So my coffee maker broke this morning...

[Malphas]

French presses are nice but a hassle. Grinding beans, waiting for water to boil.

Eh? You have to wait for water to boil when using instant as well, so that's irrelevant. You can also buy grounds rather than beans and it's essentially no more hassle than making instant.

[noisyturtle]

Wound up going with this one: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0064ONLW0/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

It's programmable has some good reviews, and no reports of it breaking in any way.

[Elrick]

Black Espresso all the way.  Besides my company just bought a brand new Bosch Benvenuto B30 for us in the office and I can't stop using it.

Imagine in all that dust, oil, grime and filth we get this little piece of heaven.  I don't mind putting up with a lot of misery but this just makes it all worth while.

[Malphas]

What do you work as, Elrick?

[fohat.digs]

I got a Chemex about two years ago and I love it. That would be my recommendation too.

I use this, too, although I have a plastic single-cup pour-through that sits on top of the coffee mug itself.

I usually only drink one cup, and this is the easiest device to clean, by far.

[eth0s]

Nah, get a Chemex:

Show Image

I got a Chemex about two years ago and I love it. That would be my recommendation too.

+1 for Chemex.  Best coffee maker you can get, other than a high pressure espresso machine at a coffee house, of course, which is clearly superior but costs a few thousand dollars more.   Chemex can be had for under $50.  Maybe under $40 if you are a good shopper.

Chemex filters out the bitterness, leaves only coffee flavor.  Makes a full-bodied flavorful coffee.  It has been the favorite method of coffee connoiseurs for more than 40 years, so it can't be bad.  Advantages of Chemex are the conical shape, with heavy bond paper filters.  It takes 7-10 minutes for the water to pass through the coffee grounds in the filter, which is supposed to be the perfect amount of time to brew coffee.  Anything more imparts too much bitterness and acidity, anything less makes weak coffee.  I use one, and I like it.  And I've tried them all, from Moka type to French press to Mr. Coffee.

[Malphas]

Do you have to stand there for 7-10 minutes pouring water into it, or can you pour it all the water in one go then leave it alone and come back when it's done filtering?

[smknjoe]

French presses are nice but a hassle. Grinding beans, waiting for water to boil.

Eh? You have to wait for water to boil when using instant as well, so that's irrelevant. You can also buy grounds rather than beans and it's essentially no more hassle than making instant.

Microwaving a cup of water for 1.5 minutes is much faster than waiting ~10 min. for boiling water.

If you are really serious about coffee (like I used to be) then you really need a french press, a grinder that crushes the beans instead of cutting them with a blade, and a glass kettle for heating water because metal can impart unwanted flavor. Of course, you can only use purified water since you don't want any impurities to taint your magical brew. Any serious coffee lover would never buy anything other than whole beans since ground coffee starts to lose flavor as soon as it is ground.

[Malphas]

It doesn't matter what method you use though, the fact is you still need to create hot water from somewhere for both methods, so you can't claim instant is faster due to the boiling process. e.g. in your example you could just as easily microwave a cup of water and use it with a french press.

However if you think microwaves are faster than electric kettles you're completely wrong. An electric kettle with a heating element submerged in the water is by far the fastest and most efficient practical way to boil water in a domestic setting.

The rest of your logic is nonsense. You initially stated that french presses were hassle due to grinding beans and waiting for water to boil, in comparasion to instant. We've already established that the boiling water part applies equally to both. Your next argument is that if you use a french press then you must do all these other arbitrary steps like grinding the beans, using a glass container for boiling, etc. - which obviously isn't the case.

If you want to use instant, fair enough, I don't care, I'm not a coffee-snob; but don't pretend a french press is so much more time consuming and hassle than instant, because it's not - there's barely any difference in time and hassle between making a cup of instant and using a french press with ready ground coffee.

[eth0s]

Do you have to stand there for 7-10 minutes pouring water into it, or can you pour it all the water in one go then leave it alone and come back when it's done filtering?

This is the drawback, you have to stand there pouring hot water.  Also, to be really accurate you should get a thermometer and pour the water at about 200F (just below boiling.  Tea needs boiling water, coffee needs near-boiling water.)  But this is for optimal coffee.  You can do whatever you want.  And if you are too busy to pour the water, really you can do three pours.  Pour once, walk away for a minute.  Pour again, walk away.  And then pour again, and walk away, and when you come back you will have 8 cups of coffee in the pot.  The smaller Chemex is probably easier to use, I guess.  I dunno because I have the biggest version which is the 8-cup model.  I think there are a 4-cups and 6-cups smaller versions.  Maybe the smallest one only needs one pour.

[Malphas]

Hmm, that's no use to me then sadly.

[eth0s]

Hmm, that's no use to me then sadly.

It might sound like using the Chemex is more work than the Moka-type coffee maker, but it's really not.  The Moka-type requires loading the bottom, and then packing the coffee section.  It's true that the coffee making in the Moka-type is pretty simple with just leaving it on the stove, but then there's the cleaning afterwards that takes time.  Similarly, the French press might seem easier to load and fill with water, but the clean-up is a lot messier, and a lot more time consuming, than the Chemex.

I assume you are pressed for time when you are making coffee at home in the morning before work, but you can easily do it with the Chemex, even when time is short.  The prep time is shorter, and the cleanup is a breeze, you just chuck the filter and spent coffee grounds in the trash.  You just have to multi-task while pouring the water, i.e., eat a scone with clotted cream or read the Daily Mail or something.  And of course, if you can take your time on the weekend, or days off, you can enjoy Chemex coffee on those days.  Don't dismiss the Chemex without trying it out, is my humble advice.  You might hate it, I dunno, but it's worth a try,  simply because the coffee tastes better.

[Malphas]

I like that you can just throw the filter out with the grounds and you've got a carafe of coffee for serving or to sit and use for multiple cups yourself, so I might get one to use at the weekend at least.

[Elrick]

What do you work as, Elrick?

Started out as a diesel mechanic but now am the senior shift manager, as the highlighted title says on my fort-nightly pay packet  .

[smknjoe]

It doesn't matter what method you use though, the fact is you still need to create hot water from somewhere for both methods, so you can't claim instant is faster due to the boiling process. e.g. in your example you could just as easily microwave a cup of water and use it with a french press.

However if you think microwaves are faster than electric kettles you're completely wrong. An electric kettle with a heating element submerged in the water is by far the fastest and most efficient practical way to boil water in a domestic setting.

The rest of your logic is nonsense. You initially stated that french presses were hassle due to grinding beans and waiting for water to boil, in comparasion to instant. We've already established that the boiling water part applies equally to both. Your next argument is that if you use a french press then you must do all these other arbitrary steps like grinding the beans, using a glass container for boiling, etc. - which obviously isn't the case.

If you want to use instant, fair enough, I don't care, I'm not a coffee-snob; but don't pretend a french press is so much more time consuming and hassle than instant, because it's not - there's barely any difference in time and hassle between making a cup of instant and using a french press with ready ground coffee.

You might want to lay off of the coffee a little bit there, bro. My last example was a suggestion as to how a great cup of coffee can be had, not to make a point about the amount of time it takes.

[Malphas]

Right, fair enough. But you misunderstand me, I'm not getting excited over this, I'm just detailing how what you said before makes no sense and I don't get it. A french press doesn't really take any more time or effort than instant coffee, contrary to what you were claiming to begin with.

[smknjoe]

I originally stated that a french press was too much of a hassle for me in the context that I don't like to have to clean or maintain a coffee maker or any other peripherals associated with the process of making coffee used in "traditional" methods. Nor do I like to wait longer than the time it takes to make exactly one cup of coffee. That's why I am happy with instant coffee most of the time (even if it's not as "good" as other methods.)