coffee-forum.net
Promoting coffee discussion.

Main
Date: 11 Dec 2006 12:58:04
From: phreaddy
Subject: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
Is the Espro worth the money? I know there's a lot of debate over
wether 30lbs. makes any difference, anyway ...





 
Date: 12 Dec 2006 10:53:29
From: Heat + Beans
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
I- >Ian wrote:

> For the most part, I agree. I don't use a doser because I hate the
> clack. I use the WDT and for my 2p moving the needle across the basket
> makes a better distribution than circular. Two taps on the counter to
> over dose, then level, tamp and load.

Sounds like a pretty good protocol. Cross-basket instead of circular.
Two taps instead of one or three. Probably follow that routine time
after time. Correct?
>
> Almost no tamp, 10, 20, 30 or all 98lbs makes almost no difference.

"2 "almosts" in a single sentence here. I can live with a little
hedging. But I suspect that in spite of your empirical evidence you
have settled on a tamp that at least "feels" somewhat
consistent-----possibly avoiding your stated extremes of 10 and 98 lbs.
Correct?

> Assuming an adequate grind, even distribution and level tamp are two
> orders of magnitude more important than the tamp pressure.

I'm not very good at estimating "orders of magnitude" in these matters.
But yes, grind and distribution are key. Maybe more important than a
degree or two of temp F. But we still pay attention to temp.
>
> If noobs learned to dose properly and level tamp, the tamp pressure
> debate would disappear.

I don't think so, since this doesn't seem to be a disagreement among
noobs, but among people who've logged in some years behind the pf.
There are a couple of tamp pressure issues in this thread.

Is a particular pressure "best"? Quickly and unanimously answered,
"no."

Is it worth paying attention to a consistent pressure? A couple of
unequivocal "NO" answers. But I'm holding out for a qualified "Yes, a
consistent tamp contributes to consistent shots."
>
> Since someone mentioned Schomer earlier, I first bought an electric
> grinder based on his Solis recommendation around the turn of the
> century. Wot a yoke! I

I mentioned Schomer because of his influence, not because of his
Revealed Word, and not intending to provoke another Schomer rant. I
suspect that Espro's 30# "standard" is derived from Schomer. Like
Schomer, they might just have well have chosen a 27# or 32# click
point or more modestly acknowledged that their 30# decision is
somewhat arbitrary but good enough as a consistency target. BTW,
another company makes a clicker also at 30#, probably for the same
reason.

My advice to noobs is if an extra $20-50 isn't too off-putting, and it
doesn't come out of your grinder budget, go for it. Get the clicker.
Nice tamper. Be consistent.
>
tin



  
Date: 12 Dec 2006 19:17:26
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
On 12 Dec 2006 10:53:29 -0800, "Heat + Beans" <heatgunroast@gmail.com >
wrote:

>I->Ian wrote:
>
>> For the most part, I agree. I don't use a doser because I hate the
>> clack. I use the WDT and for my 2p moving the needle across the basket
>> makes a better distribution than circular. Two taps on the counter to
>> over dose, then level, tamp and load.
>
>Sounds like a pretty good protocol. Cross-basket instead of circular.
>Two taps instead of one or three. Probably follow that routine time
>after time. Correct?

Correct.

>>
>> Almost no tamp, 10, 20, 30 or all 98lbs makes almost no difference.
>
>"2 "almosts" in a single sentence here. I can live with a little
>hedging. But I suspect that in spite of your empirical evidence you
>have settled on a tamp that at least "feels" somewhat
>consistent-----possibly avoiding your stated extremes of 10 and 98 lbs.
> Correct?
>
Correct, but I have tried the variance stated. On the low end, I need
to underdose slightly by using 0.5 taps to ensure I don't tear the
puck on the shower screen. Above about ~15-20, no appreciable
difference in the compression of the coffee.

>Is it worth paying attention to a consistent pressure? A couple of
>unequivocal "NO" answers. But I'm holding out for a qualified "Yes, a
>consistent tamp contributes to consistent shots."

A consistent tamp preserves what has gone before.
Put another way, if the grind, dose, distribution or level are all
over the map, a perfect 30# tamp ain't gonna save the day.

>My advice to noobs is if an extra $20-50 isn't too off-putting, and it
>doesn't come out of your grinder budget, go for it. Get the clicker.
>Nice tamper. Be consistent.
>>
>tin

By all means be consistent in everything up to the tamp.
$50 of coffee to practise pays higher dividends.


 
Date: 12 Dec 2006 08:05:17
From: phreaddy
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
OK, thanks, guys. I ordered the Lava. Don't laugh, but I've been using
the original POS that came with Silva, since I bought her three years
ago. I tamped on a bathroom scale for the first year, so I don't feel
that's an issue. And while I'm sure a properly sized tamper will make a
difference (that is, after all, why I am finally buying one) I feel
I've gotten pretty good at compensating for the size deficit by doing
this ritual of tamp around the edges first, tamp in the middle, polish,
and tamp lightly what the polish kicked up from the edges.



 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 20:56:13
From: Flasherly
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?

Harry Moos wrote:
> taste. So I no longer worry about a consistent tamp pressure, as long as
> the coffee is level and polished with no channels around the edge of the pf.

A Goody barber brush, I liked well enough to cut the hog's hairs and
glue as a handle for another tamp I removed for it's flat bottom. But,
it isn't precisely fit to the PF and that's annoying. I'll need to
wrap the PF inside with something negligibly thin to pull for an o-die,
center the tamp in, and repour and polish the edges of tamp backside
with composite epoxy. Maybe an extra unused single-shot for the die.
Lithium grease.



 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 17:35:39
From: Heat + Beans
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
I- >Ian wrote:

> The tamp pressure is the least important variable.

And consistent pressure is important in order to focus on variables
that matter more. Pressure can be variable, but shouldn't be random
because you haven't trained yourself to "feel" with consistency.

> IMO, a tamper that allows you to gauge the depth and level of the tamp
> is much more useful than an arbitrary 10-20-30-50#.

I agree (though I'd scratch the 50#). Selecting a pressure is
arbitrary only if you get into a debate about what's the "best" weight.
So Schumer says "30#. That's arbitrary in the sense that he might
just as well have said 27# or 15#. But he thinks 30 is best. Fine
with me. As a pragmatic matter, he wanted to standardize his
employees' tamps for many of the same reasons that I want to
standardize my own. Keep the tamp consistent and control your shot with
grind. Pretty basid

I also rely on depth, but this requires attention to how much I load
into the basket (related to, but not exclusively, the weight of beans).
If you adjust your pressure to achieve a desired depth, your shots
will be variable.

> I like my custom Reg Barber Tall Bubinga American Curve for just that
> reason. The piston is sized to perfectly fit the basket and the height
> is perfect for gauging both level and depth.

Again, this is an important standard for me as well, and I was able to
accomplish it with the Espro----it is, after all, a well built and
comfortable tamper. It also provided the added value of a pressure
"check."

tin

It's only better than my generic for those reasons.



  
Date: 11 Dec 2006 21:00:49
From: Moka Java
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
Heat + Beans wrote:
>
>
> I agree (though I'd scratch the 50#). Selecting a pressure is
> arbitrary only if you get into a debate about what's the "best" weight.
> So Schumer says "30#. That's arbitrary in the sense that he might
> just as well have said 27# or 15#. But he thinks 30 is best. Fine
> with me. As a pragmatic matter, he wanted to standardize his
> employees' tamps for many of the same reasons that I want to
> standardize my own. Keep the tamp consistent and control your shot with
> grind. Pretty basid

Have you tested this yourself? Try a consistent dose, weigh the beans
if you want. Then pull a series of shots with no tamp, a tamp lighter
than your usual, your usual and a heavier tamp. I saw no appreciable
difference in shot time, appearance or taste with either my retired
PID'd Silvia or the Andreja. Does your mileage vary?

>
> I also rely on depth, but this requires attention to how much I load
> into the basket (related to, but not exclusively, the weight of beans).
> If you adjust your pressure to achieve a desired depth, your shots
> will be variable.

From my casual observations it seems that it is most important to keep
the dose consistent, have the grinds evenly distributed in the basket
and level.

R "keep it on the level" TF


   
Date: 11 Dec 2006 21:45:03
From: Ken Fox
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
"Moka Java" <rtwatches@fishyahoo.com > wrote in message
news:4u6gnjF14g00sU1@mid.individual.net...
> Heat + Beans wrote:
>>
>>
>> I agree (though I'd scratch the 50#). Selecting a pressure is
>> arbitrary only if you get into a debate about what's the "best" weight.
>> So Schumer says "30#. That's arbitrary in the sense that he might
>> just as well have said 27# or 15#. But he thinks 30 is best. Fine
>> with me. As a pragmatic matter, he wanted to standardize his
>> employees' tamps for many of the same reasons that I want to
>> standardize my own. Keep the tamp consistent and control your shot with
>> grind. Pretty basid
>
> Have you tested this yourself? Try a consistent dose, weigh the beans if
> you want. Then pull a series of shots with no tamp, a tamp lighter than
> your usual, your usual and a heavier tamp. I saw no appreciable
> difference in shot time, appearance or taste with either my retired PID'd
> Silvia or the Andreja. Does your mileage vary?
>
>>
>> I also rely on depth, but this requires attention to how much I load
>> into the basket (related to, but not exclusively, the weight of beans).
>> If you adjust your pressure to achieve a desired depth, your shots
>> will be variable.
>
> From my casual observations it seems that it is most important to keep the
> dose consistent, have the grinds evenly distributed in the basket and
> level.
>
> R "keep it on the level" TF

The only thing I have ever done with basket preparation that made any
repeatable difference at all (for me) was to be more "generous" with the
amount of coffee I put in (i.e. being willing to "waste" some in the process
of distribution), to updose consistently, and to use a tamper that makes a
near friction fit with my baskets. I have a number of different basket
types but at the moment I'm using knockoff baskets I got from
coffeeparts.com which coincidentally make a friction fit with my Bumper
tamper. This allows automatic levelling since the tamper fits in only more
or less level. I have other similar baskets that fit another tamper better,
and occasionally I swap them then use the other tamper, for variety, with
the same results. Tamping pressure is unimportant in the range that I use
(3-10lbs).

Still, the most important thing of all, I think, is to operate the doser
while the grinder is operating, to overload the basket, and then to pinkie
sweep whatever size mound you want to use. By overdosing while rapidly
operating the doser, you distribute the grounds all around and the
overdosing allows you to be certain there are no big gaps in the basket, no
"holes," through which the water will channel. By being willing to "waste"
2g of coffee with each shot, I've reduced my sink shots by more than half.

The rest is all fluff, in my opinion.

ken




    
Date: 12 Dec 2006 05:37:56
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 21:45:03 -0700, "Ken Fox"
<morceaudemerdeThisMerdeGoes@hotmail.com > wrote:

>"Moka Java" <rtwatches@fishyahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:4u6gnjF14g00sU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Heat + Beans wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree (though I'd scratch the 50#). Selecting a pressure is
>>> arbitrary only if you get into a debate about what's the "best" weight.
>>> So Schumer says "30#. That's arbitrary in the sense that he might
>>> just as well have said 27# or 15#. But he thinks 30 is best. Fine
>>> with me. As a pragmatic matter, he wanted to standardize his
>>> employees' tamps for many of the same reasons that I want to
>>> standardize my own. Keep the tamp consistent and control your shot with
>>> grind. Pretty basid
>>
>> Have you tested this yourself? Try a consistent dose, weigh the beans if
>> you want. Then pull a series of shots with no tamp, a tamp lighter than
>> your usual, your usual and a heavier tamp. I saw no appreciable
>> difference in shot time, appearance or taste with either my retired PID'd
>> Silvia or the Andreja. Does your mileage vary?
>>
>>>
>>> I also rely on depth, but this requires attention to how much I load
>>> into the basket (related to, but not exclusively, the weight of beans).
>>> If you adjust your pressure to achieve a desired depth, your shots
>>> will be variable.
>>
>> From my casual observations it seems that it is most important to keep the
>> dose consistent, have the grinds evenly distributed in the basket and
>> level.
>>
>> R "keep it on the level" TF
>
>The only thing I have ever done with basket preparation that made any
>repeatable difference at all (for me) was to be more "generous" with the
>amount of coffee I put in (i.e. being willing to "waste" some in the process
>of distribution), to updose consistently, and to use a tamper that makes a
>near friction fit with my baskets. I have a number of different basket
>types but at the moment I'm using knockoff baskets I got from
>coffeeparts.com which coincidentally make a friction fit with my Bumper
>tamper. This allows automatic levelling since the tamper fits in only more
>or less level. I have other similar baskets that fit another tamper better,
>and occasionally I swap them then use the other tamper, for variety, with
>the same results. Tamping pressure is unimportant in the range that I use
>(3-10lbs).
>
>Still, the most important thing of all, I think, is to operate the doser
>while the grinder is operating, to overload the basket, and then to pinkie
>sweep whatever size mound you want to use. By overdosing while rapidly
>operating the doser, you distribute the grounds all around and the
>overdosing allows you to be certain there are no big gaps in the basket, no
>"holes," through which the water will channel. By being willing to "waste"
>2g of coffee with each shot, I've reduced my sink shots by more than half.
>
>The rest is all fluff, in my opinion.
>
>ken
>

For the most part, I agree. I don't use a doser because I hate the
clack. I use the WDT and for my 2p moving the needle across the basket
makes a better distribution than circular. Two taps on the counter to
over dose, then level, tamp and load.

Almost no tamp, 10, 20, 30 or all 98lbs makes almost no difference.

Assuming an adequate grind, even distribution and level tamp are two
orders of magnitude more important than the tamp pressure.

If noobs learned to dose properly and level tamp, the tamp pressure
debate would disappear.

Since someone mentioned Schomer earlier, I first bought an electric
grinder based on his Solis recommendation around the turn of the
century. Wot a yoke! I put it in the cupboard and went back to using
my hand crank. Sadly, I futzed aroud with several other mediocre
grinders before getting the MACAP M4. WOFTAM!

As our very own Lloyd Parsons so aptly states : "Wow! It really is the
grinder!"


     
Date: 12 Dec 2006 00:15:27
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
In article <p1fsn2t1vcap6r7g5t0cqvm2lrep4fut50@4ax.com >,
"I- >Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 21:45:03 -0700, "Ken Fox"
> <morceaudemerdeThisMerdeGoes@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Moka Java" <rtwatches@fishyahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:4u6gnjF14g00sU1@mid.individual.net...
> >> Heat + Beans wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I agree (though I'd scratch the 50#). Selecting a pressure is
> >>> arbitrary only if you get into a debate about what's the "best" weight.
> >>> So Schumer says "30#. That's arbitrary in the sense that he might
> >>> just as well have said 27# or 15#. But he thinks 30 is best. Fine
> >>> with me. As a pragmatic matter, he wanted to standardize his
> >>> employees' tamps for many of the same reasons that I want to
> >>> standardize my own. Keep the tamp consistent and control your shot with
> >>> grind. Pretty basid
> >>
> >> Have you tested this yourself? Try a consistent dose, weigh the beans if
> >> you want. Then pull a series of shots with no tamp, a tamp lighter than
> >> your usual, your usual and a heavier tamp. I saw no appreciable
> >> difference in shot time, appearance or taste with either my retired PID'd
> >> Silvia or the Andreja. Does your mileage vary?
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I also rely on depth, but this requires attention to how much I load
> >>> into the basket (related to, but not exclusively, the weight of beans).
> >>> If you adjust your pressure to achieve a desired depth, your shots
> >>> will be variable.
> >>
> >> From my casual observations it seems that it is most important to keep the
> >> dose consistent, have the grinds evenly distributed in the basket and
> >> level.
> >>
> >> R "keep it on the level" TF
> >
> >The only thing I have ever done with basket preparation that made any
> >repeatable difference at all (for me) was to be more "generous" with the
> >amount of coffee I put in (i.e. being willing to "waste" some in the process
> >of distribution), to updose consistently, and to use a tamper that makes a
> >near friction fit with my baskets. I have a number of different basket
> >types but at the moment I'm using knockoff baskets I got from
> >coffeeparts.com which coincidentally make a friction fit with my Bumper
> >tamper. This allows automatic levelling since the tamper fits in only more
> >or less level. I have other similar baskets that fit another tamper better,
> >and occasionally I swap them then use the other tamper, for variety, with
> >the same results. Tamping pressure is unimportant in the range that I use
> >(3-10lbs).
> >
> >Still, the most important thing of all, I think, is to operate the doser
> >while the grinder is operating, to overload the basket, and then to pinkie
> >sweep whatever size mound you want to use. By overdosing while rapidly
> >operating the doser, you distribute the grounds all around and the
> >overdosing allows you to be certain there are no big gaps in the basket, no
> >"holes," through which the water will channel. By being willing to "waste"
> >2g of coffee with each shot, I've reduced my sink shots by more than half.
> >
> >The rest is all fluff, in my opinion.
> >
> >ken
> >
>
> For the most part, I agree. I don't use a doser because I hate the
> clack. I use the WDT and for my 2p moving the needle across the basket
> makes a better distribution than circular. Two taps on the counter to
> over dose, then level, tamp and load.
>
> Almost no tamp, 10, 20, 30 or all 98lbs makes almost no difference.
>
> Assuming an adequate grind, even distribution and level tamp are two
> orders of magnitude more important than the tamp pressure.
>
> If noobs learned to dose properly and level tamp, the tamp pressure
> debate would disappear.
>
> Since someone mentioned Schomer earlier, I first bought an electric
> grinder based on his Solis recommendation around the turn of the
> century. Wot a yoke! I put it in the cupboard and went back to using
> my hand crank. Sadly, I futzed aroud with several other mediocre
> grinders before getting the MACAP M4. WOFTAM!
>
> As our very own Lloyd Parsons so aptly states : "Wow! It really is the
> grinder!"

I'm with you on this. When I first started down this path, I had the
bathroom scale out and was meticulous about tamp pressure. Since then
I'm seeing that it is more the even tamp you note, and the final polish.
These days I just tamp what feels right, a quick polish and onto the
machine.


 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 16:56:22
From: medley
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
I've owned my silvia for a little over a year and I like my Espro
tamper. I like knowing exactly where 30-lbs is. Sure the force you tamp
with isn't the most important variable but you do want it to be
consistent. And a little harder or softer does seem to affect my pours.
I tamp using the "staub" technique and the Espro seems to be a good
size for my commercial portafilter baskets.
Maybe in time I will no longer want the Espro. But I am very happy with
it right now and don't see any reason why I would switch to a
different tamper.
I got a deal on mine because I bought it along with a silvia and rocky.
But I would have paid the extra money for it anyways.



  
Date: 11 Dec 2006 22:16:06
From: Harry Moos
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
After reading Alan's discussion of tamp pressure, I tried a series of light
to heavy tamps. I could not discern any difference in either shot time or
taste. So I no longer worry about a consistent tamp pressure, as long as
the coffee is level and polished with no channels around the edge of the pf.
I don't use the plastic Rancilio tamper, but I have a turned aluminum and a
rosewood/stainless steel model -- both inexpensive tampers.

"medley" <jesse.medley@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1165884982.661937.124500@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I've owned my silvia for a little over a year and I like my Espro
> tamper. I like knowing exactly where 30-lbs is. Sure the force you tamp
> with isn't the most important variable but you do want it to be
> consistent. And a little harder or softer does seem to affect my pours.
> I tamp using the "staub" technique and the Espro seems to be a good
> size for my commercial portafilter baskets.
> Maybe in time I will no longer want the Espro. But I am very happy with
> it right now and don't see any reason why I would switch to a
> different tamper.
> I got a deal on mine because I bought it along with a silvia and rocky.
> But I would have paid the extra money for it anyways.
>




 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 15:17:06
From: Heat + Beans
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
phreaddy wrote:
> Is the Espro worth the money? I know there's a lot of debate over
> wether 30lbs. makes any difference, anyway ...

Particular weight doesn't seem to matter. Consistency of tamp is a very
good thing. 30lbs is a good-enough target.

Worth it? Depends on how much money you've got, and whether you feel
like spending it. How much it helps you and what it's "worth" to you I
can't say.

IMO, the Espro is worth what you pay for its admittedly limited extra
value. Above a certain amount (quite little, actually), more expensive
tampers are largely matters of aesthetics, feel, what you get used to.
Very much like the debates over favorite cups.

If it matters to you, I actually used an Espro for over a year. I
cannot speak to how much first-hand experience other posters have, but
it's possible that some never used one at a time when they actually
might have benefitted from it. Others might have immediately jumped to
highly consistent tamps without the need. And others might still have
a bathroom scale on their counter top.

Lastly, after changing my machine to one with a different pf size, I
will miss having an Espro, but I have no intention of replacing it. I
bought the Espro for $75, learned to tamp consistently at 30lbs and
other weights, and sold it for $50.

tin



 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 15:15:18
From: ramboorider@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
I'll dissent. Worth the money? - I don't know. But not a bad thing for
a beginner. There's no magic to 30 pounds but there's nothing wrong
with it either.
And it is good to eliminate as many variables as possible, particularly
when you're new to this bidness. I bought an Espro and I at least know
that my tamp is pretty consistent, so I can focus on adjusting other
stuff like the grind and the dose when I need to change something in a
shot. I'm sure it will be irrelevant soon enough, but if I was gonna
spend $50+ for a Reg Barber or something, spending $75 for the Espro
didn't really bother me. And its certainly a well made tamper that fits
my basket very well. So I don't ever see it being a liability.

-Ray


On Dec 11, 5:14 pm, "I- >Ian" <some...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:33:48 -0700, "Ken Fox"
>
> <morceaudemerdeThisMerdeG...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"phreaddy" <phrea...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1165870684.601916.77240@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> >> Is the Espro worth the money? I know there's a lot of debate over
> >> wether 30lbs. makes any difference, anyway ...
>
> >noThere seems to be some dissent
>
> No, NO x 2, and no



  
Date: 11 Dec 2006 23:49:00
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
On 11 Dec 2006 15:15:18 -0800, "ramboorider@gmail.com"
<ramboorider@gmail.com > wrote:

>I'll dissent. Worth the money? - I don't know. But not a bad thing for
>a beginner. There's no magic to 30 pounds but there's nothing wrong
>with it either.
>And it is good to eliminate as many variables as possible, particularly
>when you're new to this bidness. I bought an Espro and I at least know
>that my tamp is pretty consistent, so I can focus on adjusting other
>stuff like the grind and the dose when I need to change something in a
>shot. I'm sure it will be irrelevant soon enough, but if I was gonna
>spend $50+ for a Reg Barber or something, spending $75 for the Espro
>didn't really bother me. And its certainly a well made tamper that fits
>my basket very well. So I don't ever see it being a liability.
>
>-Ray


The tamp pressure is the least important variable.

IMO, a tamper that allows you to gauge the depth and level of the tamp
is much more useful than an arbitrary 10-20-30-50#.

I like my custom Reg Barber Tall Bubinga American Curve for just that
reason. The piston is sized to perfectly fit the basket and the height
is perfect for gauging both level and depth.

It's only better than my generic for those reasons.


 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 14:33:48
From: Ken Fox
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
"phreaddy" <phreaddy@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1165870684.601916.77240@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> Is the Espro worth the money? I know there's a lot of debate over
> wether 30lbs. makes any difference, anyway ...
>

no




  
Date: 11 Dec 2006 22:14:37
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:33:48 -0700, "Ken Fox"
<morceaudemerdeThisMerdeGoes@hotmail.com > wrote:

>"phreaddy" <phreaddy@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1165870684.601916.77240@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>> Is the Espro worth the money? I know there's a lot of debate over
>> wether 30lbs. makes any difference, anyway ...
>>
>
>no
>

There seems to be some dissent

No, NO x 2, and no


 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 13:18:45
From: daveb
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
espro?

uH, NO.



Schomer has nice tampers. -- like mine a lot.
WWW.ESPRESSOVIVACE.COM



 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 13:15:36
From:
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
On 11 Dec 2006 12:58:04 -0800, "phreaddy" <phreaddy@gmail.com > wrote:

>Is the Espro worth the money?

in a word: NO




_______________________________________
Please Note: If you find a posting or message from me
offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it.
If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to
me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate.


 
Date: 11 Dec 2006 21:09:40
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: Espro tamper or plain-Jane Lava?
On 11 Dec 2006 12:58:04 -0800, "phreaddy" <phreaddy@gmail.com > wrote:

>Is the Espro worth the money? I know there's a lot of debate over
>wether 30lbs. makes any difference, anyway ...

IMO, No.

you maybe interesested in
http://www.home-barista.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1912 - The H-B
Tamper Road Show