature stable and produces shots as good as the L1 (fact).

I have harped on about the stability concerns that I have about the frame, but that is a direct comparison (as that what the thread is about) with the rock solid, stability of the L1. The L1 was very carefully thought out in this respect and has one of the most solid frames of any home / semi professional machine. The veloce has indeed taken the frame from a Verona, to keep costs down, quickmill were reluctant to make a new frame for a small run of machines as this would inevitably have cost in R and D and driven the price up. This has its down side as the frame was designed for a different use, it has been strengthened to reduce flexing and weights are supplied to add ballast and offset the tipping effect.

When I opened up the the veloce I was amazed at how sloppy the wiring is on that machine, no care has been taken to run the loom carefully, wires cross over steam pipes and they are all over the place, however I was assured that this was pretty much the state of play across the industry and that it would be fine for use, I suggested that a revision be made and it was put on the wish list. The L1 in comparison ( as a ground up project) is carefully thought out and very tidy.

The key aspect that the quickmill has over the l1 is that it costs £300 less, which makes it quite a good proposition for a top end lever machine, true it does not come with wood, but it does come with a naked portafilter and the handles are being improved ( neither I or Dave received either of these with our machines) and I am sure that BB will ensure these go out to everyone eventually.

To say that a Verona is the same as a duetto as a comparison is not quite accurate, DaveC has reviewed the machines and has openly stated that the Verona is a better machine than the duetto due to the way it has been put together and the attention to detail, therefore comparisons can be made. It is a real shame that quickmill have not taken the same attention to detail with the veloce.


----------



## sjenner

I think that my L1 was the first fully plumbed example... It was also probably one of the first ten to be manufactured... I had a very minor leak in the pipe which leads to the manometer, which was fixed by Reiss (himself).

I have had no further problems and can confirm that this is the leading spring lever design...

There were more expensive machines before and there are a couple of cheaper machines around now...

But the Londinium model range is (in my view) defining the genre.

The new L1-P will address the L1's only weakness personal annoyance, which is the constant cycling of the boiler during use, presumably the Veloce has this "feature" too?.

EDIT: Actually... "weakness" is not the right word... I should have written "personal annoyance".


----------



## DavecUK

coffeechap said:


> To say that a Verona is the same as a duetto as a comparison is not quite accurate, DaveC has reviewed the machines and has openly stated that the Verona is a better machine than the duetto due to the way it has been put together and the attention to detail, therefore comparisons can be made.


This is definitely correct.


----------



## 4515

I'll start by saying that I have no experience with the QM but did have it on the list of potential machines.

Assuming that the thermosyphon issues are now resolved which they appear to be and the internal wiring / frame flexing dont pose a concern, theres not a lot to chose between the two.

When youre around the 2K mark for a machine, £300 isnt going to be the deciding factor for most buyers

The thing that swung it for me, excepting machine availability, was aesthetics which will be subjective but I do prefer the looks of the L1


----------



## NickR

It has to be admitted that QM make great looking boxes. I had an Andredja for a long time. I loved its curved edges, its wonderful drip tray, its luvered vents and its very high shine, but I hated its internal layout and wiring loom. I agree the Veloce does look nice, great drip tray and cup warmer, but like all QM machines the wiring loom is a mess.

The basic bread bin look of the L1 certainly put me off to begin with. However, I think Reiss spent longer styling the inside of the machine than the outside - perhaps this is the reason that it doesnt have insulation on the boiler - it would spoil to aesthetics. I would say to anyone contemplating buying a Veloce, find a picture of the inside and compare it with this. In 10 years time my L1 will still be working will any QM's?


----------



## 4085

Sorry, I was away most of yesterday. Let me make quite clear what I am trying to say. it is unfair to compare a machine of which there are only 12 in the world at the moment, to the finished article. The L1 is very good now, but for quite a long time it was really a work in progress. No one who owns a machine will ever say that there is a better one available for less now, will they.

The way things stand, the Veloce is £1695 and the L1 £1980 plus carriage plus it comes with one naked.

Andrew has pointed out that the differential at around 2k is not going to put the average person off and I agree. The main advantage I can see that the Veloce has is its smaller size. It will fit where many L1's will not. Dave H keeps on mentioning the frame and again, I agree. it is a Verona frame with an extra bit of strengthening and a ballast. But it is quite serviceable, to me anyway. I have never tipped or lifted mine, UNLESS I have wanted to demonstrate it to someone visiting.

If no one buys the Veloce, then the project will die in the water. Reiss and many others welcome with open arms competition and quite rightly so as that gives the consumer a choice.

I always dreaded the release of this machine as everyone will quite natural want to put it up against an L1. My Veloce, as has been stated had a problem. Ignore the prototype Dave had as a prototype is just that and often does not resemble the finished product. The specs for the machine were agreed and the prototype had a 2 litre boiler. When the first run of 6 machines came out QM had for some reason put a 2.7 litre boiler in. Not being technical, my understanding is that the increased height of the boiler and using the same thermo syphon tubes etc caused a problem which meant that the syphon continually stalled. It took sometime to actually work this out, and once worked out QM built a new machine and shipped it over. That was tested and offered to me and I rejected it asking for it to be sent to one of the other 3 people who had bought them. The recall amounted to 4 machines by the way, including mine. Another short delay whilst we waited for QM to send the new boilers over.

They arrived, my machine went back to BB to have the new boiler fitted. 3 days later got it back and after a week the machine failed. Shipped back down to BB again and after testing no fault was found, so they decided to strip the machine right back down until they found out what was wrong. Eventually, it was discovered that where the main power lead comes in under the boiler, when it was screwed down the cable had somehow been nicked and with the vibration coming from the machine when filling, the cable had 'moved' slightly shorting out. That was fixed and since then, it has behaved faultlessly.

Some people on here think I am in the pocket of BB. let me dispel that humour now. I use Bb because I get a fantastic level of service from them, demonstrated here where customer satisfaction is placed beyond profit. It costs around £48 each way to ship a machine of that value to BB.

I could easily afford to sell the Veloce, take a loss and buy an L1. I have not. If anyone wants to ask themselves why, the answer is quite simple. The Veloce gives me everything I want from a machine. That is not to say I will never own another L1, but with a 2 year warranty and the exciting prospect of QM taking this machine on and therefore possibly making it even better, the times ahead to me are exciting.

And lastly, Callum, if I offended you then I am sorry. perhaps I was a little harsh.


----------



## RoloD

dfk41 said:


> Callum, as much as I like you you are talking crap! The l1 in its early days was a walking disaster. The machine was released onto the market with hardly any testing and the result was that the consumer, like me, paid handsomely for a coffee machine which was not fir for purpose. My first L1 had more leaks than an average geyser. However, now it is a truly fine machine.


Absolute nonsense!

I have the second L1 off the production line and it's worked perfectly since day 1. Never leaked - I have no idea why yours did, David.

All the changes since then have been superficial - snap-off body panels have been added, slight changes to the drip tray and there was a period when the frames were bolted rather than welded which cause some flexing, but basically it is the same machine.


----------



## coffeechap

RoloD said:


> Absolute nonsense!
> 
> I have the second L1 off the production line and it's worked perfectly since day 1. Never leaked - I have no idea why yours did, David.
> 
> All the changes since then have been superficial - snap-off body panels have been added, slight changes to the drip tray and there was a period when the frames were bolted rather than welded which cause some flexing, but basically it is the same machine.


Actually the frame is now completely different and much more rigid, yours is the inverted T the new ones are as per the photo in this thread.


----------



## 4085

RoloD said:


> Absolute nonsense!
> 
> I have the second L1 off the production line and it's worked perfectly since day 1. Never leaked - I have no idea why yours did, David.
> 
> All the changes since then have been superficial - snap-off body panels have been added, slight changes to the drip tray and there was a period when the frames were bolted rather than welded which cause some flexing, but basically it is the same machine.


Hi Rolo, welcome back after such a long absence! Can I ask how far away from Reiss you live? I know the rough answer which is not far enough to have yours transported via a courier. I do not live that close. Much of the early problems were because the packaging was not good enough causing problems in transit. In addition, my first machine was a Luxe with glass panels. Since all of the nuts were coated in something to show them off, then no matter how careful Fraction were to tighten them without scratching, then they could not do this and after a short period f time, they leaked, and then leaked a bit more, then leaked a bit more again. Once it had been returned to the factory and the glass panels swopped for steel then the nuts could be and were tightened up properly. Odd hey!

I even managed to find a short clip, just in case you are wondering!


----------



## RoloD

dfk41 said:


> Hi Rolo, welcome back after such a long absence! Can I ask how far away from Reiss you live?


Currently, just over 11,000 miles but at the time I got the machine, about 10.

I know there were initially problems shipping the machine and sorry that you suffered, but I don't really think that qualifies as a 'walking disaster'! There is really very little functional difference between the first machine and current models.

I was never convinced by the Luxe - shiny copper is one thing, but plastic-boxed electronics are none too pretty.


----------



## sjenner

Dave's machines would have been shipped in the very same way from the same place in Birmingham as everyone elses', except Rolo and Frans. It was not until the machine was shipped in two parts that every single further shipment to every corner(?) of the earth has arrived undamaged by those oh so careful shipping firms.

Incidentally and completely gratuitously, the first time I ever pulled a lever on a coffee machine (I still haven't pressed a button), it was Rolo's







. Imagine my surprise when the stuff that came out was actually drinkable... V. Tasty actually... Costa Rican!


----------



## fluffles

The history of the machines is probably not of much interest to the original poster. Sounds like as they currently stand, both machines will produce similarly great espresso. The QM is smaller and that might be a deciding factor for someone with not much space. On the other hand, the L1 has been around for some time and as such is proven. The service and support is also excellent. My personal opinion is that the L1 is a safer bet.

Disclaimer: I have an L1.


----------



## 4085

What exactly is there to prove? The L1 has been around a little over 2 years!


----------



## Mrboots2u

I this think thread has now descended into onto of those ever decreasing circles of debate and comment , where nothing new or even to the point is gonna come up ...

For the OP there has been plenty of forthright comparison , plenty of L1 owners around if he wants to visit one and try it out....

Im sure Dfk would show of his machine also


----------



## Lefteye

The history of the machines is interesting but they both have obviously had teething problems. The L1 has been around for a while and so it is pretty much sorted from what I can see. The main point was as they appear to share the same group would their be any difference in the cup if the two were to be used blind. The veloce seems possibly slightly more kitchen friendly in diamension terms but I can't help but be swayed by the L1 and the way it's built. I basically want a machine that will do for life with the least that would go wrong and is easy to maintain which the L1 ticks. Having said that upgraditis is probably bound to kick in - that Vesuvius ..........


----------



## jeebsy

Lefteye said:


> The main point was as they appear to share the same group


The bosco group!


----------



## Mrboots2u

You're in newcastle if you haven't already go and see Dfks veloce in the flesh and try it out .....

The vesuvius is a different machine.

I really dont like the word upgrade , it implies whatever the next purchase is IS catergorcially better than the last one and in the coffee game its all so subjective that this isnt always the case...

If you want a machine for life thats uncomplicated then a lever is the way to go ......If you're gonna keep it that long , then in the grand scheme of things £300 isnt that much over 10 years . Go and try em , buy whatever one you want that will make you happy


----------



## 4085

Boots, lefty is coming on friday. he may leave thinking pumps are a better option of course. let me state now, that I am well used to demonstrating things to people. I never give advice unless I am paid, so he will choose the machine he wants!


----------



## fluffles

dfk41 said:


> What exactly is there to prove? The L1 has been around a little over 2 years!


The L1 is a more mature product - there are lots of them out there and any no one seems to have any significant issues (anymore). There may (or may not) be issues that come to light with the QM.


----------



## 4085

fluffels.......it rhymes with row locks mate! people had to buy the L1 in its earshot state in order for it to be where it is today! With due respect to Reiss, I think the QM r & d department might be slightly better funded if they take the project on. I admire your defense of the L1, but why are you trying to steer any future potential lever owners away from a Veloce towards an L1. You have not seen or touched a Veloce. Comments like

My personal opinion is that the L1 is a safer bet.

is just absolute tosh!


----------



## RoloD

Just to reiterate, the major changes in the L1 have been in how it is packed for shipping, not the machine itself. It's a simple design, well built, solid and it works. But its strength (and weakness) is that it was designed, marketed and sold (but obviously not engineered or manufactured) by one guy who will respond very promptly to any problems you have. Reiss has gone out of his way to help me a number of times - and I can't think of another machine where you can Skype the guy who designed it. Of course, if you don't get on with him then that is a drawback rather than an asset.

I have not see a Veloce so I can't comment on it. It looks like a fine machine and I'm sure makes great coffee - only question, does come with a plumbed-in option?


----------



## 4085

Rolo, mine is plumbed in. The reason why Reiss uses Skype etc is unique and possibly also down to the fact that he is his only support network!


----------



## coffeechap

dfk41 said:


> Rolo, mine is plumbed in. The reason why Reiss uses Skype etc is unique and possibly also down to the fact that he is his only support network!


Yours is only plumbed in because Bella barista did it especially as a favour and then it was not done entirely right the first time!


----------



## 4085

The point is it can be and since currently only available through bb I presume anyone can have there's plumbed in


----------



## fluffles

dfk41 said:


> fluffels.......it rhymes with row locks mate!


Actually that doesn't rhyme











dfk41 said:


> people had to buy the L1 in its earshot state in order for it to be where it is today!


Yep, that was pretty much exactly the point I was making.



dfk41 said:


> With due respect to Reiss, I think the QM r & d department might be slightly better funded if they take the project on. I admire your defense of the L1, but why are you trying to steer any future potential lever owners away from a Veloce towards an L1. You have not seen or touched a Veloce.


Fair enough. Wasn't actively trying to promote one over the other, they look pretty similar was just offering how I think I would look at the choice. In hindsight I probably didn't have much to contribute, just bored at work. I'll stop now.



dfk41 said:


> Comments like
> 
> My personal opinion is that the L1 is a safer bet.
> 
> is just absolute tosh!


Still stand by that though!


----------



## Lefteye

Mrboots2u said:


> You're in newcastle if you haven't already go and see Dfks veloce in the flesh and try it out .....
> 
> The vesuvius is a different machine.
> 
> I really dont like the word upgrade , it implies whatever the next purchase is IS catergorcially better than the last one and in the coffee game its all so subjective that this isnt always the case...
> 
> If you want a machine for life thats uncomplicated then a lever is the way to go ......If you're gonna keep it that long , then in the grand scheme of things £300 isnt that much over 10 years . Go and try em , buy whatever one you want that will make you happy


im looking forward to seeing the veloce. You're right about upgrade, these are different machines so I wouldn't want to imply that one is better than the other especially as it's quite subjective.


----------



## sjenner

jeebsy said:


> The bosco group!


You had just better hope that Reiss isn't going to read this thread Jeebsy...!

But apart from that, this ubiquitous (now) group is probably in more L1's than all of the others put together.

Lefteye... You will not be disappointed in the L1, it's design has never changed since the first day...

There was an issue, uncovered in the US, which was demonstrated to be caused by user error, not helped by the fact that Reiss had no problems himself, but did not understand why some did...

Frans Goddijn from the Netherlands performed thorough tests, to try to repeat the issues that some people were having. He discovered that those people that gave their groups a 30-60ml flush following making a series of shots... some people clean between shots too







, whilst this cleans the shower-head and PF group area, it also solves the user issue... Which was that if one did not do that, there was a risk that the thermosiphon would fail or falter and the group temperature would be less stable.

Transportation problems were serious at first, as Dave has said and there were a couple of brackets installed to better support the boiler and pipework... But it was not until the L1 was shipped in two parts that the problems ended completely.

Apart from all the historical guff in my comments above, I actually think that the two machines do the very same job, and presumably, they both produce top quality shots.

I have only used the L1, so I cannot make a comparison, but just like the Salvatore machine, and the Velo thing from Naples, the Veloce was not available when I bought my L1, the only competitors being the QuickMill on which this Veloce is based, but at double the price of the L1, with a double sprung lever and a 4.5-5 litre(?) boiler, and the Idrocompresso... Two levers and stunning design make this unaffordable, I think it is somewhere around £12K.

I reckon that the best coffee machine is the one you have, I won't be changing mine, and I would do the same thing today... But I do not criticise the Veloce at all.


----------



## jeebsy

sjenner said:


> You had just better hope that Reiss isn't going to read this thread Jeebsy...!


Easiest way in the world to rile L1 owners


----------



## lucasd

I made a mistake of asking Reiss about Veloce, should heed advice here.

Though at least I learned it uses better pstat


----------



## 4085

Dare I ask what is wrong with the Veloce?


----------



## Thecatlinux

I don't know but find myself veering towards the the londinium .

i am sure they are both very capable machines , but the L1 as whole package seems to have carved a good reputation and following which would negate any issues with longevity and support/help.


----------



## 4085

Thecatlinux said:


> I don't know but find myself veering towards the the londinium .
> 
> i am sure they are both very capable machines , but the L1 as whole package seems to have carved a good reputation and following which would negate any issues with longevity and support/help.


I can understand that point of view. Having had 3 L 1's and a Veloce, I can say I would certainly have another L1, but, I feel no need to change back to one right now.

The machines are very similar, both produce excellent coffee. Both had teething troubles and the L1 is where it is today because it overcame all those issues. The Veloce is still untried within the world market. If QM take the project on, it will be interesting. Right now, I am enjoying a 2 year warranty and feel no need at all, to change back, but I can understand why anyone wanting a new lever would go Londinium. It is always nice to have a choice!


----------



## Thecatlinux

dfk41 said:


> I can understand that point of view. Having had 3 L 1's and a Veloce, I can say I would certainly have another L1, but, I feel no need to change back to one right now.
> 
> The machines are very similar, both produce excellent coffee. Both had teething troubles and the L1 is where it is today because it overcame all those issues. The Veloce is still untried within the world market. If QM take the project on, it will be interesting. Right now, I am enjoying a 2 year warranty and feel no need at all, to change back, but I can understand why anyone wanting a new lever would go Londinium. It is always nice to have a choice!


Yes I agree it's nice to have a choice , and I would love the opportunity to see both of the machines , I have only managed to see and have drinks from the L1 and each time my desire for ownership has grown ever stronger , I have had time with other smaller lever machines and find them to be so much fun . Would love to have a go with the veloce and a Strega but alas east anglia is a bit of coffee dessert and I'm always miles away from where I want/need to be .


----------



## 4085

Thecatlinux said:


> Yes I agree it's nice to have a choice , and I would love the opportunity to see both of the machines , I have only managed to see and have drinks from the L1 and each time my desire for ownership has grown ever stronger , I have had time with other smaller lever machines and find them to be so much fun . Would love to have a go with the veloce and a Strega but alas east anglia is a bit of coffee dessert and I'm always miles away from where I want/need to be .


there is basically nothing between the voles and L1 apart from aesthetics. technically, each should be as good or bad as the other! The strega though (sorry Sol) is not even remotely close to them/. It is a hybrid machine that uses a pump to force the water into the group. Yes, you can vasy the pressure by taking in less water but it is all guessing. I have had one by the way! I thought the voles was a lot smaller than the L1 but TSK assures me my memory is wrong! It is smaller but not that much. this is down to the fact the boiler on the Veloce is vertical and on the L1, horizontal


----------



## Thecatlinux

When you say aesthetics is that just personal tastes or possibly build quality between the machines ?


----------



## 4085

I cannot see any Fracino being particularly better than any QuickMill or vice versa. The build quality on the QM is absolutely fine. they are using standard industry parts on the whole. The lever group, when I first received it was noticeably better put together in terms of action than the L1. I know that you now assemble your own so it is up to you, although QM send the machine out with the lever inserted unlike Londinium.

As the QM is in its first production I would fully expect them to alter things. I must say so, the water arm on the l1 is like using Arkwrights till, whereas on the QM it is as smooth as a baby bum with no chance of scolding yourself!

Best thing is to try and view one. The 6 out in the wild are in Edinburgh, Scotland, Darlington, Holland and not sure on the other one and one at BB. I know they are waiting for the bottomless to turn up at the end of the month before they push the remaining 6 machines at BB.


----------



## coffeechap

I thought we were not getting into one is better than the other? Quickmill would appear the better machine then?


----------



## 4085

coffeechap said:


> I thought we were not getting into one is better than the other? Quickmill would appear the better machine then?


I have not said anything about the QM being better than the L1. I pointed out a couple of differences. personally, I could not give a monkeys chuff about comparing them, not do i care if no one ever buys another Veloce or L1!


----------



## Mrboots2u

I prefer this one....

it seems to be lacking in steam power though

View attachment 12740


----------



## 4085

Just fill and shake the Pepsi bottle and attach a straw


----------



## Thecatlinux

To be fair im waiting to pull the trigger and I am sure many know which I am going to plump for .

trust mr boot to throw another machine into the mix I am quite partial to Pepsi as well


----------



## Lefteye

I haven't seen an l1 in the flesh so to speak but the shots from the veloce were great. Size wise not too big but felt that aesthetically needs a few bits improving - wasn't keen on the veloce badge or the quick mill one. Really small things I'm sure but when spending the sorts of money they are how it looks is bound to be a fair consideration esp if they perform basically the same. If quickmill take it and improve aesthetics then I'd probably plump for one.


----------



## malling

what issues are there with the Veloce, I have been looking at it and the Alex Leva, and do any of you by any chance know if there is going to be further improvement? One of these are planed to replace my v2b when I get tired of it.

And how is the wiring, the same as always (QM) you know the birds nest

ps. the reason I didn't pull the trigger is I have had enough of being a tester of a new product (I did it with V2B)

I'm not really looking at the L1 as it too deep for my counter.


----------



## 4085

I was involved with the Veloce project from the start. In fact, for my sins, I was given the dubious honour of naming her. The original prototype, as you would expect had to have many weeks. Somehow, between BB pressing the order button and receiving them, the boiler was inadvertently changed from 2 litres to 2.7. No one will hold their hand s up and take the blame! The result was, that the physics side of things was mucked up and with the extra capacity of the boiler, it was found that the thermosyphon stalled. This meant that the group did not reach satisfactory temp. The work around of course, was a heating flush.

Eventually, the problem was found and QM sent BB replacement boilers. Mine was replaced before xmas and has been stable since then.

The wiring is a matter of opinion. If you are comparing it to the L1, then it is a mess but if you compare it to the vast majority of machines out there, then it reaches the usual poor standard. In this case, since the original order was for just 12 machines, I think QM used a wiring loom that was too big and I would fully expect that to be replaced with a correctly sized one.

The L1 and Veloce share the same group whilst the Alex does not. If the L1 will not fir on your bench, I would be surprised if the Alex does!

If QM take the Veloce project on, then I would expect other subtle changes. The panels are easy to take off. The lid pulls off in one. Two bolts at the top back, then they pull off.


----------



## jeebsy

dfk41 said:


> The L1 and Veloce share the same group whilst the Alex does not.


The Bosco group?


----------



## Thecatlinux

jeebsy said:


> The Bosco group?


is that a serious question .? Or are you playing devils advocate ?


----------



## Colio07

I think it's called "stirring"!


----------



## 4085

its the coffee equivalent of macbeth


----------



## malling

jeebsy said:


> The Bosco group?


Very funny

I'm sure you already know that Bosco isn't the company behind the group. Besides there are subtable differences between the one Bosco uses on their machines, and those found on L1, Veloce and the like.

Yeah I know that Alex Leva uses a different lever group, it uses the same group and set up as a Pompeii, but the group is so damn sexy, with visible spring. The only real nagging thing is that it is 55mm, so no VST (as far as I recall) but I have been told that it is still one of the best lever groups in production.

The Alex Leva is the same size as a V2B (I think it uses a reinforced frame from Duetto), it's the lever and the extra cup rack that adds an extra hight to the machine, everything else is equal. The L1 is 10cm deeper then both of them, my countertop is 50cm


----------



## Thecatlinux

Watched this unpacking video today for the L1 and when it comes to taking off the panels you can judge how tight and good a fit they are. IMO a sign of build quality , I don't want to be taking them off all the time but a tight fit means less chance of rattles .

for anyone who's intrested






Also do they ship with thier tamper Or is it an extra ?


----------



## coffeechap

malling said:


> Besides there are subtable differences between the one Bosco uses on their machines, and those found on L1, Veloce and the like.


I think you will find they are exactly the same group


----------



## malling

coffeechap said:


> I think you will find they are exactly the same group


I wrote subtle differences, I did not write it where an entirely different group, bosco are using a different set up of gaskets, a different spring, and it has one port into the group, there is a small chamber behind the group that i draws water from that is attached to the boiler in a sort of dipper design, Izzo uses the same design on their machines.

I other words the group on a Bosco can not be used on a L1, so no not exactly the same, as both are modified to fit each machine.


----------



## lespresso

Balls.

You have just told me that you have never tried to fit one of these groups from one machine to another

You are another keyboard warrior pontificating on matters of which you have no experience

One of these groups with a dipper mounting plate will fit on another machine that uses the group with the dipper mounting plate, and the same for machines that use this group with the thermosiphon mounting plate

Whether we order a group from the manufacturer in dipper or thermosiphon configuration does not amount to a customisation - its straight out of the catalogue

The 'group' stops where it mounts onto the front of the casing

How you connect the group to the boiler behind the front panel does not constitute a difference to the group - it is a different part of the system

You can happily drop the top half of a Bosco, idrocompresso, Quickmill, etc into the bottom half of our group and vice versa

I have plenty of images from when we were the UK agent for Bosco and can assure you the top half of the group is no different

If you are going to lift your thoughts directly from HB, go for a contributor who is credible

The espresso machine industry is like the automotive industry - it works around component suppliers. Automative manufacturers, even with their volumes don't build their own components; they design, assemble, distribute, market, and sell. With the absolutely minuscule volumes of the espresso machine in comparison, why would you expect it to be any different?

Bosco have created a modified dipper design which means the back of the group is not kept hot by being bolted directly to a large flange welded onto the side of the boiler. it is a simple and ingenious solution to prevent the group from overheating when consecutive shots are drawn (something that all dipper designs suffer from) and it works well in the cafes of Napoli where the cafes are busy throughout the day, whilst avoid the additional cost and engineering demands of fabricating a thermosiphon and heat exchanger into the boiler

Bosco are a very decent family that i hold in high regard - they are trying to make an honest living in Naples and its a challenge - if you are ever in Napoli you should try to arrange a visit

Izzo recently seem to have taken a liking to Boscos design and copied it. I think it's a dirty trick and is completely unnecessary for Izzo to thrive

If you can't appreciate the significant and numerous differences in quality between our machine and the Veloce from the many images of both machines that are in the public domain, buy the Veloce

Reiss.


----------



## lespresso

If you need a difference to fixate on, choose one that exists; the Izzo group is Izzo's own design, made by the same people who make the group we, Bosco, QM, Kees et al use

However for reasons best known to Izzo they specify that the sleeve be welded at the bottom into the group. Not an issue in a domestic environment, but in a busy commercial environment it means you'll eventually need to replace the whole group, rather than being able to simply replace the sleeve


----------



## malling

lespresso said:


> balls
> 
> The 'group' stops where it mounts onto the front of the casing
> 
> How you connect the group to the boiler behind the front panel does not constitute a difference to the group as such - it is a different part of the system
> 
> 'The group' is able to be purchased in either thermosiphon or dipper configuration
> 
> You can happily drop the top half of a Bosco, idrocompresso, Quickmill, etc into the bottom half of our group and vice versa
> 
> I have plenty of images from when we were the UK agent for Bosco and can assure you the top half of the group is no different - stop repeating what you've read on HB as the fact/word ratio is astonishingly low over there as far as lever machines are concerned
> 
> Here's the news: the espresso machine industry is like the automotive industry - it works around component suppliers. Car builders, even with their volumes don't build their own components; they design, assemble, distribute, market, and sell. With the absolutely minuscule volumes of the espresso machine in comparison, why would you expect it to be any different?
> 
> Bosco have created a modified dipper design which works well enough in Napoli in a commercial environment where the cafes are busy
> 
> Bosco are a very nice family and I don't have a bad word to say about them - they are trying to make an honest living in Naples and its a challenge
> 
> Izzo recently seem to have taken a liking to Boscos design and copied it - I think it's a dirty trick to be honest
> 
> If you can't appreciate the significant differences between our machine and the Veloce from the numerous images of both machines that are in the public domain, buy the Veloce
> 
> Reiss.


I'm well aware of that the top part is the same, and you can get it with one or two spring configuration, and with different sets of gaskets, and that part is interchangeable.

the bottom part as your indirectly state above, is however different, depending if it is for a thermosiphon or dipper configuration, the Bosco I have seen are using a dipper bottom part.

But yes it's like any other industri, where your buying parts from components suppliers, thats hardly any secret for anyone who has open up enough espresso machines, I have seen the same boiler in a allot of different machines, all the electronic parts and mechanical parts are even more clearly made by the same suppliers.

Didn't know that the sleve where welded on the Izzo, I guess I'll remove the Alex lever from the list, even if it of no issue in a home environment. So thanks for the info Reiss

Reiss I love your Machine and do admire your work, but it's deeper then my counter, so for me I need to go a different route, thats why I asked for the Veloce, that in all honesty also look like a bit of a copy of the L1, as far as I can tell.

but I do agree with you regarding the H-B part, it's the same with grinders, their rave about Conicals as being superior clearly proves this point.


----------

