Coffee Forums banner

The 40 second shot

8K views 101 replies 27 participants last post by  Rob1 
#1 ·
In a completely non-argumentative way, does the above really exist? I mean, back in the day, the rule of thumb was loosely, if a shot was much under or over 30 seconds then it was either under or over extracted. Since this, fables have surfaced, around the word tasty, suddenly anything goes. People are pulling tasty 40, 50 and 60 second shots......if a shot is not prepared correctly, ir too much/too little coffee, tamp is wrong, grind is wrong then the output must be wrong. So, how does someone intentionally pull a 40 second shot on a nonprogrammable machine? Or, is this just another bout of coffee bollocks?
 
#2 ·
I regularly pull shots that are close to or over 40s eg with the latest compass mystery mk8 a 1:3 will take me over 40.....tastes good so I don't know what to say

Why can't you have one over 40

Or is the implication that my taste buds are shot?
 
#3 ·
jj-x-ray said:
I regularly pull shots that are close to or over 40s eg with the latest compass mystery mk8 a 1:3 will take me over 40.....tastes good so I don't know what to say

Why can't you have one over 40

Or is the implication that my taste buds are shot?
No implication of anything matey! But having been around coffee for years,the attitude is completely changing. What used to be yesterdays newspaper is now not tomorrows fish and chip paper......I just wonder if I can ask directly, how @DavecUK in his video targeted a 40 second 40 gm output shot.......even he will admit that in older written instructions sent out with machines and in general discussion, the old rule used to be 30 seconds as an absolute maximum
 
#4 ·
Shot times & brew times vary with grinder & bean. This is normal. The output relates more to the quantity of drink produced than it does to the time it takes to make.

Let's say you're average shot time is 30s, then 2/3 of your shots could be 25-35s, outliers could be 20-40s.

Your grinder, tamper & machine do specific tasks, but they can't really do much about the physical make up of the bean you use, mechanically speaking these might present different resistances against the brew water, yet still produce a reasonably similar result.

If your shots are 25s & a strength & balance you like then I don't see why you would want to set out to make a 40s shot, or vice versa.

Illy describes espresso as being a shot pulled in 15-50s.
 
#6 ·
dfk41 said:
I would agree with all of that Mark, but my taste buds are not that discerning, so I wonder how you decide to go from 30 to 40 seconds with a bean, presuming your tamp does not change and you substantially change the grind setting. How many people on here really have the ability to detect those changes
I wouldn't decide to do it, I would do what I normally do re. dose, prep & tamp, then maybe a new bean, or different grinder would dictate how long it took to get my target weight & a good flavour balance. And I'd live with it, rather than fight the tide.

I guess we have to assume people here make coffee they like and can tell the difference when they don't like it.
 
#7 ·
I would qualify that I am still a relative newcomer to "proper" coffee and am still wrapping my head around what is known Vs my own limited experience....

I have stopped using time as an indicator of quality tho.....the time is the time
 
#8 ·
It's really about flow rate and ramp rate. This will directly vary the time. Also if the shot is still seems to be extracting well and tasting good keep going. Over the years I have experimented with tighter grinds and slower flows, as long as the perfusion seems even, then why not
 
#9 ·
DavecUK said:
It's really about flow rate and ramp rate. This will directly vary the time. Also if the shot is still seems to be extracting well and tasting good keep going. Over the years I have experimented with tighter grinds and slower flows, as long as the perfusion seems even, then why not
But what is you do not have a profiling machine and are relatively new?
 
#10 ·
Over the time I have had this L1 and usually when changing beans I have had shots run long like this. Before I would set about immediately changing the grind to shorten this time but these days I try the result first after finding one of these was super flavoursome and sweet.

The result has been that in my book these can be even better this way.

Bear in mind I have smokers taste buds, use a lever and my favourite beans to date are Guji Highland (strong flavour) which seem to go well @ 45s for me.
 
#11 ·
I take on board peoples advice if I ask for it and they have been kind enough to share their experiences with me, but I've never been one for sticking to the rules just for the sake of it and have done quite a lot of experimenting with espresso particularly. What I found was to my tastes, darker roasts were sometimes better upto 40 seconds but could never really get on with short extractions of less than 22 or so seconds.

I've found light roasts much more picky. Anything over 30 or under 25 isn't usually that good for me.

After all these years and fads I still believe that 26 to 30 is the bet starting point, but it's just that, a starting point.
 
#12 ·
I'm fewer years in than others, but still need to fix one thing otherwise my head will explode with the sheer number of variable involved in this damned hobby.

30 ish seconds stands in my book.

Much longer, and it takes too long to get the requisite number of shots into me before I leave the house for work.

I aligned the burrs on my E37s on Friday. Result was the grind setting I had come to rely on where massively out. First two shots on Saturday were 90s then 60s. They were both just drinkable, but not my best. I wouldn't aim that long again, plus took what felt like ages to reach the volume. I recon i should have left them to run to a longer ratio, but it was enough to think about trying to adjust the grind to get back on parameters again.

I haven't been able to work out what which beans should be left to run longer.

Presumably, on considering, a lighter roast? The theory being the chemicals are harder to extract, so a longer contact time will allow more flavours to transfer to the water?

Hit me up the theory and I'm keen to lean more.
 
#13 ·
rob177palmer said:
I haven't been able to work out what which beans should be left to run longer.

Presumably, on considering, a lighter roast? The theory being the chemicals are harder to extract, so a longer contact time will allow more flavours to transfer to the water?

Hit me up the theory and I'm keen to lean more.
The beans that run longer in time, will just run longer, you won't need to make them.

Assuming the light roast & dark roasts you are talking about are normal, not charcoal, not under-developed, there probably won't be much difference. Origin could make more difference.

If you under-extract a dark roast it can be less face puckeringly sour than if you do a light roast, but if you're getting them both balanced then there might not be any difference.

If there is a difference, you could pull the dark roast to a shorter brew ratio, the lighter roast to a longer brew ratio. Dark roasts grind up finer at the same grinder setting, so again, the swings & roundabouts of it might still mean they overlap.

Time isn't really a variable as in something you deliberately change, grind & brew ratio are. At the same grind setting, putting more water through the puck will extract the solids more easily than keeping shots borderline feasible at the short end & trying to do to all with grind.

I find a ratio where the light roasts (I'm talking light filter roasts here) extract past sourness & stick to that. I'd rather my coffee was tasty, if a little weak (I don't add milk, or more water after pulling the shot). Then, if I have a darker roast, that seems flat, dull, or silty/powdery mouthfeel, I'll not change grind by much (if at all) and see if pulling less liquid out makes it more enjoyable. Like most folk I can't change pump pressure, or tweak flow rate, or temp & I keep everything else the same.
 
#17 ·
DavecUK said:
I "almost" wish I had not posted the video and carried on quietly making great coffee my own way, honed over decades.....
;)
Grumpy old git....LOL It was the very fact that you did post it that prompted me. I know that you know how to make coffee, fine tune etc......but, when advice given out to people is based on something being tasty, I scratch my head and wonder what the flip they are talking about. What I find tasty and you find tasty will differ. Can two coffees made with 30 second and 40 second pours both be tasty? Some people like roast beef cooked rare, some like it well done. No doubt it is tasty to both.

I just struggle when someone asks a question about a shot, to be told if it is tasty then don't worry......it is a mis use of the word, like the word fresh for coffee beans. How many people have the ability to really fine tune a shot by decreasing the grind a couple of thousand microns, keeping the same tamp and on their non pressure profiling machine change the ramp
 
#18 ·
dfk41 said:
Grumpy old git....LOL It was the very fact that you did post it that prompted me. I know that you know how to make coffee, fine tune etc......but, when advice given out to people is based on something being tasty, I scratch my head and wonder what the flip they are talking about. What I find tasty and you find tasty will differ. Can two coffees made with 30 second and 40 second pours both be tasty? Some people like roast beef cooked rare, some like it well done. No doubt it is tasty to both.

I just struggle when someone asks a question about a shot, to be told if it is tasty then don't worry......it is a mis use of the word, like the word fresh for coffee beans. How many people have the ability to really fine tune a shot by decreasing the grind a couple of thousand microns, keeping the same tamp and on their non pressure profiling machine change the ramp
I'm not sure what others can do, I tend to work with a specific machine and the way it wants to make coffee best. Certainly the Minima seems to shine at the 40 - 45 second mark. I'm not going to fight that, but simply roll with it.
 
#19 ·
There seems to be 2 "old" definitions of a single shot. Probably 30ml and 30 sec from the USA and 25ml and 25sec probably from Europe as 30ml is close to a USA fluid Oz.

I've mostly drunk MM to a huge extent since owning an espresso machine. ( DavecUK will love this ) I became used to the consistency a BE gave but have found more need for grinder setting variations on the fly since switching to flat burrs.

On the DB I set a fixed shot time of 30 sec on any bean. Then a baskets size and then a ratio. Due to grinder vagaries I have lately been trimming up shots via time if the ratio is significantly our from what I intended. Seems to be ok even pushing out to 35 sec, not so OK if pushed to 40 sec.

On MM I use 14g in and a 30 sec shot should give 35g out but taste wise I'm happy if it's over say 32. This removes the sweetness and slight earthy note the bean can have. On that basis I wouldn't argue if some one said I was over extracting. If I cut the shot time to 20 sec it goes sweet.

Personally I think over and under extraction is a myth perpetuated by farts. There are 2 Italian terms ristretto and lungo that in my view relate to water through the puck. So in one case I produce an MM ristretto and in another case a lungo. There is no rules on how that is done. As most commercial machines are volume related it suggests time should be used.

Standard basket sizes suggest other ratios. Light single 6g, standard single 7g, Ratio 1 to 4.17 and 1 to 3.57. Same for doubles.
;)
I've yet to try ones pushed that far.

John

-
 
#20 ·
dfk41 said:
Grumpy old git....LOL It was the very fact that you did post it that prompted me. I know that you know how to make coffee, fine tune etc......but, when advice given out to people is based on something being tasty, I scratch my head and wonder what the flip they are talking about. What I find tasty and you find tasty will differ. Can two coffees made with 30 second and 40 second pours both be tasty? Some people like roast beef cooked rare, some like it well done. No doubt it is tasty to both.

I just struggle when someone asks a question about a shot, to be told if it is tasty then don't worry......it is a mis use of the word, like the word fresh for coffee beans. How many people have the ability to really fine tune a shot by decreasing the grind a couple of thousand microns, keeping the same tamp and on their non pressure profiling machine change the ramp
"Tasty" might mean different things to different people, sure, if we are talking about specific characteristics, but there is little point in this, because even if we all used the same grinder, the same machine, we would still use different coffee which will taste different for well pulled shots.

The use of tasty isn't mysterious, it is simple...make something you like the taste of. It's not saying, 'there is only one right way', which would be limiting. We generally try a lot of different coffees, we expect them to taste different, but we don't really want any of them to be nasty. If you don't like a funky, tropical fruit natural, shot time isn't going to turn it into a caramel & nuts Brazil.

It's not quite the same as the steak analogy, a blue steak is a blue steak, a charred steak is very different, easily identifiable by sight, smell & taste (not possible to pull a shot like this, because the process is finished and you have your outcome, but you can stop the steak when you see it over-browning). They are at the ends of the spectrum, a lot of folks won't like either, some folks will tolerate one or the other, a very few will love one or the other. Think more like a medium steak? A bigger percentage of folk will find it acceptable, even if it sometimes comes out medium rare.

In the big picture, one person's 30s shot can easily be the same as another's 40s shot. For example, I made 6 shots at the same grind setting, all 18g dose. One was 54g out in 19s and a little tart, just a little (for me). So next shot pulled longer at 64g this took 24s, tasted more balanced, tartness is gone. Great, I now want the next one to be 64g too, except this only took 19s again, but still the tartness that I wasn't keen on was gone. These 6 shots all tasted at least OK to me, but the worst of them took 26s, the best of them also took 26s, but in total the range was 7 seconds and this was the difference between the best & 2nd best.

Your difference in shot time can be way over +/-10% and still produce good shots (if you like the coffee you have in the first place).

A couple of thousand microns is 2mm, this isn't fine tuning, it's more like going from Turkish to coarse drip, or back again. Everyone who has made a cup of coffee a couple of times would recognise this. Pressure/flow profiling isn't going to fix this, unless you can use it to make a 250ml mug from 18g in a single shot (not an Americano) :)
 
#23 ·
It would be useful to know what attributes make a particular coffee taste better with a long pour as opposed to a quick pour and vice versa. At the moment it seems to be trial and error and taste.

Obviously long pre infusion times will skew the comparison as we're looking at different machine capabilities.
 
#24 ·
lake_m said:
It would be useful to know what attributes make a particular coffee taste better with a long pour as opposed to a quick pour and vice versa. At the moment it seems to be trial and error and taste.

Obviously long pre infusion times will skew the comparison as we're looking at different machine capabilities.
We are getting there.......the original point I was making is how can an inexperienced person possibly have the knowledge to make a tasty 35 to 95 second shot without it simply being wrongly extracted
 
#25 ·
dfk41 said:
We are getting there.......the original point I was making is how can an inexperienced person possibly have the knowledge to make a tasty 35 to 95 second shot without it simply being wrongly extracted
As usual you are throwing in straw men, stretching the issue into absurdity (2000micron grind adjustments, 95sec shots), to make a point that isn't worth making. You're contributing to the confusion, not reducing it.

To determine whether a shot is tasty, you put it in your mouth - if you like it, then it's extracted OK. Do the same thing again (grind, dose, prep & weight out), if takes a little more/less time & you still like it, then you don't have a problem.
 
#26 ·
MWJB said:
As usual you are throwing in straw men, stretching the issue into absurdity (2000micron grind adjustments, 95sec shots), to make a point that isn't worth making. You're contributing to the confusion, not reducing it.

To determine whether a shot is tasty, you put it in your mouth - if you like it, then it's extracted OK. Do the same thing again (grind, dose, prep & weight out), if takes a little more/less time & you still like it, then you don't have a problem.
Wrong, I am highlighting the absurdity of every question being answered by the stock phrase, 'is it tasty'./
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top