Jump to content


New Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Your Profile

  • Location
  • Interests
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Zatogato's Achievements

Portafilter pro

Portafilter pro (6/8)



  1. They are an absolute gem. With enough effort, you'll be amazed at how well they can perform against machines that cost 5-10x the price! PM if you need any help.
  2. Don't want to derail the thread, but hypothetically wondered what kind of entry level commercial machine would be recommended to the OP. Have a friend in a similar position except he already has a food truck and wants to expand his offering to coffee. Just wondered if there are any obvious choices as a best value option! I figured this would most likely also be of interest to OP!
  3. Hi @mobomobile - not sure about the first question (@Coff Hey is the man for that) but I can jump in to help with the latter. The Crono now has 2 versions as it has been updated as of May 2021. The 2020 version has identical burrs to the Manuale. The 2021 version of the Crono has brew focussed burrs which are better in the brew range. There was a time that all 50mm burrs between 50mm Eureka grinders were the same so it was just a marketing bullet point but now there is some differentiation. If the Filtro hasn't already been updated with the brew 50mm burrs then I expect it will imminently. I guess Coff Hey's upgraded burrs will fit any of these models so if you're aiming to upgrade it won't make a lot of difference in terms of results personally I would choose Crono because of it being lower cost than the Manuale. As a bonus, you get the choice of a timer or can override that for on demand grinding. Apparently the power switch can be modded to make it 'always on' if you prefer not to hold down the button on the front when going on demand.
  4. Yeah that's a very good point. I guess @Coff Hey would be best qualified to answer how both motors fare in terms of longevity between the 50mm models with a 260w vs the 310w motor (especially in the context of light roasts/use cases that cause more strain on them) and in fact whether he's seen either fail through use. Perhaps the manufacturer of the motors has a rating in terms of life expectancy for them though that'd be arbitrary compared to real world experience. My hypothesis will remain that the Crono is the best value option of the grinders in this thread including what we're discussing for now unless some new info comes to light. I would also postulate that with the line of reasoning you are speaking of, there might be a better option altogether in terms of investing in a heavier duty grinder than any of these models if the main use case is stuff that creates a lot of strain. As an aside, I do appreciate your well reasoned debating style!
  5. While I agree with you academically I really struggle with the idea that this would be important in reality. @Coff Hey can correct me on this if I'm wrong but one of the reasons why the Silenzio & Facile have a more powerful motor is actually a lot simpler. The housing! The housing with the acoustic dampening feature is the one used in the Specialita and is made to fit the larger motor (goes back to the OP about hitting different price points and target markets while rationalising tooling). The headroom extra torque is necessary for the larger burrs of the Specialita but they are still rotating at the same speed in the 50mm models so it's no faster and not really being utilised. In the Gaggia Classic for example the vibratory pumps range from 48w to 65w but at both ends of this range you can generate more pressure than you would ever actually need in reality. Still people would argue the merits of going with the 65w. The Silenzio retails for around £315. It's approaching the price of buying 2 Cronos! I reckon trying to work out the cost benefit of motor longevity is a bit unnecessary for a machine being used in a domestic environment if it's built to a good standard like any of these models. In reality I reckon I'd probably end up upgrading it before I got close to the motor mechanically wearing out and the other parts are user serviceable anyway like burrs. In summary I think trying to justify the price differential of going for an unnecessarily higher wattage motor (for the 50mm models) under the presumption that it'll have a longer lifespan is a bit of a reach and even if it were true it still wouldn't be proportional said increased cost. Don't buy into the marketing!
  6. Thank you @CocoLoco! The latter thing is exactly the sort that I had in mind. 😏
  7. Hey all, just looking for some pointers if anyone has found a good solution that could hold my gear which includes: Tamper, levelling tool and distribution tool Dosing cup 2 milk jugs PF A couple of cups and saucers Cleaning gear including brushes and cloths (preferably in a drawer) The more it uses vertical space the better - thinking a little free standing organisation unit but haven't found anything that would have the right sized compartments and not be either way too big or too small. I will keep poking around and post anything that looks interesting!
  8. That's a relief! I just saw the new model and thought since the Crono's wild popularity that it was game over. So these ones are upgrades over the stock 2020 model? (As well as a cure for the 2021 model for espresso).
  9. Hey everyone, suffice to say the opportunity on Cronos is over for now. Next cheapest with same grinding performance would be the Manuale but now the Cronos from this month onwards actually do have brew specific burrs. https://coff-hey.com/products/new-eureka-mignon-crono-coffee-grinder-matt-black?_pos=3&_sid=b8e0cd360&_ss=r To my knowledge the brew pro does have different burrs that are brew specific. I don't know of aftermarket burrs that fit and am waiting to find out if you could buy a Crono and a set of espresso burrs as Manuale spares to fit to it. I'm assuming that you could go this route or buy a Manuale/Facile as the next best value option.
  10. My knowledge is also limited - but I have stripped out all the electronics while rebuilding yet again and there is no modification or difference in components that I can see in that regard between a 2003 and 2013. I also cross referenced this against the wiring diagram. Hmmm, if we take the 570w figure from the 2013 boiler at 110v we get 1140w and then adding the 48w pump we arrive at 1188w which is approaching the right figure. However given that EU units would be running at 230v could they just have used the US number as arbitrary? I'm not sure what the indicator lights and solenoid would be rated at so it's hard to say but this is the only way the maths makes sense and would still mean there is no reason to believe a 1200w European Gaggia Classic would heat any slower than a 1425w one! I figured @Norvin meant between the EU and US versions. I guess the boiler is the same but wired differently for their lower mains voltage - but that wouldn't make that a different between boilers but rather configuration for country mains rating. I'm going GCSE physics on this one too - increasing the number of elements in series would lower the heat but it would still be higher because of the more powerful mains supply. In parallel both would get their 110v of juice but the total would still be lower. That's consistent with the fact that electric kettles are pretty unpopular in the US due to the less powerful supply. Presumably a Gaggia there takes a lot longer to come up to temp. Perhaps someone who understands electronics would be able to clarify on these points - this is just speculation and rudimentary understanding on my part!
  11. Haha oops, was having a brain-fail when I replied that. Yes you're absolutely right! The main myth I wanted to dispel with this thread is that 1425w units 'heat up faster' or have more powerful boilers. This doesn't seem to be the case at all. If you add the 65w Invensys pump to the calculation you get 1360w from the boiler and 65w from the pump which does make the 1425w rating. If you factor in the solenoid and indicator lights (albeit negligible) then it wouldn't be an accurate rating. Perhaps still 'close enough'. The 1200w rating is just baffling. That's 1360w and the 48w ULKA pumps that are more standard with these units would make it 1408w - again needing adjustment when factoring in the solenoid/lights.
  12. What else in the machine consumes power to operate aside from the boiler though? I figured that the boiler is the only thing unless you count the switch lights but that would be a trivial amount. Seems that the 1425w rating is wrong too.
  13. Just to update, the fuse seems pointless to me and is also redundant in my setup with the BoostBox anyway but I agree it doesn't seem worth the price if you didn't get it supplied with the machine. I got the drip tray guard to try out and I basically hate it! It protects from solenoid ejection splashing which was kind of a non problem for me in the first place but instead causes more splashing around the main part of the tray when you're flushing water through pf etc!
  14. Along the way with trying to get to my ultimate Gaggia Classic build, I often found wattage to be one of the issues why people prefer the older units (back when they were 1425w.) I understand other aspects like thicker casing/larger solenoid but this one seems to be a misunderstanding. These 1425w boilers are rumoured to be more powerful/heat up faster but between my 2013 (1200w) and 2003 (1425w) I have had a PID on both units and if anything the 2013 1200w one heats up faster! Having tinkered with both units in a variety of configurations with both boilers descaled, I noticed this and then had a look at the heating elements. Both units are specified at 680w at 120v. Going by that I don't see any reason a 1200w unit would heat up any slower than a 1425w unit. I guess logically that would make it a 1360w setup at 240v (680x2) across the 2 elements and all of the aluminium Gaggia boilers exactly the same in terms of real world performance. I would attribute my slightly faster heating 1200w boiler to it being 10 years newer if anything but other than that it seems to perform nearly identically. If I have missed something here, could anyone tell me why '1425w' units are preferred and explain why/where this rating comes from? This is the '1200w' 2013 boiler. Interestingly it is stamped at 570w at 110v and 680w at 120v. ] This is the '1425w' 2003. Same 680w rating per element at at 120v but weirdly 535w at 110v which is 35w lower despite this supposedly being the higher wattage boiler.
  15. Just to clarify this appears to be mythology in my experience. The boiler wattage is just an arbitrary number that appears to have been changed as regulations changed or for whatever reason. The boilers used are the same specification and I've tested an original boiler from a 1425w machine against a 1200w and the 1200w one was marginally faster to come to temperature according to PID. Assuming all other things are equal I would equate the slightly better performance from the '1200w' one to being 10 years newer. Both had been descaled - the heating elements have 680w/240v stamped into the heating element on one side so I guess that'd be 1360w between the 2 elements. The larger solenoid is a bit more attractive but the 2001 is not stainless if I recall correctly. It's a bit swings and roundabouts. The spot welds can fail on either but that isn't too difficult a fix so I wouldn't get too hung up on that either. I would favour 2003-2005 models which have the thicker gauge stainless steel as well as larger solenoid though that's by no means necessary!
  • Create New...