Results 1 to 3 of 3
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By samuellaw178

Thread: Gorilla Burrs

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    960

    Gorilla Burrs

    These burrs are designed for a small number of top commercial grinders such as the Mythos, the EK43 and the Robur.

    Burrs are what gives the flavour profile, particle distribution and other properties of the grind to a much greater degree than the machine built around them.

    The grinder itself of course is what determines the geometry and size of the burrs and the grinding path along with features such as hoppers, dosers, adjusting mechanisms and timers.

    This company has produced burrs with it's own profile and has even produced graphs of particle size distributions of sample grinds (indicative only of course as each roast is different). The burrs themselves have many times the hardness of manufacturer's burrs and even have a special anti-friction coasting to reduce grind temperatures. The burrs are claimed to produce a better grind with reduced amounts of fines which may contribute to bitterness.

    I think it is past time companies come out with specialised burrs for common grinders as this is a key area that is relatively undeveloped. We just assume Mazzer or Mahlkonig know best but my best is just as with baskets, that may not always be true.

    This thread isn't just about Gorilla burrs as there may be others out there so I am interested in thoughts from people on the forum.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    279
    I tend to agree that manufacturers should come out with different burr sets for different purposes. Baratza is one of the few that did this -AP burrs for espresso and BG for brewing.

    Interestingly though, despite the length they went through, some early reports said that there isn't that much difference between the Gorilla Gear burrs and the regular burrs. Maybe the advantage lies in the longevity and allowing more grind before overheating, and that isn't quite relevant to home users like us.

    I think as a whole, we don't know enough about the burrs design(how to create a certain grind distribution deliberately within the constraint of physics/mother nature). Secondly, most consumers won't be able to tell much difference. The ongoing debate of conical vs flat a living proof of that! Consumers generally care more about usability and price (that's why blade grinder still sells).

    R&D to create these different burrs is unlikely lucrative enough for the big companies. Maybe this is more of a niche market for the smaller-scale machinists to tap into as a side hobby (custom burrs)...
    Dimal likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    960
    I Samuel. Definitely it would take work and skill and money to design different burrs for different machines. You would have to target just a few select machines as they did with the Gorilla burrs.

    The conical/flat burr argument is interesting and I even bought a Robur a week back just to see if the difference is a smack in the face with a wet fish. It isn't. I compared to my M4D and I couldn't tell the difference. Obviously you need a quality grinder and the ones we are talking about definitely are quality grinders, the rest is probably firstly the Coffee bean and roast itself with grind and extraction still important but not as important as the raw material put in. I think as long as the grind is even and tamped properly and the espresso extracted at more or less the correct time, temperature and pressure, all should be good.

    Nevertheless, I think the burr design itself is it seems less important in the minds of most users than the machines themselves, some of which cost a small fortune. It is because of course the machine designer obviously knows a lot about burr design as well and so a lot of work goes in to this.

    It may be in the future though that more emphasis is placed on the burr design. Specialist companies then need to supply detained particle size distributions for different roasts and their recommendations. Companies such as Mazzer and others might then be persuaded by competition to lift their game in this area too. Most of use don't have access to Laser Particle Size Analysers and this information may well be of interest. Such information may also further drive development and refinement of the machines themselves.

    I see this as a developing area.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •