Top positive review
4.0 out of 5 starsA review by an average Joe (ha! SWIDT)
Reviewed in the United States on December 7, 2015
This review is for the average coffee drinker, the camper who wants better coffee "in the wild", and/or someone trying to choose between the Aeropress and a French press. Keep in mind that my wife and I aren't coffee-nistas. Me: 16 ounce mug in the morning with sugar and flavored liquid creamer; my wife: 16 oz mug in the morning with regular powdered creamer. Neither of us drink espresso and the menu at Starbucks intimidates me. 'Nuff said.
When we would go camping in our small trailer, my wife and I would drink instant coffee because it's easy and not messy, but the flavor and caffeine levels were lacking. We bought a French press and the flavor and caffeine were definitely an improvement. However, the messiness of it put us off: smacking it like an almost-empty ketchup bottle trying to get most of the grounds out, then having to rinse out the rest.
Then we heard about the Aeropress. We bought it and tried it at home and while camping. It makes good coffee, but it didn't knock our socks off (sorry, Aeropress aficionados). But we liked it enough to buy another one and give to our son to help him save money from always buying at coffee houses. More recently, we bought a couple of ultra-fine metal filters for the Aeropress on Amazon from Cornucopia Brands. We wanted to see if there was a taste difference between the paper and metal filters for our unsophisticated palates; more on that in a minute.
Comparing the French press and Aeropress: My wife and I think they make similar-tasting coffee and both are better than our drip machine and light years ahead of instant (granules or bags). IMO, the French press is easier for making the coffee (scoop coffee into the cylinder, pour boiling/very hot water in, wait a few minutes, press plunger down, pour coffee out) while the Aeropress directions can be rather. . . fussy: scoop coffee into chamber (some buffs measure it by the GRAM!), shake chamber to level coffee, pour 175 degree F water (185 degree F if using light roast) to level 2 in the chamber (buffs pour in a little water, let the coffee "bloom" for a few seconds, then pour the rest in; also, some buffs measure the water by the ml, possibly by the cc), stir ten seconds, then insert plunger and press gently for 20 to 60 seconds. [There's also the "inverted method" which we use that allows the coffee to brew longer.] Realistically, you don't have to be so exact to end up with really good coffee and experimentation is encouraged to discover what works best for you, but the French press is still easier up to this point. When it comes to clean-up however, the Aeropress wins by a landslide: unscrew cap, hold over trash can, and push plunger all the way to expel the paper filter and "puck" of grounds, and rinse the plunger's rubber tip. That's it. Also, the Aeropress is at least twice as quick to make coffee which is important if you're the one waiting with bleary eyes and blurred brain.
I slightly prefer the French press taste (possibly because the paper filter supposedly restricts many of the beans' oils from reaching the mug) while my wife slightly prefers the Aeropress. However, for camping, it's definitely the Aeropress because of the easier clean-up.
The oils question caused us to buy the Cornucopia Brands metal filter on Amazon to try them out--for two filters at that price, how could we go wrong? In a taste test with my wife, our son, and me, we all tasted a small difference between the paper filter and metal filter. Our son and I preferred the metal while my wife preferred the paper. So we gave one metal filter to our son and I kept the other one. With the metal filter, you have to remember not to push the filter into the trash with the grounds and that it's one more thing to rinse off. Of course, those that reuse the paper filters to save natural resources or money have to do the same.
So, for these two coffee rubes: we think both the Aeropress and French press make better coffee than our drip machine (forget about instant), but not so much that we don't use our dripper several times a workweek due to laziness/time; we think the Aeropress and French press make similar tasting coffee although I think the French press has a fuller body to it because of the oils (albeit with higher cholesterol, too), but that using a metal filter in the Aeropress makes up some of that difference; and, finally, the French press is easier in set up and brewing while the Aeropress is quicker in brewing and easier in clean-up. A final consideration is that a French press uses more coffee per serving that a dripper and the Aeropress uses more than a French press. For us, it's 2.5 teaspoons vs 3 t. vs 4 t. per serving. Not a huge difference, but it's there.
BTW, before we got an Aeropress, I'd heard of cappuccinos, but didn't know what they were; now, I've even made a couple when I needed a little boost in the afternoon. Thanks Aeropress for making me feel a little more worldly.
