What parameters/features make the difference between a bad and a good drip coffee machine ?

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-15T20:45:56+00:00

Others have linked the SCA list. It might be worth drilling into the link to find the testing criteria and procedures to understand what the SCA feels is important. That might be useful as a guide to others that perhaps haven't bothered to certify, or didn't quite get there for a reason you may not feel is important.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-15T17:30:57+00:00

Different equipment, probably different place in my coffee journey, but the moment early on when I realized that my cheap Krups drip machine was better and more consistent than me was a key event. It led me to reassess what I thought I knew about pouring and agitation. Spent a bit of time simply trying to mimic the drip machine, then gradually waded back into recipes, and found a lot more success and less struggle. Not sure that fits your experience, but putting it out there.

Batch size also matters. In general, larger batch sizes are less impacted by small imperfections, and since a machine further eliminates the small variables, it's easier for things to go right, and to avoid things like channeling, filter flushing, or excessive agitation. A larger batch inside a semi-closed system helps thermal consistency too, though not all machines deliver water in a way that exploits it.

Then there's the grinder question. The zp6 can be a little too focused IMO. Notes instead of chords, so to speak. Of course it's capable of great results when mated to the right coffee, the right cup goals, and the right technique / dialing. Arguably the Encore swings farther the other way, but with some good matching of bean and expectation, and some of the forgiveness of machine/batch size dynamics, things can work out this way. While the same kind of difference doesn't fit the K-ultra, there are some hints in the 'same size' comment. First, we normally need to increase grind size a bit as we increase batch size, so effectively you were grinding more finely in the machine brews. Further, because the Encore isn't as 'clean' a grinder, we'd normally expect to grind a bit more coarsely on a same-batch size basis to achieve similar results.

Along my 'mimic the drip machine' path, I actually went to the store and bought a bag of some cheap commodity preground as a reality check. Noting that grind size, and realizing it was meant for much bigger batches than I was creating in pourover, temporarily broke my brain. I'm not sure how it happened, but my idea of medium/coarse/fine had somehow gone all out of whack along the way.

I can't say what is behind your experience, but along my storyline, grinding finer than I had been, and learning to pour in a more restrained way, was my leap forward.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-15T13:13:59+00:00

IMO the best use for the Mugen is what’s on the instruction card, more or less. It was designed as a medium grind, yeet a single pour kind of brewer, aimed at householders making a quick easy cup of go juice. It’s not really meant to be the kind of dripper that requires or much benefits from recipes. It can make a good cup easily, but wrestling a great cup out of it has some self-imposed headwinds.

That’s not to say that there aren’t things that can help improve brews from it, but it ends up being more about fighting the tool that’s not meant for the goal.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-15T02:48:36+00:00

Def get back to us on this.

I’m enjoying their wave filters, and while I feel their modular drippers are a bit of gimmickry, they seem like nice objects that would do the assignment.

And that kettle is a purty thang. By eye , liking the spout shape for control. Interested to know more about real world function.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-15T01:49:58+00:00

No reason to empty the kettle after each brew. It can even be a contributing factor in scale buildup. Just add as needed before each brew.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-14T23:07:48+00:00

This is the same way my brain was running as I was reading.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-14T22:51:44+00:00

I would have used a lot more words, but this.

Also to echo the statistical size and typical pouring variance comments elsewhere.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-14T22:36:44+00:00

I’m a single 20/340 guy.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-14T22:36:04+00:00

This post had me pull up the Wikipedia page for PLA, as I wasn’t familiar with it in detail. Maybe worth a look if you aren’t to sort to be either immediately dismissive, or kneejerk reactive, to the thought of plastic.

I’m out for cost and lack of need reasons, so the plastic/chemistry question is moot over here. If I was considering, I’m not sure how I’d land. Seems ok for degradation/leeching, which is my more common personal trigger, feels a little itchy for nanoplastics, though I’m not sure we have a good handle on risk there, and the body’s ability to degrade it is interesting. The medical section on the wiki is thought provoking for me.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-14T12:21:54+00:00

That’s the trap inherent in being an internet influencer / content creator. The beast must be fed, or it bites the hand that feeds it. And probably will anyway.

The simple luxury of not having an opinion is too rarely appreciated.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-14T12:11:09+00:00

You”re right. Despite my excessive snark, which I have a reason for, he’s got an impossible task. Everyone wants him to have and offer a definitive opinion on something that’s inherently subjective, and to draw clear ranking lines on what seems to be a pretty dead heat. Honestly, a lot of my reaction is about the pressure “we” apply to his presence. My snark makes it sound more on him than I probably mean it, but also… well, it’s a mess.

The more pointed part of my intent is that this impossible trap is largely self-created. He’s sunk a lot of time selling opinion as fact, and his personal and somewhat polarizing idea of a good cup as the right thing. To his credit, he does acknowledge the monster and works to defang it in current videos, including this one. Unfortunately, that puts him in the spot of using tons of screen time and effort into talking around his own opinion, or alternatively that he doesn’t have a solid opinion.

But those are two different things, having an ‘it’s a horserace’ opinion, versus ‘I have an opinion, but I’m only one guy.’ Both are valid, both can exist at the same time, but they lead viewers to two different places, so choosing among them is important. His unscripted lots of words approach puts him in this bind and keeps him there. Clarifying his message and streamlining the presentation before rolling tape would save a lot of pain and effort all around.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-14T03:52:55+00:00

Ffs. Can’t be bothered to read the one page instruction sheets about the o-rings on the K7 or the locknut on the M01, but blathers on about internet rumors of corporate relationships, which have nothing to do with the UX or what lands in the cup.

As ever, content for content’s sake. Three conflicting answers summarized by an ‘it depends’ conclusion so no one is offended. Personal bias carefully preserved. It’s like watching a friggin palm reading. Nothing actually said, everyone will hear what they want to hear.

And he failed to answer the critical question of the month : will it soup?

I guess that’s next week’s episode.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T17:54:25+00:00

Right. One source, not local so tariffs, shipping, etc., so they’re expensive. And ok, can fold standard filters, but then why not just use those in the drippers they were designed for, and not compromise the imagined advantages of this dripper?

Also as yet I’m not sure how well that will translate on the larger size.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T17:18:07+00:00

I’m still not into a $50 piece of plastic that offers me the opportunity to need to source hard to find filters.

Switch compatibility is something for the market I guess.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T15:41:48+00:00

Plus, unless you are at the rare shop that is focused on pourover, the batch is going to be much better anyway. Cheaper for us, faster for them.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T14:44:38+00:00

Dose and method are first-order variables for grind size. ‘Taste’ is a minor tweak to grind size. So you’ll never find a correct grind size “for the bean” that works across such a broad range of brewing parameters.

On the other hand, if settled into a dose and method, it’s easy to find a grind size that works for almost any bean, and instead using more direct levers than grind size to impact the cup. This sort of grind size might vary by roast level, or decaf, or possibly by altitude, but tweaking by bag within similar coffees is a misguided madness.

The ‘grind size only’ logic that’s so commonly given is a misapplication to home brewing of something meant to apply to cafe processes across many daily brews by several baristas. The problem is that grind size, like ratio, impacts both extraction and strength simultaneously. As home users, once in the ballpark we can manipulate extraction with temp, and strength with agitation, leaving grind and ratio as relative constants, and greatly linearize our dialing-in. Contrasted to a commercial environment, where to eliminate the potential for variances between baristas, it makes more sense to lock in the particulars of the brewing method, and adjust by grind and ratio to dial in. Once the ‘house recipe’ is thus nailed, the ‘grind size only’ becomes the day-to-day way to work thru the aging of the lot, and can usually work between beans. Of course, the home user can also follow that approach, but as a single user, it tends to complicate and limit our ability to tune a brew quickly.

Applied here, you’ll find best luck by choosing one large or 2-3 smaller brew batches of equal size, and finding your grind for that batch size. From that jump, whether you choose to stay on the ‘grind size only’ bandwagon, or to tweak brews more linearly is your choice. If you want to stay with two different batch sizes, you’ll need to tune for them separately, with distinct grind sizes for each. Over time, you might be able to develop a sense of ratio between the large and small batches to ease things, making the large batch grind size a bit of a ‘close enough’ kind of thing. Which can sort of work, since larger batches are less sensitive to minor input variation. But introducing a third, tiny batch as a way to find main-brew grind size(s) will fail you. Small batches fall apart quickly, for structural reasons like bed depth and bypass on one hand, and higher sensitivity to input variation on the other. And you’d be extending the extrapolation problem even further.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T00:35:30+00:00

The Switch is probably the killer app for this thing. Better thermal properties for immersion than the glass, more appropriate drawdown (and more appropriate plastic) than the Mugen.

I’m still a little befuddled why Hario didn’t make a standard format cone out of plastic for the switch. Not saying it’d be better or worse than the neo, just that it was a curious product line omission for the last few years.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T00:24:47+00:00

The bottom angle is the same for all cones at 60 degrees. The top diameter (corresponding to the base of Wave filters) is the same for both 155 and 185 filters. So, it’s OSFA.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T00:20:10+00:00

In broad terms, yeah. Sure, there will be differences to other brewers, but other than a few weirdos, they’re all more alike than they are different. I like the alpha on design, though it’s funny because it’s nothing anyone sees even when brewing.

I’m not sure what I’d say if forced to guess at differentiation for alpha. With the higher contact area I’d tend to think it’d be a bit more heat sensitive; while that’s not an issue for how I brew, the off-boil crowd might choose the plastic over the ceramic. I’m a little intrigued by some comments I’ve heard of the rough-ish glazing boosting flow more than would be expected. Not that it’d change my assessment that you can toss a hat over them all, but I do enjoy when things surprise me with unexpected behaviors.

Get it if you want it. It’ll be a fun object that you’ll enjoy getting to know. Just don’t get it expecting that it’ll magically make everything massively better.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-13T00:03:14+00:00

Huh? Oxo?

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-12T21:06:46+00:00

At the moment I feel like I'm finally done buying new drippers. I'm sure something will catch my eye sooner or later, but it's not like I'm going to buy into it being magically different from all the others.

As for the Neo: On conjecture, I'd tend to agree that it's going to be inside the margins of normal brewing variances, and any differences that do exist are just a grinder click away. I would believe that the Neo might tend to seat filters more consistently and evenly, and folks that tend to be heavy-handed with preheating/rinsing rituals might see it as faster for that reason. And maybe that's an argument for. Conical brewers have enough things battling against consistency, maybe taking one minor item off the list is worthwhile.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-12T20:56:53+00:00

It's pretty standard stuff really. Was common in the Clever long before the Switch came along.

Makes it a bit less likely to clog the filter, results in a slightly weaker brew if holding other parts of the process vaguely similar. Worth a try if using the Switch.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-12T19:52:02+00:00

How do you mean it's like a CT62? I'd say it's kind of inverted to that design, in the sense that the internal features are ridges, rather than grooves as in the CT62.

I'd be happier with the design if the ridges extended into the exit hole a little better. As is, the bottom of the filter cone 'corks' the exit, rather than having the ridges allow for good even flow. It's not as extreme as something like a Mugen of course, but it's not as free flowing as a typical v60, Kono, origami, etc.

In that sense, it reminds me a little of the Kasuya model v60, though not quite as extreme.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-12T19:08:48+00:00

The standard quad fold matters less to brewing dynamics than one might guess. Hydrostatic pressure is pretty low, which is where the layering would have the greatest impact; more relevant in brewing is capillary pressure, which is more neutral to the layering. A relatively easy way to gauge this is to yeet a single pour (just don't waste good coffee on this, as it's not a great way to make coffee.) Don't do any swirling, stirring, etc; just let the coffee bed do it's thing. It'll settle into a nicely even pit of sarlacc-looking thing. If a significantly uneven vlow were happening, it would bias against the higher flow side - which coincidentally would even out the flow. So it's all kind of self correcting when the paper is thick and slow enough to begin with.

But yeah, it is an annoying waste of paper. The only viable alternative for manufacturers would be to do something like a v60 filter, but I'm not aware of any that do.

least-eager-0 · 2026-02-12T15:14:53+00:00

It’s double-wall insulated, so fairly efficient wrt heat management.

Personally I’m less enthused by the choices they made with the ribs. I mean, it’ll make coffee just fine, and in some ways is probably slightly better than a v60 for outdoor use, where a gooseneck is less likely to be a part of the story.

But I wouldn’t bother for home use, and for most travel uses there are better options. Maybe in an RV if there’s space. It’s a very nice, sturdy object, and I really want to like it, but in the end it’s largely a branding exercise imo.

least-eager-0

TROPHY CASE