Serious Eats / Jesse Raub The Competition This test showed that none of these scales were up to the task for extremely lightweight readings, but I’m not sure many people are trying to weigh a single feather (or in this case, coffee bean) in their kitchen, either. 2 grams is a low enough weight that it’s within the scale’s margin of error, it’s hard to say. Whether that means that the bulk of these scales just weren’t sensitive enough to read. When the coffee bean was removed, the scale would then read -.2 grams, showing that the scale had compensated for the light weight by re-zeroing its platform. This was tested both with a zeroed out platform and a tared ramekin in order to test responsiveness with added weight, but the only clue as to what might be happening showed up on the Acaia Pearl S: with the Pearl S, the scale would quickly flash to. The Lunar is designed for accuracy (particularly when making espresso) with a smaller weight capacity and a highly responsive platform, but I didn’t expect to see that none of the other scales could even register a single coffee bean being placed onto their platforms. Our control scale was an Acaia Lunar that had been calibrated with a 100-gram scientific weight and easily displayed that both a single coffee bean from Peru and a single coffee bean from Burundi weighed. In our first accuracy test, I placed a single coffee bean onto each scale. While all of the scales struggled to note the weight of a single coffee bean, we don't really think this would be a common usage.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |