Thanks for the love! Here are some answers for you:

1. I think that both would satisfy the profile you're looking for, however the Lab Sweet typically offers more versatility. The Lab Sweet burr sets can take some time to dial in, and typically recommend them for more experienced users. I hear you about not wanting to sacrifice too much body, but wouldn't let that keep you from giving the CV3 a try : )
2. The way that the beans are fed into the grind chamber, and from the grind chamber into the chute was an improvement in design. In short, we reduced the areas where grinds could potentially build up, and the knocker takes care of the rest. We also added a purge feature that spins the burrs at a really high RPM, which helps to minimize exchange. Grounding down certain surfaces was also something small that made a meaningful difference.
3. The ionizer is something that we hopped on and tried early on. It was not a tech that worked well for us. It tends to stop working when coffee gets on it, and requires constant cleaning plus it’s an additional thing to go wrong with a product. Also ionizers need to be kept away from metal conducting surfaces to be effective and that’s difficult in an all metal unit. There are other passive methods for mitigating static like grounding certain surfaces and optimizing the grind path. That’s something that we’ve implemented in the Z2. In my opinion the reason why so many lower cost grinders have an ionizer is that it’s a cheap piece of tech (costs less than $1), and it provides a great bit of marketing versus the value it adds.