| |
Main
Date: 01 Apr 2007 08:54:22
From: D. Ross
Subject: Air pressure espresso
|
Well, what with all the discussion of Travesso's machine, I remembered where
I had seen air pressure espresso extraction before: REI is selling a machine
from PrevaCafe which works this way. Maybe "Travesso" can tell us if there
is a connection:
"either with our pods or with your own grounds, its the best espresso you
can make on the summit of Mt Rainier." - Preva website
"When was the last time you had a godshot on top of Mt. McKinley? Either
have we, but we think the closest you can get, is with a Travesso." -
Travesso website
"espresso exists up to maybe 3,000 feet elevation.
Above that you better get a French Press." - David Schomer
- David R.
--
Less information than you ever thought possible:
http://www.demitasse.net
|
|
| |
Date: 03 Apr 2007 02:12:04
From: Flasherly
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
On Apr 1, 9:56 pm, "*alan*" <in_flagra...@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
> > There's nothing wrong with a mocha pot as long as you recognize that
> > it's a mocha pot.
>
> Can't even call it an inferior espresso maker?
Nope - one is predictability across the norm, which WWII espresso
connotes with the advent of automated crema, mocha lacks at all times
qualifiably, ostensibly (for Joe Java enduser) to produce with same
source beans. Another tangible is temperature. Inferences go as high
as 230F mokapot operability -- away from another espresso idiom bound
to 195-205F (sourer, relatively, the Italian style of "taste"
distinguished for non- percolated and -drip expectancy) -- or, back up
within steam, back to bitters, and definitely away from bleedin' PID
territory.
|
| |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 11:28:58
From: Ken Fox
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"D. Ross" <ross@math.hawaii.NOSPAM.edu > wrote in message
news:460f7134.40207835@localhost...
> >
> "espresso exists up to maybe 3,000 feet elevation.
> Above that you better get a French Press." - David Schomer
>
> - David R.
> --
> Less information than you ever thought possible:
> http://www.demitasse.net
The correct interpretation is that David Schomer can't make espresso above
3000 feet. And there those of us who think he has a few things to learn
about espressomaking and blending, at sea level.
Since espresso is made in a sealed portafilter which is experiencing around
9bar of pressure, the only relevant issue is the "boiling point" of the
espresso and its constituents, as they exit the portafilter at the end of
the extraction. I know for a fact that this has negligible to zero impact
at around 6000 feet, and doubt it significantly impacts espressomaking at
much below 9,000 feet.
ken
|
| | |
Date: 02 Apr 2007 00:24:13
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"Ken Fox" <morceaudemerdeThisMerdeGoes@hotmail.com > wrote:
|
| |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 09:04:37
From: Travesso
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
On Apr 1, 11:51 am, Barry Jarrett <b...@rileys-coffee.com > wrote:
> On 1 Apr 2007 06:47:19 -0700, "Travesso" <cpaso...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It seems
> >all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be overcome.
>
> the boiling point of water
But, water still boils 205 degrees at 4000'
At 11,500' water still boils at 191 degrees.
Shouldn't these temperatures be fine?
In addition, Illy has done some experiments of making espresso at room
temperature with ultra-high pressure. I can make espresso at
1200PSI. If I heat the cartridge, I can dangerously go well beyound
that pressure.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 13:36:12
From: Steve Ackman
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
In <1175443477.317079.210490@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com >, on 1 Apr
2007 09:04:37 -0700, Travesso wrote:
> On Apr 1, 11:51 am, Barry Jarrett <b...@rileys-coffee.com> wrote:
>> On 1 Apr 2007 06:47:19 -0700, "Travesso" <cpaso...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It seems
>> >all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be overcome.
>>
>> the boiling point of water
>
> But, water still boils 205 degrees at 4000'
> At 11,500' water still boils at 191 degrees.
> Shouldn't these temperatures be fine?
I lived at 6151' for a year and had no problems
making great espresso. Others have experience with
espresso at even higher altitudes, though I think
about 9000' is the highest I've heard of.
Boiling water at altitude:
http://twoloonscoffee.com/map/boiling_point.php
> In addition, Illy has done some experiments of making espresso at room
> temperature with ultra-high pressure. I can make espresso at
> 1200PSI. If I heat the cartridge, I can dangerously go well beyound
> that pressure.
Pressurize to just 600 PSI but increase the heat to
575°F and voila! Biodiesel.
Hmmm... 36 shots to move my jeep ten miles. Bet the
exhaust would smell lovely too. ;-)
|
| |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 06:47:19
From: Travesso
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
On Apr 1, 4:54 am, r...@math.hawaii.NOSPAM.edu (D. Ross) wrote:
> Well, what with all the discussion of Travesso's machine, I remembered where
> I had seen air pressure espresso extraction before: REI is selling a machine
> from PrevaCafe which works this way. Maybe "Travesso" can tell us if there
> is a connection:
>
> "either with our pods or with your own grounds, its the best espresso you
> can make on the summit of Mt Rainier." - Preva website
>
> "When was the last time you had a godshot on top of Mt. McKinley? Either
> have we, but we think the closest you can get, is with a Travesso." -
> Travesso website
>
> "espresso exists up to maybe 3,000 feet elevation.
> Above that you better get a French Press." - David Schomer
We have no connection with Preva or the aeropress. I have purchased
both in the last few month to compare. I don't think it is possible
to get either over 30 PSI. Neither company has answered any of my
questions.
The question that I really think you need to ask, is what happens to
plastic above 180 degrees. We actually had one of our units made out
of Nylon. It was OK until you put in 180+ water in it--it tasted like
chemicals.
I think I need to find a mountain. I am testign at 20' right now.
What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It seems
all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be overcome.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 15:51:07
From: Barry Jarrett
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
On 1 Apr 2007 06:47:19 -0700, "Travesso" <cpasoren@hotmail.com > wrote:
>What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It seems
>all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be overcome.
the boiling point of water
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 12:29:59
From: J. Clarke
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
Barry Jarrett wrote:
> On 1 Apr 2007 06:47:19 -0700, "Travesso" <cpasoren@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It seems
> >all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be overcome.
>
> the boiling point of water
A good trick would be a machine that maintains enough pressure in the
boiler and during extraction to allow the proper temperature to be
maintained but then cools the shot ten degrees or so in a controlled
manner so that it doesn't flash into steam when the pressure comes off.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 14:25:26
From: Jack Denver
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
I'm not sure that you really have to much special. I'm also not sure what
Schomer is talking about. Inside the PF, where the pressure is 9 bar, the
boiling point of water is way, way above any conceivable brewing
temperature. You could be in the vacuum of outer space and the shot would
still proceed up to the point where the brewed coffee left the basket holes.
At most altitudes, you could use a blend that extracts a little cooler -
Schomer's 203F is at the extreme of what most people consider a suitable
brew temp. Even if the brew is a little bit above the boiling point when
it emerges from the holes, the heat of vaporization will very quickly cool
it - what will happen is that a very small percentage of the shot will flash
to steam at any altitude where humans can breath and the rest of the shot
will remain just fine. So this is one of those Schomerlike broad sweeping
pronouncments that really are nothing more than his personal and often
misguided opinion. There are lots of espresso bars located in cities above
3000 ft. and they do just fine.
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net > wrote in message
news:euommp01k20@news2.newsguy.com...
> Barry Jarrett wrote:
>> On 1 Apr 2007 06:47:19 -0700, "Travesso" <cpasoren@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It seems
>> >all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be overcome.
>>
>> the boiling point of water
>
> A good trick would be a machine that maintains enough pressure in the
> boiler and during extraction to allow the proper temperature to be
> maintained but then cools the shot ten degrees or so in a controlled
> manner so that it doesn't flash into steam when the pressure comes off.
>
> --
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
>
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 15:58:01
From: J. Clarke
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
Jack Denver wrote:
> I'm not sure that you really have to much special. I'm also not sure
> what Schomer is talking about. Inside the PF, where the pressure is
> 9 bar, the boiling point of water is way, way above any conceivable
> brewing temperature.
Are the boilers on espresso machines other than steam toys sealed so
they build up steam pressure? Although a restrictor valve might allow
enough pressure to build.
> You could be in the vacuum of outer space and
> the shot would still proceed up to the point where the brewed coffee
> left the basket holes. At most altitudes, you could use a blend that
> extracts a little cooler - Schomer's 203F is at the extreme of what
> most people consider a suitable brew temp. Even if the brew is a
> little bit above the boiling point when it emerges from the holes,
> the heat of vaporization will very quickly cool it - what will happen
> is that a very small percentage of the shot will flash to steam at
> any altitude where humans can breath and the rest of the shot will
> remain just fine. So this is one of those Schomerlike broad sweeping
> pronouncments that really are nothing more than his personal and
> often misguided opinion. There are lots of espresso bars located in
> cities above 3000 ft. and they do just fine.
>
>
>
> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:euommp01k20@news2.newsguy.com...
>> Barry Jarrett wrote:
>>> On 1 Apr 2007 06:47:19 -0700, "Travesso" <cpasoren@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It
>>> seems >all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be
>>> overcome.
>>>
>>> the boiling point of water
>>
>> A good trick would be a machine that maintains enough pressure in the
>> boiler and during extraction to allow the proper temperature to be
>> maintained but then cools the shot ten degrees or so in a controlled
>> manner so that it doesn't flash into steam when the pressure comes
>> off.
>>
>> --
>> --
>> --John
>> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
>> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 16:44:39
From: *alan*
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"J. Clarke" wrote
[...]
> Are the boilers on espresso machines other than steam toys sealed so
> they build up steam pressure?
[...]
Just curious about the what appears to be a gratuitous denigration of
steam-pressure dependent espresso machines. It seems that at least 90% of
the references in this newsgroup to such machines employ the word "toy".
Is that an intentionally mean-spirited term intended to make it clear that
the poster is a member in good standing with the fraternity of pump-driven
machine owners? I don't believe I've ever read any postings which refer to
"French-press toys", "Aeropress toys", or "vacuum toys". Why do you suppose
steam driven espresso machines seem to be singled out for this epithet?
Perhaps the term has been used so often that it no longer conveys what was
originally meant as an obvious prejudicial snub, and the term is currently
used out of unthinking habit, and is actually now quite neutral?
Just curious . . .
--
Alan
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Apr 2007 05:38:45
From: Danny
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
*alan* wrote:
> Just curious about the what appears to be a gratuitous denigration of
> steam-pressure dependent espresso machines. It seems that at least 90%
> of the references in this newsgroup to such machines employ the word "toy".
>
> Is that an intentionally mean-spirited term intended to make it clear
> that the poster is a member in good standing with the fraternity of
> pump-driven machine owners? I don't believe I've ever read any postings
> which refer to "French-press toys", "Aeropress toys", or "vacuum toys".
> Why do you suppose steam driven espresso machines seem to be singled out
> for this epithet?
>
> Perhaps the term has been used so often that it no longer conveys what
> was originally meant as an obvious prejudicial snub, and the term is
> currently used out of unthinking habit, and is actually now quite neutral?
>
> Just curious . . .
> --
> Alan
A Moka pot is just that, and a Cafetiere is just that, and an espresso
machine is just that, *provided* it has a means of developing the
required pressure for espresso extraction (usually by employing a pump
or spring lever etc)
So called steam toys are just that. They are called espresso
machines, but do not possess the ability to generate 9 bar of
pressure, instead relying on the steam pressure in the boiler to brew
the shot. This results in, (usually), overly hot coffee and various
portafilter "enhancements" that attempt to generate a higher pressure
by restricting the flow (not the same as pumping) or other
crema-enhancing discs etc. They generally also emply various steam
wand additions to aid the creation of frothy milk, something else
which is a world apart from properly steamed milk.
Nobody objects to Moka pots, as long as one doesn't call them espresso
machines (since they don't produce espresso), whereas "steam toys" are
sold as espresso machines. At least with a moka pot once can produce
a nice coffee.
That said, a lot of people start on these steam machines (I did) and
enjoyed what it made, until they discovered better machines, so they
serve as an introduction as long as one moves on.
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
(apparently bad grammar but I like it that way...)
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Apr 2007 06:49:55
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Apr 2007 18:36:47
From: Danny
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
D. Ross wrote:
>
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Apr 2007 18:35:58
From: Danny
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
D. Ross wrote:
>
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 20:07:48
From: J. Clarke
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
*alan* wrote:
> "J. Clarke" wrote
> [...]
>> Are the boilers on espresso machines other than steam toys sealed so
>> they build up steam pressure?
> [...]
>
> Just curious about the what appears to be a gratuitous denigration of
> steam-pressure dependent espresso machines. It seems that at least
> 90% of the references in this newsgroup to such machines employ the
> word "toy".
>
> Is that an intentionally mean-spirited term intended to make it clear
> that the poster is a member in good standing with the fraternity of
> pump-driven machine owners? I don't believe I've ever read any
> postings which refer to "French-press toys", "Aeropress toys", or
> "vacuum toys". Why do you suppose steam driven espresso machines
> seem to be singled out for this epithet?
They're basically self-heating mocha pots with a milk-heating accessory.
There's nothing wrong with a mocha pot as long as you recognize that
it's a mocha pot.
A french-press doesn't pretend to be an espresso machine. Neither does
a vacuum pot or a drip machine or a percolator. It's only the steam
machines that make that pretense.
> Perhaps the term has been used so often that it no longer conveys
> what was originally meant as an obvious prejudicial snub, and the
> term is currently used out of unthinking habit, and is actually now
> quite neutral?
>
> Just curious . . .
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Apr 2007 01:56:56
From: *alan*
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net > wrote in message
news:eupiqs02luk@news2.newsguy.com...
> *alan* wrote:
>> "J. Clarke" wrote
>> [...]
>>> Are the boilers on espresso machines other than steam toys sealed so
>>> they build up steam pressure?
>> [...]
>>
>> Just curious about the what appears to be a gratuitous denigration of
>> steam-pressure dependent espresso machines. It seems that at least
>> 90% of the references in this newsgroup to such machines employ the
>> word "toy".
>>
>> Is that an intentionally mean-spirited term intended to make it clear
>> that the poster is a member in good standing with the fraternity of
>> pump-driven machine owners? I don't believe I've ever read any
>> postings which refer to "French-press toys", "Aeropress toys", or
>> "vacuum toys". Why do you suppose steam driven espresso machines
>> seem to be singled out for this epithet?
>
> They're basically self-heating mocha pots with a milk-heating accessory.
Oh my! "a milk-heating accessory". Are you saying that "steam toys" can't
even froth or steam milk properly? Forgive me, but it does seem that you're
being over-zealously harsh on machines which, until the advent of
pump-driven models, used to make "espresso". (Apologies to all those here
who insist, in opposition to the speech community at large, that only
pump-driven machines make "espresso". I know from previous postings that
the word "espresso" has a very narrowly defined meaning within the confines
of the "profession" and its afficionados and I don't wish to open that can
of worms. I do not disagree with the notion that a pump-driven machine can
make a better-tasting espresso --- I was merely taking issue with the
gratuitous denigration of steam driven machines as "toys".
> There's nothing wrong with a mocha pot as long as you recognize that
> it's a mocha pot.
Can't even call it an inferior espresso maker?
>
> A french-press doesn't pretend to be an espresso machine. Neither does
> a vacuum pot or a drip machine or a percolator. It's only the steam
> machines that make that pretense.
>
>> Perhaps the term has been used so often that it no longer conveys
>> what was originally meant as an obvious prejudicial snub, and the
>> term is currently used out of unthinking habit, and is actually now
>> quite neutral?
>>
>> Just curious . . .
>
> --
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
>
>
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 23:07:17
From: Jack Denver
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"*alan*" <in_flagrante@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:IpZPh.1857$5e2.996@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
>
>
> Oh my! "a milk-heating accessory". Are you saying that "steam toys"
> can't even froth or steam milk properly?
Depends on which one. I've used ones where the steam was rather pathetic.
Forgive me, but it does seem that you're
> being over-zealously harsh on machines which, until the advent of
> pump-driven models, used to make "espresso".
We also used to fly around in unpressurized aircraft but if you bought a
ticket on United and they put you in the back of a Ford Tri-motor you'd be
upset. In any event the commercial steam driven models of the past had huge
boilers and were a far cry from the little home versions. A very small
poodle is called a "toy" poodle and a small espresso machine is a "toy"
espresso machine. A mocha pot (which works on very much the same principle)
is not a "toy" because it's not a miniature version of anything.
(Apologies to all those here
> who insist, in opposition to the speech community at large, that only
> pump-driven machines make "espresso". I know from previous postings that
> the word "espresso" has a very narrowly defined meaning within the
> confines of the "profession" and its afficionados and I don't wish to open
> that can of worms. I do not disagree with the notion that a pump-driven
> machine can make a better-tasting espresso --- I was merely taking issue
> with the gratuitous denigration of steam driven machines as "toys".
As the others said, the denigration is a counter -reaction to manufacturers
don't make the distinction clear - indeed actively confuse people - there
must be countless people who have been saddled with a machine that doesn't
really do what they want it to do ("make coffee like at Starbucks") because
they don't know the difference and the copy on the box doesn't really say.
So if we can get save one person from being fooled this way then it will be
worth having insulted an inanimate object.
>
>> There's nothing wrong with a mocha pot as long as you recognize that
>> it's a mocha pot.
>
> Can't even call it an inferior espresso maker?
>>
>> A french-press doesn't pretend to be an espresso machine. Neither does
>> a vacuum pot or a drip machine or a percolator. It's only the steam
>> machines that make that pretense.
>>
>>> Perhaps the term has been used so often that it no longer conveys
>>> what was originally meant as an obvious prejudicial snub, and the
>>> term is currently used out of unthinking habit, and is actually now
>>> quite neutral?
>>>
>>> Just curious . . .
>>
>> --
>> --
>> --John
>> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
>> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
>>
>>
>
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 22:48:18
From: J. Clarke
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
*alan* wrote:
> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:eupiqs02luk@news2.newsguy.com...
>> *alan* wrote:
>>> "J. Clarke" wrote
>>> [...]
>>>> Are the boilers on espresso machines other than steam toys sealed
>>>> so they build up steam pressure?
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Just curious about the what appears to be a gratuitous denigration
>>> of steam-pressure dependent espresso machines. It seems that at
>>> least 90% of the references in this newsgroup to such machines
>>> employ the word "toy".
>>>
>>> Is that an intentionally mean-spirited term intended to make it
>>> clear that the poster is a member in good standing with the
>>> fraternity of pump-driven machine owners? I don't believe I've
>>> ever read any postings which refer to "French-press toys",
>>> "Aeropress toys", or "vacuum toys". Why do you suppose steam
>>> driven espresso machines seem to be singled out for this epithet?
>>
>> They're basically self-heating mocha pots with a milk-heating
>> accessory.
>
> Oh my! "a milk-heating accessory". Are you saying that "steam
> toys" can't even froth or steam milk properly? Forgive me, but it
> does seem that you're being over-zealously harsh on machines which,
> until the advent of pump-driven models, used to make "espresso".
> (Apologies to all those here who insist, in opposition to the speech
> community at large, that only pump-driven machines make "espresso".
> I know from previous postings that the word "espresso" has a very
> narrowly defined meaning within the confines of the "profession" and
> its afficionados and I don't wish to open that can of worms. I do
> not disagree with the notion that a pump-driven machine can make a
> better-tasting espresso --- I was merely taking issue with the
> gratuitous denigration of steam driven machines as "toys".
Life's too short to waste any of it on people whose sole purpose in life
is to argue nomenclature.
<plonk >
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Apr 2007 23:14:31
From: *alan*
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"J. Clarke" wrote
[...]
> Life's too short to waste any of it on people whose sole purpose in life
> is to argue nomenclature.
>
> <plonk>
I quite agree. And way too short, as well, to waste on those who have the
temerity to divine one's purpose in life from a newsgroup posting.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Apr 2007 00:58:09
From: *alan*
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net > wrote in message
news:eupiqs02luk@news2.newsguy.com...
> *alan* wrote:
>> "J. Clarke" wrote
>> [...]
>>> Are the boilers on espresso machines other than steam toys sealed so
>>> they build up steam pressure?
>> [...]
>>
>> Just curious about the what appears to be a gratuitous denigration of
>> steam-pressure dependent espresso machines. It seems that at least
>> 90% of the references in this newsgroup to such machines employ the
>> word "toy".
>>
>> Is that an intentionally mean-spirited term intended to make it clear
>> that the poster is a member in good standing with the fraternity of
>> pump-driven machine owners? I don't believe I've ever read any
>> postings which refer to "French-press toys", "Aeropress toys", or
>> "vacuum toys". Why do you suppose steam driven espresso machines
>> seem to be singled out for this epithet?
>
> They're basically self-heating mocha pots with a milk-heating accessory.
> There's nothing wrong with a mocha pot as long as you recognize that
> it's a mocha pot.
>
> A french-press doesn't pretend to be an espresso machine. Neither does
> a vacuum pot or a drip machine or a percolator. It's only the steam
> machines that make that pretense.
I see. I suppose I was a little confused by your phrase "espresso machines
other than steam toys" which led me to believe that you'd included "steam
toys" in the category of "espresso machines"
>
>> Perhaps the term has been used so often that it no longer conveys
>> what was originally meant as an obvious prejudicial snub, and the
>> term is currently used out of unthinking habit, and is actually now
>> quite neutral?
>>
>> Just curious . . .
>
> --
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
>
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 18:49:01
From: Barry Jarrett
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:25:26 -0400, "Jack Denver"
<nunuvyer@netscape.net > wrote:
>will remain just fine. So this is one of those Schomerlike broad sweeping
>pronouncments that really are nothing more than his personal and often
>misguided opinion. There are lots of espresso bars located in cities above
>3000 ft. and they do just fine.
yep. we were making lovely espresso at 10,000ft when the roasters'
guild retreat was at keystone. the crema was copious and a bit fizzy,
but that was expected.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Apr 2007 14:35:24
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: Air pressure espresso
|
"Jack Denver" <nunuvyer@netscape.net > wrote in message
news:3Iidney1KciLZJLbnZ2dnUVZ_vqpnZ2d@comcast.com...
> I'm not sure that you really have to much special. I'm also not sure
> what Schomer is talking about. Inside the PF, where the pressure is 9
> bar, the boiling point of water is way, way above any conceivable
> brewing temperature. You could be in the vacuum of outer space and the
> shot would still proceed up to the point where the brewed coffee left
> the basket holes. At most altitudes, you could use a blend that
> extracts a little cooler - Schomer's 203F is at the extreme of what
> most people consider a suitable brew temp. Even if the brew is a
> little bit above the boiling point when it emerges from the holes, the
> heat of vaporization will very quickly cool it - what will happen is
> that a very small percentage of the shot will flash to steam at any
> altitude where humans can breath and the rest of the shot will remain
> just fine. So this is one of those Schomerlike broad sweeping
> pronouncments that really are nothing more than his personal and often
> misguided opinion. There are lots of espresso bars located in cities
> above 3000 ft. and they do just fine.
>
>
A really higher extreme would be Dr. John's Malabar Gold, which he
recommends be extracted from 205°F - 209°F@ 9 bars.
http://www.josuma.com/documents/espresso_testing.pdf
Cheers,
Craig.
>
> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:euommp01k20@news2.newsguy.com...
>> Barry Jarrett wrote:
>>> On 1 Apr 2007 06:47:19 -0700, "Travesso" <cpasoren@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >What are the facters that would limit espresso over 3000'? It
>>> seems
>>> >all of them (that I can think of) should be able to be overcome.
>>>
>>> the boiling point of water
>>
>> A good trick would be a machine that maintains enough pressure in the
>> boiler and during extraction to allow the proper temperature to be
>> maintained but then cools the shot ten degrees or so in a controlled
>> manner so that it doesn't flash into steam when the pressure comes
>> off.
>>
>> --
>> --
>> --John
>> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
>> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
>>
>>
>
>
|
|
