Numpty Question du Jour - Leveler or traditional tamp?

Doram The argument being made (which may be cobblers) does require the height to be set, though, and that may not have been in that situation. Their case is that it deosn’t require much pressure to remove the gaps from between grind particles, to achieve sufficient compression but that it does require some. Levelling without getting that height correct wouldn’t adequately compress, and then yeah, inadeqaute pressure resistance too. The required pressure is, allegedly, pretty low.

It’s a plausible argument, for sure. I just don’t know if it’s right.

It’s not just about effort. It’s about risk, and time. I already have one shoulder I can’t use for much. If I damage the other one, it’s a major problem. I also already have one permanently broken bone, in my hand. Fortunately, it’s the left hand, and I’m right-handed. Nonetheless, and even with something as minor as my little finger, if I even touch anything on that, the two bits of broken bone grind against each other, and believe me, it blooming hurts. The condition I have risks bone weakness, as that finger makes clear. The chemo risks even more bone weakness, which is why I take bone strengthening meds, which also have some not-fun effects on me. Imagine a broken shoulder, if a broken pinky is that painful.

If I end up with a broken shoulder, I will no doubt end up in hospital for surgery … or an immobilising cast. I really should have that pinky finger removed but, y’know, Covid and stuff. Another delightful part of the cancer is that it’s in my lungs too, so, hospital and surgery risks chest infection, and that, given my lungs, involves a not inconsiderable risk of coming out feet-first.

Until the next MRI scan, I won’t even know how successful the last round of radiotherapy was on the shoulder, and thus, won’t know how weakened it is.

The whole point of the leveler question was to avoid manual tamping. I get that my situation is far from normal, but even light tamping exerts pressure in places it’s probably best to avoid even light stresses, where possible. Some things aren’t avoidable, and I’ll have to deal with the consequences of that if/when anything happens, but tamping? It’s a risk I don’t need to take.

Yeah, Puqpress avoids it. If need be, so be it. But I’m not looking to spend money if not needed. If a leveler alone, without tamping, will do the job, then it’s worth looking at. At that point, I’ll need to find out (maybe by suck-it-and-see), if a cheap Chinese leveler will do it on it’s own or if there’s something about the design, maybe the weight, of the Jack, that means it works and they won’t.

Maybe I can get a clear answer to whether a leveler alone works just by asking, maybe not. Maybe someone has used both a Jack and cheap Chinese tampers and knows that either both work, one works or neither is sufficient, and why. Again, that’s why I’m asking.

In general, I agree about the learning process. My objective is to shortcut to a solution that works, not to mess with either tampers or levelers unless it looks viable. Everything I read suggests even something as apparently simple as tamping requires practice, experience, maybe muscle memory to get right, consistently. If I buy a cheap leveler, and a cheap tamper, and then spend a lot of time getting lousy shots, is it because the leveler isn’t working, because that cheap one isn’t but a Jack does (according to Marc) or because my tamping technique isn’t good enough? Or good enough, consistently.

Getting the puck prepared adequately isn’t an area I want to spend a lot of time on, if an easy solution is available, even if it’s an expensive easy solution. Roasting maybe, but tamping? No.

All of which brings me right back to whether leveling is, on it’s own, sufficient. If you use your cheap leveler and it requires you to then tamp, that suggests leveling with it on it’s own doesn’t work. Maybe the Jack does? Maybe something else, cheaper than the Jack, does? Maybe not. If so, I hope to find out before the Niche arrives otherwise it’ll sit here and I can’t use it. If not and I need a Puqpress, I’d rather just order and be done. But if there’s an alternative, I’d rather find out before I order.

Thanks for understanding.

I wasn’t aware of the knockoff. I know there are Puqpress competitors. The Slingshot Kilo looks moderately interesting, for example, but, I have no notion of price-point, not least because so far, I haven’t found UK distribution. As for a knockoff, I have two issues with that. Firstly, if it is an actual knockoff, a cheeky copy, I won’t touch it on principle. If it’s someone given the market idea by Puqpress and has developed their own solution, then that’s just competition and is actually healthy, but a knockoff undermines healthy competition and is outright exploitation of someone else’s hard work by a talentless semi-criminial no=hoper, and ultimately, not good for consumers. The original Puqpress, as I understand it, took about three years to develop and grow from a garage-built prototype to a viable market product, with a lot risked to do it,and even more growing the company. If someone then waltzes in and rips it off, it discourages the next entrepreneur from risking it all. I get why people might buy it, at half price, but I won’t. Also, buying a knockoff is very much a punt on product quality. Secondly, and on the same lines, it’s much less likely to have worthwhile and reliable customer service if anything goes wrong. I’m also not an eBay fan.

The third reason (of two, I know) is resale value if/when I don’t need it any more. A legit Puqpress? Probably decent, especially for a low-volume cafe or startup that wants one but wants to save a bit on up-front cost. A knockoff? Not so much.

I am coming round to the Puqpress as the best option for me, yeah. If they weren’t so damned expensive for what seems like such a simple (if taste-critical) job …. but maybe you get what you pay for. I usually do find, buy right, buy once.

I did,yes. Watched the linked vids, read the forum comments. Comments especially varied. The theme, though there were exceptions, was that most of those with the Jack reckoned that, first, it worked, and second, was better than cheap imitations. Several made the point that it works well provided you set the depth right. Which makes sense. It also shows a weakness of the ‘depth’ metric in the Jack, as opposed to the pressure metric used by Puqpress. If I use the same bean all the time, the Jack is going to be better suited than if I chop and change a lot and have to keep adjusting it.

What isn’t going to be easy to assess, on a forum I don’t know, is how many that own it and like it do so because of some kind of confirmation bias? It isn’t easy to buy something expensive then admit it was a mistake. On the other hand, quite a few of those that are negative towards it don’t have one, which begs the question of how they conclude it doesn’t work, or isn’t any better. The same sort of confirmation bias logic could apply.

All told, it’s leaing me to conclude I have to decide which risk to take. Minimum cost for a chinese Jack copy, and wish I’d bought right in the first place? Buy an expensive Jack and wish I’d either bought an equally functional cheap copy for less, or even a much more expensive Puqpress. Or spent a lot more on a Puqpress and wish I hadn’t bothered and gone with a cheaper option.

There aren’t any risk-free options, so its just a case of making up my mind which to try. I’m inclined, right now, to just bite the bullet and go Puqpress. But I want to let that ferment for a bit, not do it on impulse.