Cutting My Coffee Budget: Can A Moka Pot Beat Starbucks?
Coffee is a daily ritual for me -- one shot of espresso with lots of warm milk and extra foam. I've been lazy though, not learning how to make it myself and relying on the chain stores to make it for me. While my palate isn't trained to call out the subtleties of different roasts or coffee origins, I can identify my least favorite trait -- burnt coffee -- with one sip.
In light of the economic times, I tried out a moka pot at home for the first time this weekend. The Bialetti Cuor Di Moka is an adorable little pot that brewed up some great coffee. Now, I’m a latte fan, and this had everything I like in a good latte -- plus it didn't cost me $4! The pot itself yielded a beautiful shot with nice crema. I added it to milk that I had heated and frothed separately, and I had a latte with great coffee taste and none of the bitter or burnt flavor you get at some chain coffee stores.
What gives this little pot the superpower to eliminate any burnt, over-cooked coffee flavor? Bialetti says this pot uses their new patented system called “Controlled Pouring.” They say that compared with a traditional moka pot of the same size, less water passes through the filter -- only the amount necessary for "extracting the best coffee blend, without any extraction dregs. The result is a coffee with excellent organic and flavorful characteristics." From what I gather from the manual, this revolutionary system just stops the coffee from entering the upper chamber when it gets hot enough to burn the coffee. Simple, but effective. You could get the same result if you got really good at gauging when to remove it from the heat. But I guess this new system saves you from having to be quite as diligent.
Starting this little pot on high heat made for very little coffee with almost no crema. When I tried it again following the directions – warming the burner before I started and turning it to medium once I put the pot on – the pot made a full beautiful cup with a nice crema float. Adding this little 5-minute ritual to my regular morning routine sets me well on my way to putting at least $1000 back in my pocket this year. Sorry Starbucks.
I was surprised to find that some moka pot fans on the blogs (self-proclaimed “potheads”) don’t consider the yield from a moka pot to be espresso. I have to admit that I usually don’t make espresso myself so I'm going to risk a dumb question and ask: What’s the difference between my little concentrated shot of moka pot coffee and a shot of espresso? They’re both (as Wikipedia defines espresso) “brewed by forcing steam or hot water under pressure through finely ground coffee.” It would be great if one of the potheads in the blogosphere would fill me in. I hope to hear from you.
--Martha Snodgrass
Nick on February 16, 2009 at 02:37 PM
Moka pot coffee is not technically espresso because espresso is supposed to be brewed at a higher pressure than the moka pot can produce, about 9 bars. The same is true of the cheap ~$30 espresso makers; they both rely on the pressure created by boiling water, which is just not enough to create 'true espresso'.
Elizabeth on February 17, 2009 at 07:56 AM
I did the same thing last year (dropped my Starbuck's habit and saved between 800-1000 a year by making my own with a stovetop espresso pot and hand frother). It's nice to save the money and I like the ritual of it. From the other comment, I suppose my "espresso" isn't ESPRESSO, but it's pretty tasty!
pickypickypicky on February 17, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Interesting.
It's not your "palette" that discriminates taste, it's your "palate". Palette is what an artist uses to mix & hold paint & is often used to imply a range of colors.
Sigh.
Tom on February 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM
I don't see any comments on the item yet, so I'll ask you--how is the cleanup? I have another of Bialetti's stovetop espresso makers and the cleaning can be a real pain (especially if one's roommate dumps it into the sink with water--not to be recommended).
Jim on February 17, 2009 at 12:34 PM
To answer your question, yes, a moka can beat Starbucks. But you aren't exactly setting the bar real high here.
Brewing at higher pressure wrings a lot of oils out of the coffee; I think 13 to 15 bars of pressure is pretty close to optimum for espresso. I use a moka sometimes, particularly while hiking, and find you can get a great shot of something like Turkish coffee from it, and something resembling espresso. But a properly pulled espresso shot (Hint: Starbucks isn't even close) is unmistakeably richer, with an almost creamy texture, little or no bitterness, and often a whole range of flavors hitting your tongue. My local coffee shop's espresso beans taste of dark chocolate with a touch of melon aftertaste.
CoffeeGeek.com is a good place to learn about the differences.
RR Ryan on February 17, 2009 at 01:04 PM
pickypickypicky: Second time I've seen that today. At some point I start to believe I'm wrong. As for the coffee, invest in a good espresso machine if you can afford it and make sure it has a pump. I've had an estro for 10-12 years and it's as good as new. And get a decent burr grinder for your beans. In the long term these are both money savers.
John Burgess on February 17, 2009 at 01:09 PM
I doubt this can produce better coffee than the Aerobie Coffee Press, also available through Amazon.
John Burgess on February 17, 2009 at 01:10 PM
I doubt this can produce better coffee than the Aerobie Coffee Press, also available through Amazon.
John Burgess on February 17, 2009 at 01:10 PM
I doubt this can produce better coffee than the Aerobie Coffee Press, also available through Amazon.
Memomachine on February 17, 2009 at 01:10 PM
Hmmmm.
1. Never understood the attraction of Starbucks. The coffee is over-roasted leading to excessive bitterness. And the result is less attractive than what you'd get from a diner.
2. Personally I really like Moka. Sure it isn't actual espresso but it does give some incredibly good flavor.
3. Never forget the Kahlua. It doesn't take much to make a nice cup of coffee just that little bit better.
David_Layman on February 17, 2009 at 01:33 PM
I hope I'm not intruding, but I've always wondered this:
How does one "hea[t] and frot[h] (milk) separately," without using an expensive espresso machine, with a frother attachment?
I'd love to make my own froth for (at least quasi-) espresso.
richardb on February 17, 2009 at 01:47 PM
I've owned these types of pots for years and they make much better coffee compared to drip machines. Whether they make better than Starbucks, that depends upon what you drink. If its Starbucks COD, then sure. If it's their espresso, cappuccino, au laits, then I don't think so. One other note on the mocha. Try adding milk to it then walk away for 4 or 5 minutes after you turn on the heat. That milk will be all over your stove.
I recommend a good espresso machine that gives 15 bars. Won't save you a penny but it will make Starbuck, Peets, whoever quality espresso.
richardb on February 17, 2009 at 01:47 PM
I've owned these types of pots for years and they make much better coffee compared to drip machines. Whether they make better than Starbucks, that depends upon what you drink. If its Starbucks COD, then sure. If it's their espresso, cappuccino, au laits, then I don't think so. One other note on the mocha. Try adding milk to it then walk away for 4 or 5 minutes after you turn on the heat. That milk will be all over your stove.
I recommend a good espresso machine that gives 15 bars. Won't save you a penny but it will make Starbuck, Peets, whoever quality espresso.
richardb on February 17, 2009 at 01:47 PM
I've owned these types of pots for years and they make much better coffee compared to drip machines. Whether they make better than Starbucks, that depends upon what you drink. If its Starbucks COD, then sure. If it's their espresso, cappuccino, au laits, then I don't think so. One other note on the mocha. Try adding milk to it then walk away for 4 or 5 minutes after you turn on the heat. That milk will be all over your stove.
I recommend a good espresso machine that gives 15 bars. Won't save you a penny but it will make Starbuck, Peets, whoever quality espresso.
richardb on February 17, 2009 at 01:48 PM
I've owned these types of pots for years and they make much better coffee compared to drip machines. Whether they make better than Starbucks, that depends upon what you drink. If its Starbucks COD, then sure. If it's their espresso, cappuccino, au laits, then I don't think so. One other note on the mocha. Try adding milk to it then walk away for 4 or 5 minutes after you turn on the heat. That milk will be all over your stove.
I recommend a good espresso machine that gives 15 bars. Won't save you a penny but it will make Starbuck, Peets, whoever quality espresso.
Suzy on February 17, 2009 at 02:19 PM
I've had a Mukka Express for 3 years and love it. It paid for itself in less than 2 months. It makes a great Latte. However, it is a pain to clean. And heaven help you if you forget to put it together right and espresso blows all over your ceiling (it's happened to me 4 times).
comatus on February 17, 2009 at 04:08 PM
Memo, Euro-style coffeemaking is fancier and more bitter because for most of history the Europeans could not get good coffee. It was all robusto, and they had to roast the heck out of it, and do what they could with the product. Meanwhile we got the best in the world, and boiled it in a percolator.
Pardon my provincial question, but just what happened to coffee, as opposed to all these confections? You know, what you make with a grinder and a Melitta, or a Chemex, struck at 190 degrees? Was something missing from our lives? I would not put these sidewalk candies alongside a cup of real mocha-java (that's Mocha, Yemen, not "mocha latte") for all the tea in China.
I have a cappuccino machine that I bought in 1978, and it's fun. I use it four to six times a year, to make a dessert drink for dinner parties. There's no way in the world I'd want one every morning.
Just a hick I'm sure, but I'd lay money I've been making good coffee longer than most of you have.
DavidS. on February 17, 2009 at 06:49 PM
A few years ago on vacation in Italy, i picked up a basic Moka Express pot, and I've been hooked ever since. I heat the milk separately then froth it with a handheld wire frother (found one at Ikea for less than $5). Sure it's not the same as steam, but it gives it a decent froth.
I am curious to try this new model with "controlled pouring". With my 3 cup Moka Express "Dama", I've found that the coffee/espresso tastes *much* better when you remove the pot off from the heat once 2/3 of the water is in the upper chamber. Once you get used to timing it, it's not that hard.
ramblin' on February 18, 2009 at 08:15 AM
We are coffee geeks in our household and have experimented with many coffee contraptions. The mokka pot is quick, easy and makes great coffee. We have had few of the problems that others are describing and find clean up to be easy. For froth, we use the glass cylinder with the wire frother that someone else mentioned. After putting in the milk, we pop it into the microwave for 55 seconds before frothing it. Otherwise, the cold milk cools the coffee down too much.
Ray on March 23, 2009 at 09:27 PM
I'm confused. I ordered this pot on the basis of this article. It arrived today.
In every online advert for the pot, INCLUDING the Bialetti.com Shop, it is advertised as an "espresso maker,"
Imagine my surprise to read in the instruction manual a warning that says "Espresso coffee must never be used since the system might not work properly."
Great. I also ordered 4 packages of Lavazza Rossa to use with this pot.
So is this an espresso maker or not?
Thoughts for Ray on January 17, 2010 at 08:40 AM
Ray: I believe that it is referring to espresso GRIND which is one of the finest grinds for coffee. It may clog the filters by lodging coffee into the tiny holes by which the coffee flows into the upper chamber. I am using a blended espresso ROAST with my moka pot. It's turned out very well so far. All of my current trouble is due to "user error". BTW thanks for mentioning the proper heating instructions, Martha! I've been getting crema for 1/2 the process followed by premature gurgles. Can't wait to try this method!