How we rate grinders

The heaviest thing on the page, because even particle size is the only reason a grinder exists. It is what separates a $30 grinder from a $300 one; everything else on this list is convenience.

What we can actually read: No maker publishes particle distribution or fines percentage, so this is the one criterion we cannot measure directly. We read the three things that predict it instead: burr geometry, burr diameter and burr material.

Scored from figures that predict it, because the thing itself is not published.

The 3 rules below score this criterion out of 10, and they add up to 10 exactly. That result is then worth 24 of the category's 100 points.

• Burr geometry4 of 10

  flat

  4 pts

  conical

  3 pts

  blade

  0 pts

• Burr diameter4 of 10

  Not asked of a product whose burr type is blade.

  30 mm or less

  1 pt

  over 30 mm, up to 38 mm

  2 pts

  over 38 mm, up to 48 mm

  3 pts

  over 48 mm, up to 58 mm

  3.5 pts

  over 58 mm

  4 pts

• Burr material2 of 10

  Not asked of a product whose burr type is blade.

  titanium, stainless steel

  2 pts

  ceramic

  1.5 pts

  plastic

  0 pts

10 of 10

Whether one grinder covers everything you brew, or whether you end up buying a second. Espresso is the hard end: plenty of grinders sold as all-purpose cannot hold a fine enough grind, and it is the most common complaint about cheap ones.

What we can actually read: Every input here is published by every serious maker: settings count, whether the adjustment is stepped or stepless, and the two ends of the range.

Scored directly from published figures.

The 4 rules below score this criterion out of 10, and they add up to 10 exactly. That result is then worth 16 of the category's 100 points.

• Grind settings5 of 10

  20 or less

  1.5 pts

  over 20, up to 40

  3 pts

  over 40, up to 90

  4 pts

  over 90

  5 pts

• Adjustment2 of 10

  stepless

  2 pts

  stepped

  1.5 pts

• Holds an espresso grind2 of 10

  present

  2 pts

• Coarse enough for French press1 of 10

  present

  1 pt

10 of 10

A grinder is either a fifteen-year purchase or a two-year one, and the materials plus the warranty are the only advance warning you get.

What we can actually read: Body material and warranty are usually published. Burr bearings and axle material almost never are, which is why this reads as thinly evidenced more often than any other criterion here.

Scored from figures that predict it, because the thing itself is not published.

The 3 rules below score this criterion out of 10, and they add up to 10 exactly. That result is then worth 16 of the category's 100 points.

• Body material4 of 10

  Also read under Cleaning, Retention & Mess, which asks a different question of the same fact.

  stainless steel, titanium, brass

  4 pts

  aluminium, ceramic

  3 pts

  glass

  2 pts

  abs, plastic

  1 pt

• Warranty4 of 10

  none

  0 pts

  up to 1 yr

  1.5 pts

  over 1 yr, up to 2 yr

  2.5 pts

  over 2 yr, up to 5 yr

  3.5 pts

  over 5 yr

  4 pts

• Manufacture location published2 of 10

  published at all

  2 pts

10 of 10

Retention is yesterday's coffee appearing in today's cup, and it is the thing owners complain about long after they have stopped noticing anything else.

What we can actually read: Retention in grams is published by single-dose grinders and almost nobody else, so this leans on whether the grinder is designed around single dosing and on the body material that governs static.

Scored directly from published figures.

1 of the 3 rules below are struck through in this category, because too few makers publish the input. The 2 that remain score this criterion out of 10 between them: a struck rule leaves the sum entirely rather than counting as a zero. That result is then worth 14 of the category's 100 points.

• Retentionnot scored here

  Fewer than one maker in four publishes this here, so its 5 points leave the sum rather than being guessed at.

  0.5 g or less

  5 pts

  over 0.5 g, up to 1 g

  4 pts

  over 1 g, up to 2 g

  3 pts

  over 2 g, up to 5 g

  2 pts

  over 5 g

  1 pt

• Single dose3 of 10

  Also read under Dosing & Workflow, which asks a different question of the same fact.

  present

  3 pts

• Static cling2 of 10

  Also read under Build Quality & Durability, which asks a different question of the same fact.

  stainless steel, aluminium, ceramic

  2 pts

  plastic

  1 pt

10 of 10

How many actions stand between beans and a brew. A hopper you fill weekly is a different machine from one you dose into every morning, and neither is wrong, but they suit different people.

What we can actually read: Hopper capacity, a built-in scale, a timer and single-dose design are all published when they exist.

Scored directly from published figures.

The 5 rules below score this criterion out of 10, and they add up to 10 exactly. That result is then worth 12 of the category's 100 points.

• Single dose2 of 10

  Also read under Cleaning, Retention & Mess, which asks a different question of the same fact.

  present

  2 pts

• Hopper2 of 10

  30 g or less

  1 pt

  over 30 g, up to 100 g

  1.5 pts

  over 100 g

  2 pts

• Built-in scale2 of 10

  present

  2 pts

• Timer2 of 10

  present

  2 pts

• Drive2 of 10

  Also read under Speed & Noise, which asks a different question of the same fact.

  electric

  2 pts

  manual

  1 pt

10 of 10

Points already earned per pound spent, against the median of this category. Good value is not a mood: it is what else the same money buys here.

What we can actually read: Needs a price on the product and on at least three rivals. Where the category is thinly priced it scores neutral and says so.

Computed from price, not from a rule list

Value is the only criterion here with no thresholds of its own, because it cannot be read off one product. It asks what else the same money buys in this category, so it needs the category. That result is then worth 10 of the category's 100 points.

Points already earned on everything else

out of 10

Multiplied by the category median over this price

median ÷ price

Capped at

10

No price published, or fewer than 3 priced rivals

5 of 10

Half marks is not a verdict, it is a refusal to guess: with nothing to compare against, a product is neither good value nor bad, and scoring it either way would invent a finding. It corrects itself as the category fills.

Weighted lightest deliberately. A slow grinder is an annoyance; an inconsistent one ruins the coffee. Noise matters mainly if you grind before anyone else is awake.

What we can actually read: Motor power and rpm are published by electric makers. Noise in decibels almost never is, so a quiet claim is treated as a claim rather than a figure.

Scored from figures that predict it, because the thing itself is not published.

1 of the 4 rules below are struck through in this category, because too few makers publish the input. The 3 that remain score this criterion out of 10 between them: a struck rule leaves the sum entirely rather than counting as a zero. That result is then worth 8 of the category's 100 points.

• Drive3 of 10

  Also read under Dosing & Workflow, which asks a different question of the same fact.

  electric

  3 pts

  manual

  1.5 pts

• Motor3 of 10

  Not asked of a product whose manual or electric is manual.

  100 W or less

  1 pt

  over 100 W, up to 200 W

  2 pts

  over 200 W

  3 pts

• Burr speed2 of 10

  Not asked of a product whose manual or electric is manual.

  400 rpm or less

  2 pts

  over 400 rpm, up to 1000 rpm

  1.5 pts

  over 1000 rpm

  1 pt

• Noisenot scored here

  Fewer than one maker in four publishes this here, so its 2 points leave the sum rather than being guessed at.

  60 or less

  2 pts

  over 60, up to 75

  1.5 pts

  over 75

  1 pt

10 of 10