Hario V60 alternative filter papers - Rombouts No.4 white filters.

LMSC

@MWJB Interesting. Thank you for the experiment. It will be useful, if you find time, compare the usual pour regime. 2 x centre with valve closed and 3 in circles valve open.

Edit:

EY is interesting, although it’s too early to conclude. I could not pick one over the other in blind cupping and was not able to detect any slight silts using Kintos.

MWJB

LMSC I’m not expecting EY to significantly differ based on what I have seen so far. Silt wouldn’t tend show up via EY (as it’s not extraction related) unless you ground crazy fine/it was a big problem.

‘Will do’, on the ‘steep first, percolate later’ variation.

MWJB

Now completed another 6 brews, 2×40g/40s in centre with valve shut, open valve just before 1:20 then another 3 pours in the ring with the valve open. 3 brews with Kinto paper, 3 brews with the Hario medium crepe and this seems to have shifted the balance slightly in favour of the Kinto, for the 2nd round (immerse first, then percolate second).

For 6 brews per paper, the differences between the papers evened out - both averaged 6.5/9.0 (69%) in subjective liking score.

EY was 19.9% for the Kinto, 19.7% for the Hario medium crepe (0.2% isn’t in any way significant in terms of a difference).

So, if open to slightly tweaking your brew regime for hybrid Switch brews, both paper filters may be considered equivalent.

Thanks again to @LMSC for sending over the Kinto papers.

LMSC

MWJB So, if open to slightly tweaking your brew regime for hybrid Switch brews, both paper filters may be considered equivalent.

For example, 6 pulses than 5 to lengthen the brew time - 6 × 40s x 35g/40g? Thx

LMSC

Good to hear @MWJB. Thanks again for taking a lot of your time, efforts and resources to conduct the experiment. 🙏🏽

MWJB

LMSC No, more as in this case, where ‘percolate first’ vs ‘steep first’ seemed to produce different swubjective preference results based on filter paper used in the hybrid brews (grind, brewer & weights all being constant).

LMSC

MWJB No, more as in this case,

Sorry, lost you here as you had initially indicated slightly tweaking brew regime. Please explain. Thx

MWJB

LMSC Sorry, lost you here as you had initially indicated slightly tweaking brew regime. Please explain. Thx

The first 6 brews seemed to give favourable results to the Hario medium crepe paper, in these brews the first 2 pours were with the valve open (percolation), closing the valve just before the 3rd pour (all remaining water) at 1:20, then immersing from 2:00 & drawing down at 3:00.

In the 2nd 6 brews where the Kinto paper did better, the Switch valve was shut for the first 2 pours (immersion), opened just before 1:20, then the remaining water poured in 3 more pulses at 1:20, 2:00 & 2:40 (percolation).

les24preludes

I’ve been using Rombouts No. 4 in my V60 for several months, folding them with a Hario as template.

I only brew decaf. So which would be the optimum filter paper for that?

I’ve ordered a packet of T90 to try….

MWJB

les24preludes I use the same papers for decaf & non-decaf.

les24preludes

I have a bunch of different Cafec filter papers coming - more when they arrive.

I tried the Rombouts versus Hario for speed of filtering. I used 250ml water into a wetted paper and stopped the clock when the continuous stream first broke and turned into drips. Result was Hario 22s, Rombouts 30s. As I suspected, the Rombouts is slower.

MWJB

les24preludes That won’t really work, you need the ground coffee in there as the coffee bed is part of the filtration media & the particles will interact with the paper to affect brew times. Brew times are not really precise enough to tune brews anyway. Focus on the grind setting & keeping the pour speed constant.

I did find the latest smooth inner, medium crepe outer Hario paper brewed a little faster, but normalising brew time didn’t fix flavour issues.

I found I had too grind a bit coarser for Rombouts and slow the pour rate with more pulses, I suspect the Rombouts is a coarser filtration medium compared to latest Hario.

I can’t remember which Hario papers you have, there’s a few white papers out there branded as Hario.

les24preludes

I have the latest Hario green stripe - that’s the only one I’ve had so far.

Yes, with Rombouts I’m grinding coarser with more pulses. Playing around with the grind, though. It’s a better paper than the Hario, but that’s not difficult.

LMSC

@MWJB Do you know what your percentage of fines under 400 Kruve please ? Thx

MWJB

LMSC 6% under 400Kruve for manual poured brews with a gooseneck

LMSC

MWJB Where would 12% take you in terms of yield and critically taste?

MWJB

LMSC Personally, I wouldn’t go that fine with a gooseneck poured V60 and the Rombouts paper. I was at 12% with the med crepe white Hario, but was driven coarser with the paper change.

I’m in that region though with a more restricted brewer like the Bartleet (Melitta style with 3 holes), maybe you could do it with the Mugen?

LMSC

MWJB I’m happy with the Hario project Waterfall. Was just curious what difference this paper makes. 😊

Zephyp

I’ve done some testing and my current setting is 46 on a C40 Red Clix with the Rombouts, which would be 23 without Red Clix. The sifting on this setting gives me around 14% under 400. I’ve gone coarser, but never found it to taste better in that direction. I’m pretty happy with the brews these days.

les24preludes

I’ve been using Rombouts for months with good results but I just got a packet of 4 Cafec filters…T90, Abaca+, T83, T93. This has changed my attitude to filters in an unexpected way. My favourite was the T92 filter for its clarity and clean taste, with a very lingering finish. Long draw down with a medium grind. The T92 is the unloved Cafec with few users, so why did I prefer the taste? Digging further into the design of these Cafecs I found that the T90 holds up the oils in the beans the most. So my interpretation is that this is what is making the difference. Almost all the feedback on the Cafecs refer to draw down times and fines, but I rarely see oils mentioned.

Can anyone comment on this? It seems to be a different way of looking at filter papers. Interestingly the Abaca+ which is often compared to the T90 because of draw down speed, is much closer to the T92 for clarity in the cup.

MWJB

les24preludes Digging further into the design of these Cafecs I found that the T90 holds up the oils in the beans the most. So my interpretation is that this is what is making the difference. Almost all the feedback on the Cafecs refer to draw down times and fines, but I rarely see oils mentioned.

Can anyone comment on this? It seems to be a different way of looking at filter papers.

Filter papers generally remove the vast majority of the oils, as well as smaller, bittering particles of bean.
Coffee oils/lipids do not dissolve into the drink & are not considered contributors to coffee extraction, only the soluble solids are. When you get a lot of oils in coffee it mostly contributes to mouthfeel, but in terms of flavour, coffee oil is pretty generic, bitter, bileous and, well, ….oily.

I seem to recall the Scandinavians doing some research of filtered coffee vs their traditional coffee kettle immersions, paper filtered coffee reducing the oils by about 90-95%

« Previous Page Next Page »