New French Press / Cafetiere

Maccapacca

Maccapacca

Maccapacca

Tea Drinker
Don
Joined
13 Apr 2010
Posts
18,482
Location
Sunny Sussex
Hi foodies and coffee lovers

I bust my bodum cafetiere now I need another, any recommendations?

What about one of those stove peculators, any good? I'm grinding beans now so am looking for something nice.
 
You can buy a replacement glass from amazon for it.

Stove top one is good, as is aeropress, but the all make slightly different coffee.

P.s. Didn't you just spent £25,000 on coffee stuff?
 
Personally, I'd ditch the French press and go with the Clever Dripper

Same flavour profile possible, same immersion brewing techniques, same ability to do long brew times, with the added benefit of no sediment and a damn sight easier to clean.
 
Do you mostly brew single mugs, or do you need to make lots of filter coffee for you and your family in the morning?

What type of coffee do you like drinking / drink the most?

How much do you want to spend?

I got tired of the sediment in the bottom of the french press drink, but I'm very happy with my AeroPress for single mugs.

It's really, really quick, with no steeping time required past 10 secs of stirring. And the coffee is really good.
 
Mostly single large cups.

Coffee, I really like rich, milky and sweet, I've just finished some Kopi Luwak and Blue Mountain and as nice as they were without any milk and sugar they didn't have enough kick.

£20 - £50
 
The thing about the AeroPress is that it needs a fairly fine grind, which can take longer if doing it by hand. That's why I have pre-ground on standby for work mornings.

But anyway from what you've said, I'd go AeroPress personally. I like milky drinks too. Something I do quite a lot is to boil a kettle for the AeroPress, and meanwhile microwave some milk in a mug until it starts to forth. Then you can press a batch straight from the AeroPress into the mug with milk in it. Latte in 3 minutes.
 
I much prefer my aeropress to my French press. Easier, no sediment, cleaning is quicker.

Tastes better to me too.
 
Participant said:
The thing about the AeroPress is that it needs a fairly fine grind, which can take longer if doing it by hand. That's why I have pre-ground on standby for work mornings.

But anyway from what you've said, I'd go AeroPress personally. I like milky drinks too. Something I do quite a lot is to boil a kettle for the AeroPress, and meanwhile microwave some milk in a mug until it starts to forth. Then you can press a batch straight from the AeroPress into the mug with milk in it. Latte in 3 minutes.
Click to expand...

There's this wonderful method for the aeropress called Inverted. It's the most commonly used method among baristas now. Use a coarser grind and can brew for anything up to 30minutes if you want. Still easy too.

As for the milk in the microwave... :eek: :eek: :(
 
Great eh. No special steamer or frother required. Got that tip of the AeroPress website itself. Tastes fantastic, and no mess or extra equipment required :cool:.
 
Participant said:
Great eh. No special steamer or frother required. Got that tip of the AeroPress website itself. Tastes fantastic, and no mess or extra equipment required :cool:.
Click to expand...

Great? No.

Anything over 65°C kills the flavour of the milk. Proteins break down and instead of being sweet heads rapidly into bitterness and a really not pleasant burnt flavour. Add to that, a latte requires microfoam to get the right texture, boiling the milk won't give that.

Have to remember, the Aerobie guys still call the aeropress an espresso maker. It isn't.

*gets off high horse*
 
A latte does not "require microfoam", at all :). The original latte has no foam. You're just used to the modern variant and are assuming there's only one correct way. Ever drunk an Italian latte for example?

As for the 65 degrees or over killing the milk, if you shake the milk in a jam jar then microwave it, you get foam way before it reaches 65 degrees. Microwaving something doesn't automatically mean you have boiled it ;).

And I understand that there's a lot of AeroPress snobbery amongst coffee "connoisseurs", because something has been invented that gives you 90% as good a drink with 10% of the faffing and cost, which is annoying for people that have spent hundreds or more on high end kit. What matters though is the quality of the final drink, not whether or not the shot technically passes as an espresso or not. Unless you're drinking espresso that is.

*Gets off high horse*
 
Last edited:
What are you talking about? Coffee snobs love Aeropresses.

Not being willing to use incorrect words to describe something isn't exactly a bad thing. An Aeropress doesn't make espresso - that doesn't mean that it doesn't make nice coffee.

I also don't think you really understand what microfoam is in this case.
 
FrenchTart said:
Not being willing to use incorrect words to describe something isn't exactly a bad thing. An Aeropress doesn't make espresso
Click to expand...

What are you prattling on about? Nobody said that it did, but Flibster just randomly mentioned that an AeroPress doesn't make espressos in this thread as a way to debunk the AeroPress suggestion about microwaving milk :confused:.

FrenchTart said:
I also don't think you really understand what microfoam is in this case.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what microfoam is, but people were making lattes way before microfoam using a steam wand was possible so Flibster claiming that 'a latte requires microfoam to get to the right texture' is purely down to what your definition of a latte is.
 
Participant said:
I know exactly what microfoam is, but people were making lattes way before microfoam using a steam wand was possible so Flibster claiming that 'a latte requires microfoam to get to the right texture' is purely down to what your definition of a latte is.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, a latte today is different to that of 100+ years ago. It was then, just a coffee with milk. With latte being an Italian word, of course it has a different meaning there. Times change, and outside of Italy, what we know as a latte is a 20th century drink made from an espresso and steamed milk. If you steam milk correctly, you will get microfoam. If you don't steam milk, or steam it incorrectly, you can still call the drink a latte (see Starbucks for a good example), but technically it isn't a proper latte. It all depends if you care about technicalities really :).
 
molinari said:
outside of Italy
Click to expand...

molinari said:
If you don't steam milk, or steam it incorrectly, you can still call the drink a latte (see Starbucks for a good example)
Click to expand...

All you've done is reaffirm that there's more than one way to skin a cat, especially by saying "outside of" arguably the biggest coffee nut nation on the planet. With all due respect.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom