tf23 . He is no doubt fuming into his espresso reading all this.
I’m glad for posts like this and that it’s all getting out into the open now, even at my expense. He really is an unpredictable person and when all you read is praise and worship about him prior to buying, it really catches you off guard when his mood swings this way
I thought long and hard before starting this thread even though his ire was also directed at me in the news article, although it’s been removed and the post heavily edited a week or so ago (the original post is still available in this thread). Some people even said to me that it might be not good to do it. However, I think it’s healthy that this is finally coming out, for too long people seem to have been “unwilling” to say anything, thus perpetuating such behaviour..
Even now when I go back and read it, further edits have been made to try and rubbish LH review. It’s unbelievable that there is still no humility, questioning, listening, acknowledging…just accusations, clearly some people never learn? This also means that the development of his Londinium machines suffers and only the most meagre developments seem to take place.
I do suspect much of the development is led by Fracino, especially as the “pressurestat swapping” for different temperatures for darker roasts and the concept of swapping them regularly is laughable. See https://coffeetime.freeflarum.com/d/2153-why-you-might-not-want-to-buy-a-londinium/75
If I were ever to develop something like the Vectis, I would certainly have (as a minimum) electronic temperature control. If it were desired to keep the basic aesthetic a PID type display does not need to be on the front panel
- Cool, Medium and Hot brew temps on a 3 position switch (this could be under the machine)
- The power switch t be a 3 position toggle instead of 2 positions Off/On/steam
- Low water level probe in the boiler (Allowing low water to register and switch off the heating element)
This would remove the disadvantage of:
- Steam pressure only being 0.8 bar (which for a small boiler like that is never going to give great steaming). It also gives brew temperatures maxing out like this (source daddys got coffee review)
From turning the machine on - 20 Minutes - temp peaked at 91C
40 Minutes - temp peaked at 96C
60 Minutes - temp peaked at 103C
80 Minutes - temp peaked at 107C
100 Minutes - temp peaked at 108C
120 Minutes - temp peaked at 110C
140 Minutes - no change from previous test (point of stability)
This is because the dipper system could be run at 3 different lower temperatures to favour espresso and then quickly be boosted for steaming by moving the on off switch down into the steaming position and boosting up to 1.2 bar
- A low water probe in the boiler would prevent a leak, steam leak, group seal leak etc.. from allowing the boiler to run dry and frying the heating element…as it would turn off automatically and flash the power light. In addition, you wouldn’t then really need a sight glass, as the probe could always leave enough water to finish the shot.
These simple changes would almost be cost neutral as sight glasses are not free, can leak and could be done away with. Electronic temperature control for sure is more than a pressurestat…(perhaps not 2 presurestats). Plus there isn’t a push pull John guest fitting to leak with frequent connections/disconnection
Reliability would be enhanced and he could even insulate the boiler while he is about it. With these changes the use of the most basic 80s tech could make the machine more as it should be for the price being charged. OK it won’t solve the huge pressure issues it must have, you can read about it here (based on daddys got coffee review) https://coffeetime.freeflarum.com/d/2153-why-you-might-not-want-to-buy-a-londinium/39
Considering the DGC review, was pretty much advertising, and Reiss hasn’t complained…he must agree with it all.
I’m going to get a bit technical here, but as the piston cylinder diameter increases, the pressure required to generate even 8.5 bar, increases (much more than you realise)….if the cylinder is smaller, then less pressure to generate 8.5 bar is required, but the distance the piston has to move is much larger….a juggling act he probably hasn’t got right…potentially he should have made Vectis little deeper and the lever a little longer with a stronger spring.
P.S. I’m not worried that I am giving him free design information, because he would never listen anyway…but it has been useful for me to see how not to do it.