ARE PUCK SCREENS WORTH IT? The Truth Revealed

Summary

In this video, Lance Hedrick explores the effectiveness of puck screens and filters in espresso brewing. He investigates various methods, including mesh screens, air press filters, and paper sandwiches, analyzing their impact on extraction efficiency. Through extensive testing, Hedrick presents data showing that puck screens can improve extraction yield, increase consistency, and enhance the final cup by allowing for more even dispersion of water. Despite minor differences in shot times and extraction, he concludes that puck screens are beneficial for both machine cleanliness and shot consistency, although their effect on extraction yield may vary depending on the basket and machine setup.

Takeaways

• 😀 Puck screens are used to evenly disperse water over the espresso puck, potentially improving extraction and taste by reducing uneven water distribution.
• 😀 The trend of using puck screens gained popularity after the Flare 58 espresso machine included one, which helped address issues with its undersized shower screen.
• 😀 Different types of puck screens have emerged over time, including mesh screens from brands like Weber, Flare, and Normcore, as well as alternative options like paper filters.
• 😀 Before mesh screens, some people used paper filters or ‘paper sandwiches’ to improve puck saturation and water flow in espresso extractions.
• 😀 Six different methods were tested to compare the effects of puck screens, including naked shots, dry and wet mesh filters, billet screens, paper filters on top and bottom, and a combination of these.
• 😀 The results showed that puck screens improved extraction yield by about 0.3 to 0.5%, likely due to a more even water distribution or increased resistance leading to longer shot times.
• 😀 Using a puck screen allows for coarser grinds while maintaining consistent extraction yields, making the process more efficient and offering more control over the final taste.
• 😀 The use of billet screens, while keeping the machine cleaner, did not significantly increase extraction yield compared to naked shots, suggesting they don't provide the same benefits as mesh screens.
• 😀 Paper filters on top did not significantly improve extractions compared to no filter, though they can help maintain cleanliness and reduce waste in the machine.
• 😀 Bottom paper filters, typically used for baskets with small holes, did not provide the expected increase in extraction yield for baskets with larger holes like the Sor basket but did lead to faster shot times by reducing resistance and increasing flow rate.

Q & A

What is the primary claim about puck screens in espresso brewing?

Puck screens are claimed to evenly distribute water over the coffee grounds, leading to more uniform extraction, which should result in a more consistent and tastier espresso shot.

Why did the trend of using puck screens gain momentum with the Flair 58?

The trend grew because the Flair 58 had an undersized shower screen, and users noticed that adding a puck screen improved water distribution and evened out the extraction flow, leading to better results.

What different types of puck screens and filters were tested in the video?

The video tested several methods: naked espresso (no filter), dry mesh filter, wet mesh filter, billet screen, paper on top of the puck, and paper on the bottom of the puck.

How did the dry mesh filter compare to the wet mesh filter in terms of shot consistency?

The dry mesh filter provided more consistent shot times, while the wet mesh filter caused slight fluctuations in shot times due to pre-wetting the puck, though these differences were not statistically significant.

What was the effect of the billet screen on extraction time and yield?

The billet screen increased the extraction time but did not improve extraction yield. This suggests that the billet screen does not evenly distribute water as effectively as mesh puck screens.

Did the use of paper filters have any significant impact on extraction yield?

The paper filter on top did not significantly impact extraction yield compared to no filter. However, the bottom paper filter reduced puck resistance, resulting in faster shot times and potentially more efficient extraction.

What impact did the bottom paper filter have on extraction when used with a Sor basket?

The bottom paper filter increased the shot flow rate but did not lead to a higher extraction yield. It reduced puck resistance, which made the extraction more efficient and faster.

What is the key takeaway about puck screens and bottom paper filters for different types of espresso baskets?

For standard baskets with smaller holes, bottom paper filters can improve extraction by increasing surface area and reducing resistance. However, for advanced baskets (like VST or IMS), they may not provide significant benefits and may even affect the flow negatively.

What did the data reveal about the overall effectiveness of puck screens?

Puck screens showed a statistically significant improvement in extraction yield (0.3% to 0.5%) and allowed for more consistent extraction, though they also slightly increased extraction time due to the added resistance.

What should home espresso users take away from this experiment regarding puck screens and filters?

Home espresso users can consider using puck screens and filters to enhance consistency and machine cleanliness, but they are not strictly necessary. The benefits are modest, and users can likely achieve great espresso without them, especially if they have good baskets and tamping techniques.