# Weight (and volume) out...



## Beanie Man (Feb 9, 2014)

Hi all,

So I thought I was dong ok, grinding 18 grams and getting about 28-30 out in 28 secs. All good. Taste good.

Watching too many videos is the problem and I see in a few that that a double shot is meant to be 2oz/60ml?

Now, I am only getting about 30ml for my 28-30 grams so the 'weight' is right but should I really be aiming for more volume?

Ta.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

Beanie Man said:


> Now, I am only getting about 30ml for my 28-30 grams so the 'weight' is right but should I really be aiming for more volume?


If you're happy with how it tastes then no.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Nope

weight in

weight out

ignore the volume

as it's not weight in , volume out

A double is the basket and dose you use in it

if you havent already then read this as a starter

http://coffeeforums.co.uk/showthread.php?22879-Beginners-Reading-Weighing-Espresso-Brew-Ratios


----------



## Beanie Man (Feb 9, 2014)

Thanks! Phew!

Yes always done, weight in - weight out.


----------



## scottomus (Aug 13, 2014)

there really is no correct answer to be honest. For myself it is usually between 50-55ml per double. Thats what works with the blend i use! But obviously may not for others.


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

scottomus said:


> there really is no correct answer to be honest. For myself it is usually between 50-55ml per double. Thats what works with the blend i use! But obviously may not for others.


In grams?


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

I've been following the 1:2 ratio, 18g in and approx 36g out between 25 and 30 secs then taste and adjust accordingly. Still not brilliant but passable in milk lol


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Rhys said:


> I've been following the 1:2 ratio, 18g in and approx 36g out between 25 and 30 secs then taste and adjust accordingly. Still not brilliant but passable in milk lol


Then change the ratio till you like it









Will depend on the quality of the coffee too.


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

Mrboots2u said:


> Then change the ratio till you like it
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just to confirm, sour = over extracted (less amount for time taken?) and bitter = under? (bigger very like for time taken?) just trying to remember.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

There are lots of things that could make a coffee sour

a ristretto could be nominally " under" extracted for example

What is the coffee though


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Rhys said:


> Just to confirm, sour = over extracted (less amount for time taken?) and bitter = under? (bigger very like for time taken?) just trying to remember.


Sour/sharp/tart would normally be underextracted, underextract further and you may have no bitterness or sourness (may lack complexity though) it's possible that bitter can be underextracted too & also over, so it's probably best not to read too much into the sweet/bitter/sour vs under/over relationship.

Change the grind at the same ratio to steer the flavour sweeter (finer), if you can't get sweet & balanced at the ratio you are using go longer (e.g. 2.3-2.4:1). Don't stick to 28sec religiously, go by taste & record the time for reference, but don't obsess over it. E.g. at 2:1 you get a sour shot in 28sec, most probably underextracted, grind finer to make it easier to dissolve the good stuff...this may, in turn, cause the shot to run longer in seconds, the water may well need to be in contact with the puck for longer, to bring the sweetness out.


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Rhys said:


> Just to confirm, sour = over extracted (less amount for time taken?) and bitter = under? (bigger very like for time taken?) just trying to remember.


Over extracted will be longer, under extracted will be shorter, typically.

Also, the shorter the more acidic, the longer the more bitter.

But it's only a vague rule of thumb.

To be honest, I think 1:2 is too high and tend to enjoy ristretto shots more.


----------



## urbanbumpkin (Jan 30, 2013)

Rhys said:


> Just to confirm, sour = over extracted (less amount for time taken?) and bitter = under? (bigger very like for time taken?) just trying to remember.


As a massive generalisation under extraction is indicated by sourness but it's not always the case as MWJB says.

What beans are you using?


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> Over extracted will be longer, under extracted will be shorter, typically.
> 
> Also, the shorter the more acidic, the longer the more bitter.
> 
> ...


So you like nominally under extracted shots then


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Sometimes I just eat the beans.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> Sometimes I just eat the beans.


that would explain alot........


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> Sometimes I just eat the beans.


I've started doing this in work, haven't made a coffee this week


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

jeebsy said:


> I've started doing this in work, haven't made a coffee this week


that would explain alot.....


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

A barista in a local cafe was just munching beans one day i was in, it's quite addictive


----------



## urbanbumpkin (Jan 30, 2013)

jeebsy said:


> I've started doing this in work, haven't made a coffee this week


May as well just sell your machine and grinder


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Mrboots2u said:


> that would explain alot.....


You should try it.


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

urbanbumpkin said:


> May as well just sell your machine and grinder


I've made plenty at home, just can't be arsed with the Sowden at the moment. EK and K30 are going nowhere


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

jeebsy said:


> A barista in a local cafe was just munching beans one day i was in, it's quite addictive


I always have a bean or two when I open a new bag.

It's interesting how beans differ from each other a little.


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

Mrboots2u said:


> There are lots of things that could make a coffee sour
> 
> a ristretto could be nominally " under" extracted for example
> 
> What is the coffee though


Rave LSOL.

Just been trying different grinds and got sour and bitter so am trying 16g instead of 18g. Both times the puck stuck to the shower screen.. Anyway, enough coffee for tonight as I won't sleep. Must try again tomorrow and take notes.


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

You can get chocolate coated coffee beans, they are really rather nice


----------



## Thecatlinux (Mar 10, 2014)

jeebsy said:


> I've made plenty at home, just can't be arsed with the Sowden at the moment. EK and K30 are going nowhere





jeebsy said:


> How was the LM Mini?


are you considering an upgrade ??


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

Thecatlinux said:


> are you considering an upgrade ??


Only if i find a bag of money


----------



## Beanie Man (Feb 9, 2014)

Curators Coffee were doing 18g --> 24g last week. Hey ho....


----------



## Beanie Man (Feb 9, 2014)

I have to say that on my Piccino (and I know this is a known problem) if I tamp 18g too hard the machine does choke sometimes.

Might cut down to 16g and try that...


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Beanie Man said:


> Curators Coffee were doing 18g --> 24g last week. Hey ho....


If you like the taste of that shot , then stick to it

The Brew ratio allows you to repeat what you like the taste of...


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

Volume was old school

Ratio is also old school to a degree*

Weight output is useful for repetition if your shot prep is repetitive.

*Unless you know the TDS you don't really know much at all


----------



## urbanbumpkin (Jan 30, 2013)

garydyke1 said:


> Volume was old school
> 
> Ratio is also old school to a degree*
> 
> ...


Agree with the above. As not many people have the ability to measure TDS taste is going to be ultimate bench mark.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

Just about everybody ''try 1.6 ratio as a start point''

Newbie ''its sour and little bit bitter''

Just about everybody ''Perhaps you need a better tamper or different coffee''

Newbie ''I think I need a better grinder''

Newbie ''Shall I get a better machine?''

-upgrades machine and grinder-

Newbie ''its still sour and little bit bitter''

Just about everybody ''Perhaps you still need a better tamper or different coffee''

But seriously 1.6 ratio IS a good start point. So long as your water and technique are good.

18g into xyz is useful. what if xyz is 30g? What if its 40g ? What if its 23g ?

These weights tell you nothing about the quality or efficiency of the extraction. Add TDS into the mix and bingo. After all 18-23% extractions are the tasty zone (pre hump and pre pre humps aside)


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Sure, I'll doTDS.

Anyone going to foot the £500.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

Kyle548 said:


> Anyone going to foot the £500.


People spend 3 times that amount to upgrade a machine and still don't see any improvement in flavour. ; )


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

garydyke1 said:


> But seriously 1.6 ratio IS a good start point. So long as your water and technique are good.


But if your water & technique aren't good, then it's worth trying a longer ratio. Perhaps initially recommending a longer ratio will help establish a lowest common denominator (good flavour, but potentially weaker than intended preference?), then folk can work back from there, tightening grind, pulling shorter, once they have identified a good tasting shot? Burning through a bag of "sour coffee" (it's very likely not sour when extracted nominally) at 1.6 wouldn't seem to be in anyone's favour?



garydyke1 said:


> 18g into xyz is useful. what if xyz is 30g? What if its 40g ? What if its 23g ?.


All things being equal & consistent, the bigger the beverage the higher the extraction & the more chance of hitting the sweetspot.



garydyke1 said:


> These weights tell you nothing about the quality or efficiency of the extraction. Add TDS into the mix and bingo. After all 18-23% extractions are the tasty zone (pre hump and pre pre humps aside)


That's because people look at the weights as a target, not as a tool/mechanism...this is what makes coffee recipes difficult to communicate, the targets are usually weights & times, the objective is a sweet balanced shot, not overly sour or bitter. This is what any ratio assumes, it's just the strength that ideally changes. A lot of folk will struggle to get past 18% at 1.6.

If I boil some pasta, or cook some rice, the recipe gives some indication as to what the end result should be ("al dente", "fluffy, no chalky centre"), only a fool would cook these things then continue to eat them underprepared, or cook them into mush time after time. This is what is missing from many coffee recipes, folks brew at a ratio, get a consistently unrewarding result even though they have followed instructions to the letter, then blame the coffee not the level of instruction because the instruction is usually inadequate/missing a crucial point/because they take the instruction too literally. I'm sure any of us here cook pasta & rice & can do it satisfactorily, make a judgement on whether over/undercooked that 90% of the population would agree on, so applying the same logic to coffee doesn't strike me as such a big leap.

If you know how to make coffee, reasonably consistently, then you can repeat what you know how to do...if you can repeat it, then it's not "magic", there is some process, if there is a process, then this can be conveyed...otherwise we'd all be reliant on magic and it wouldn't matter what beans/gear/water you had, the magic spell would take care of the rest ;-)

I know you know all this Gary, just fleshing out for those that might be having issues.


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

garydyke1 said:


> People spend 3 times that amount to upgrade a machine and still don't see any improvement in flavour. ; )


The biggest improvements I got was going to HX and the la cimbali magnum.

Getting equipment which is able to make consistent cups is probably more important than knowing what's in the cup but being unable to do anything about it because your equip lets you down.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Kyle548 said:


> The biggest improvements I got was going to HX and the la cimbali magnum.
> 
> Getting equipment which is able to make consistent cups is probably more important than knowing what's in the cup but being unable to do anything about it because your equip lets you down.


You're misunderstanding the intention of measurement, you measure what tastes good, if what you can get tastes good, but is outside of established ideals/highest preference & you can't get it in there, you still have a good tasting cup & can repeat it, you can still trouble shoot bad cups and take remedial action in the context of your own sphere of activity. The mechanism works the same irrespective of the specific target.

If you measured your good cups, established by taste, you'd likely find they fell in reasonably small range of yields on the whole.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

Kyle548 said:


> The biggest improvements I got was going to HX and the la cimbali magnum.
> 
> Getting equipment which is able to make consistent cups is probably more important than knowing what's in the cup but being unable to do anything about it because your equip lets you down.


I would say human error is very often at fault not equipment . Having stable equipment is good though for sure.


----------



## jjprestidge (Oct 11, 2012)

garydyke1 said:


> Just about everybody ''try 1.6 ratio as a start point''
> 
> Newbie ''its sour and little bit bitter''
> 
> ...


1.6 on a great deal of speciality coffee gives quite low extraction yields. I haven't sold an espresso at less than 2 for a year now (even longer for Max).

JP


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

MWJB said:


> You're misunderstanding the intention of measurement, you measure what tastes good, if what you can get tastes good, but is outside of established ideals/highest preference & you can't get it in there, you still have a good tasting cup & can repeat it, you can still trouble shoot bad cups and take remedial action in the context of your own sphere of activity. The mechanism works the same irrespective of the specific target.
> 
> If you measured your good cups, established by taste, you'd likely find they fell in reasonably small range of yields on the whole.


We are simply talking about different things.

The issue isn't with measuring- that can only be a good thing.

It's that, measuring only makes so much point when consistency is the real issue.

For most it makes more sense to upgrade a grinder than it does to measure shots which they can't get right anyway.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

jjprestidge said:


> 1.6 on a great deal of speciality coffee gives quite low extraction yields. I haven't sold an espresso at less than 2 for a year now (even longer for Max).
> 
> JP


I run 20 into 42-48 on the EK myself .

At work 18.5 into 30-34 on the mythos, with different water I'm sure I'd run longer shots (our water is v unique)


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Kyle548 said:


> For most it makes more sense to upgrade a grinder than it does to measure shots which they can't get right anyway.


What's the grinder that universally ensures consistency & good tasting shots? The mechanism for dialling in is the same accross grinders. Blanket advice like "upgrade grinder" is going back to magic again, unless you're going to specify exactly what an upgrade actually is & quantify the result of the upgrade. We have to assume that people have a reason for using the grinders they do (within their budget/that perform at least adequately, unless otherwise stated). Otherwise we're in danger of just getting into a grinder/machine/bean upgrade loop...that still ends with, "my espresso is sour & acidic".


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

garydyke1 said:


> I run 20 into 42-48 on the EK myself .
> 
> At work 18.5 into 30-34 on the mythos, with different water I'm sure I'd run longer shots (our water is v unique)


Would it be churlish of me to translate that along the lines of "~2.2:1 might be a good starting point, allowing for water & technique.."


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

MWJB said:


> What's the grinder that universally ensures consistency & good tasting shots? The mechanism for dialling in is the same accross grinders. Blanket advice like "upgrade grinder" is going back to magic again, unless you're going to specify exactly what an upgrade actually is & quantify the result of the upgrade. We have to assume that people have a reason for using the grinders they do (within their budget/that perform at least adequately, unless otherwise stated). Otherwise we're in danger of just getting into a grinder/machine/bean upgrade loop...that still ends with, "my espresso is sour & acidic".


We all need a little chrome plated brass magic in our lives.


----------



## Beanie Man (Feb 9, 2014)

Need a ratio calculator....!


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> We all need a little chrome plated brass magic in our lives.



View attachment 13730


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Mrboots2u said:


> View attachment 13730


What's the resolution on that?

Does it come with a sand timer for accurate pours?


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> What's the resolution on that?
> 
> Does it come with a sand timer for accurate pours?


I think its waterproof


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Mrboots2u said:


> I think its waterproof


Don't give the hipsters ideas....


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

Kyle548 said:


> It's that, measuring only makes so much point when consistency is the real issue.


How are you measuring consistency ?


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

MWJB said:


> Would it be churlish of me to translate that along the lines of "~2.2:1 might be a good starting point, allowing for water & technique.."


But we are using super light acidic roasted beans which are impossible for anyone to extract ; )


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Mrboots2u said:


> I think its waterproof


Bugger to get under the brew head, though.


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

garydyke1 said:


> How are you measuring consistency ?


Does it taste like it should or not.

The only consistency that actually matters.

The metrics measured against are time and weight.

With the logic that if shot A tastes good at a certain time and weight, shot B, within relative tolerance (taking into account age, time since last shot, ect) will taste similar with the same settings.

Providing user competencies.

All your doing with TDS is adding a quantitive value for taste rather than a subjective one; in the end, it doesn't help with the actual production of the coffee.

Of course, objective analysis of extraction IS a useful thing, but for the price, there are better returns that can be made.

I'm saying this, but take it with the cravat that I have never measured TDS myself - it might very well be the revolution the 4th wave needs.

I'm simply stating my opinion as someone who has put money (less money into my entire espresso set up than a single VST) into my machine and grinder rather than a refractometer.


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> I'm saying this, but take it with the cravat


Lols

I don't TDS a lot of espresso, but with Aeropress I really struggled to get a consistently good tasting brew out it for ages. Got the refrac, bish bash bosh, finer grind, less coffee, more water, Bob's your uncle. Within an hour I had a recipe I was happy with as working towards a TDS gave a proper way of measuring what my palette couldn't.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Kyle548 said:


> I'm saying this, but take it with the cravat that I have never measured TDS myself - it might very well be the revolution the 4th wave needs.
> 
> I'm simply stating my opinion as someone who has put money (less money into my entire espresso set up than a single VST) into my machine and grinder rather than a refractometer.


TDS/EY measurement is decidedly first wave, it's just taken until now to get a portable, real-time method of doing it to useful degree of accuracy.


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

The real question is will something like a £30 eBay special work.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> The real question is will something like a £30 eBay special work.


- How did this become the real question ....i missed this part....

Does tds become a more insightful measurement the less the machine costs to measure it ?


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> The real question is will something like a £30 eBay special work.


No, search for Brix on here - we've been over this before


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Mrboots2u said:


> - How did this become the real question ....i missed this part....
> 
> Does tds become a more insightful measurement the less the machine costs to measure it ?


The real question for me.

I never said it wasn't insightful, if anything - I'm all for it.

My biggest issue since the start has been price vs benefit against other high cost equipment.


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

jeebsy said:


> No, search for Brix on here - we've been over this before


I guess it was too much to hope some maverick came along with a cheap and cheerful device since last time....


----------

