In article , J. Clarke wrote:
>DaveM wrote:
>> On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:15:32 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> DaveM wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 15:31:45 -0400, "J. Clarke"
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If McD had brought in some real coffee experts, people from the the
>>>>> various growers and roasters associations for example, they would
>>>>> have cut the opposition with their survey of local restaurants to
>>>>> pieces. But they didn't, they assumed that the judge would actually
>>>>> have a lick of common sense.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect for McDonalds to have won, they'd have needed a jury
>>>> that'd never had a McDonalds coffee. They were clearly too hot to
>>>> drink and I'd guess most customers got their mouths burnt the first
>>>> time they bought one.
>>>
>>> Then Starbucks coffee is also "clearly too hot to drink" as is the
>>> espresso I make at home and the percolator coffee my mother used to
>>> serve.
>>
>> I haven't found that - in Starbucks, I mean.
>
>Then 190F is not "clearly too hot to drink".
Are you accusing Starbucks of serving coffee that hot? If so, then I
*will* plunk down $4 or whatever at a Starbucks and I will take along my
thermometer!
>>> It appears to me that many people who are pontificating about coffee
>>> only drink it on rare occasions rather than every morning. Anybody
>>> who routinely drinks coffee sips it until it cools.
>>
>> Black coffee, perhaps.
>
>Which until Starbucks and their profusion of coffee-flavored milkshakes
>was how it was nomrally served.
What temperature do you claim "usual" coffee serving temperature is?
I get 158 degrees F for done brewing 10-15 seconds ago by a Bunn
"Pour-O-Matic" trhat surely looks like a common coffee machine to me!
>> With milk it gets cooled sufficiently, unless
>> you're using dried milk or reheating the coffee to keep the
>> temperature high. And that's not good - even though I'm primarily a
>> tea drinker, even I can taste the damage reheating does to coffee.
>
>And McD usually provides milk to those who want it. In fact that is how
>the Stupid Old Bat got burned, she took the lid off the cup to pour in
>the milk.
She got burned because the coffee was much hotter than most restaurant
coffee and because the lid was unusually difficult to open without
spillage.
>>> The extraction process requires that the water be at approximately
>>> 200 degrees during extraction and the only way to serve the coffee
>>> cooler than that is to let it sit for a long period of time, which
>>> has an adverse effect on flavor, or to add cool water
>>> post-extraction and _neither_ of these is a normal part of coffee
>>> preparation.
>>>
>>> Try it yourself--get a one-cup coffee filter and put coffee in it and
>>> pour water through it at 150 degrees or whatever temperature you
>>> think is appropriate for the preparation of coffee and see what you
>>> get.
>>
>> I've filtered a lot of coffee in my time. I've never measured the
>> temperature,
>
>Try it sometime. Try it at the 150F that the know-it-alls are saying is
>the correct temperature.
How about whatever brewing temperature and brewing/serving
practices results in a serving temperature around 155-160 rather than 185?
>> but once the milk's in it's easy to drink. I've had a
>> burnt mouth at least once at McDonalds, though.
>
>Then you need to learn to be more careful, because their coffee is no
>hotter than what comes out of a filter cone into which 200 degree water
>has been poured.
So what temperature is the hot water hitting the coffee grains in a Bunn
Pour-O-Matic to give me 158 degrees when the serving caraffe just finishes
filling up while it was sitting on a hot warming plate/"burner"?
Next shift I work where they have one I will take along my thermometer
if I have to!
>By the way, coffee aficionados seldom add milk unless the coffee is
>_real_ bad.
McD's coffee, last time I drank it (quite a few years ago), I found to
be a swill slightly better than that served on Amtrak trains back when I
worked a messenger job in the mid 1980's. What I got on Amtrak
NE-corridor trains back then as "coffee" I found to be worth only its
caffeine content, with flavor so bad as to be only slightly degraded by
mixing it with canned domestic beer!
Conductor: "I was about to throw you off the train for doing that
wierd stuff!"
Me: "The coffee was not any worse mixed with beer than not!"
Conductor: "You got a point there!"
So I suspect McD's could have been trying to hide the bad flavor of
their "coffee" by making it hot enough to burn taste buds even when
sipped!
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com) |