Hacker News Reader

Comment by getToTheChopin | Hacker News Reader

I've been using my $30 aeropress for years, and heartily agree.

Likewise, the french press and moka pot are extremely simple, easy to use and require no electricity to operate.

Except to boil the kettle!

... unless you have a normal stovetop kettle, and a gas cooktop. Technically no electricity required then, though it does consume fuel.

That's a good justification for buyers of outdoor grilles to purchase one with a side burner that has enough output to bring a kettle or pot of water to a boil. No electricity needed.

I have a $20 “camp stove” and cheap butane cylinders that are in aerosol cans.

If things get real bad, the Wood stick camp stove that’s just folding metal plates.

Propane burners are just an annoying in between, but our outages are rarely long.

A stovetop kettle would not be considered normal in the UK in the 21st century

Stovetop kettle would be considered normal maybe in a nursing home.

Not in case of moka pot.

I haven't owned a drip machine in over a decade. Moka pots are probably my favorite quick coffee, and french press is easy. Both are easier to clean.

However last year I got a Gaggia espresso machine, and espresso is a whole other world of complexity. My Gaggia only has the pressure mod, but I did plan to add a PID to it. It's still simple, turn on and let it get hot, then I usually do long pulls for like 40-50 seconds on a double shot portafilter. But there are other espresso machines with more electronics that feel desirable.

Of course I chose getting a Gaggia by going to Github and seeing which espresso machines are developer friendly. :)

https://github.com/Zer0-bit/gaggiuino

However I just make coffee for myself. Maybe a Keurig is easier if you have guests. It seems most of the people I know who have it, have it for that reason.

Fun project! And espresso is fun too. I have a la pavoni, but was interested in the Gagguinio after my bad experience with the Decent (can't really hack on it at all).

The beauty of machines like the Gaggia (I have a Classic) is their simplicity. I can get spare parts to replace everything in the machine, and work on it myself (I'm not mechanically-minded, but it's very straight forward). The biggest repair I've had to make is to replace a thermostat and themal-fuse, and it cost me about £10 in parts and 30 mins of work.

I use a Stanley full-metal-jacket french press on camping trips and for just-in-case situations like power failures. Unlike most moka pots that can eventually have seal failures, only the wire mesh of a french press plunger ever needs tweaking back into shape.

Same here. Plus, it travels effortlessly if I’m going to be someplace with terrible coffee. You can almost always get an electric tea kettle or hot water at any hotel.

The aeropress is a great way to make coffee, my only issue with it is it doesn't make quite enough! My hario switch (large) gives me just about 2 cups of coffee so I can share a brew with someone.

It functions similarly (and was inspired by) as espresso, in my experience - so typically you'd add water to fill it as a full cup (e.g. an Americano). Still, with two people, you'd brew it twice.

Edit: designed as an espresso alternative -> functions similarly to espresso

The aeropress was really not designed as an espresso alternative. In interviews, the inventor said he was designing a better way to do drip coffee for a single cup. He recommends pressing as slowly as possible to not create pressure.

Perhaps semantically I am wrong, and can admit that, but your comment acts a bit as if it's so ridiculous to think of (and make) Aeropress coffee that way. I gladly make Americano's and lattes with it regularly.

> he was designing a better way to do drip coffee for a single cup

Can you point to this interview? In https://archive.nytimes.com/tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2010..., it mentions he actually started with an espresso machine before trying drip and French press. So, it'd be more accurate to say he was designing a better way to all 3 of those - not just drip, as you claim.

Some other references to espresso --

https://www.aeropress.co.uk/blogs/news/evolution-aeropress-h...

> AeroPress is inspired by technology found in espresso machines

https://aeropress.com/pages/how-it-works

In this page, each recommended option is an offshoot from espresso-based drinks.

https://aeropress.com/pages/faq

> Many people say that espresso must be made with 9 bars of pressure. If you use this definition then no, AeroPress coffee makers do not make espresso. But if you define espresso by the taste of the drink in the cup, certainly many people think AeroPress coffee makers can brew espresso. Since coffee brewed by AeroPress coffee makers can be made into lattes, cappuccinos, and other espresso based drinks, we feel it is important to use the term "espresso" when describing what AeroPress coffee makers brew so potential customers will understand how coffee brewed by AeroPress coffee makers can be enjoyed.

tldr; I've amended my previous comment but to act as if espresso is not a clear design/inspiration choice is wrong.

I just don't understand why every coffee method needs to be compared to espresso. Espresso is not a gold standard to achieve, it's just one tasty way to make coffee among other.

With that in mind, the aeropress marketing material uses espresso as a gold standard and because of that it is plain nonsense to me.

> But if you define espresso by the taste of the drink in the cup, certainly many people think AeroPress coffee makers can brew espresso.

That is just fantasy.

> Since coffee brewed by AeroPress coffee makers can be made into lattes, cappuccinos, and other espresso based drinks, we feel it is important to use the term "espresso" when describing what AeroPress coffee makers brew.

Ah yes, just like since lemonade can be used instead of rum to make a Mojito I feel it is important to use the term "alcohol" when describing lemonade.

Espresso is widely understood to be a percolation brew, about 2:1 coffee to water ratio, brewed at around 9 bars, in about 30 seconds.

The aeropress is almost the exact opposite, it's an immersion brew, usually at much higher ratio, with almost no pressure and much longer brew time.

Both are awesome and none is superior to the other. It's fine to enjoy aeropress-lattes or aeropress-americanos.

The trick for a two cups aeropress is brewing at a stronger ratio (for instance 25g in with 220g of water) and diluting it with water once it's done brewing.

I do another trick that works well enough for me, I put more coffee in than I normally do for one cup, plunge, then pull the plunge out, add more water and plunge again. Just make sure you are going into a big enough cup or use two cups.

I've never had success with brewing a concentrate using an Aeropress really. I prefer using a different method like a larger french press for multiple cups.

You can also use the aeropress chamber as a zero bypass pourover - grind finer than usual and/or double up on filters to slow it down.

Aeropress coffee is fantastic and the machine lasts a very long time. Highly recommended!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com