tl:dr – I traded my manual WDT for a 3D-printed spirographic one, expecting consistent coffee. Instead, I got circular tracks and soupy pucks. Turns out standardising my process was actually creating channeling. I’m keeping the tamping station, but the spirographic tool is getting returned.
After getting my new espresso machine, I started looking at gear that would fit my 58 mm group head. My old machine had a smaller group head so everything had to be purchased again – tamper, funnel, puck screens and distributor. I decided to get a planetary spirographic WDT tool with the hopes of standardising my coffee making process. The goal has always been to make consistently decent coffee at home.
It turns out, these tools can range in price and build quality. The more affordable 3D printed tools costing around £60 whereas a full metal tool (with brass or aluminium gears) were around £160+. This wasn’t going to be a cheap investment but I was interested in getting something that would minimise user variability and improve consistency. I opted for a lower-end 3D printed device because of cost. I liked that you could get something perfectly fitting your machine as it was 3D printed.
Week 1: Did I Make A Mistake?
Truthfully, I was underwhelmed and a little disappointed with the spirographic WDT tool when I started using it. I didn’t think it was as good as my manual tool as it left visible clumps and unevenness’s in my coffee bed – something that was never present in my manual distribution. I found cracks could easily form during preparation and I was observing more incidences of what I thought was channeling.
I wanted to omit my skill negatively impacting the tools abilities so I made sure to install the needles at the correct depth, tapping to settle grounds and the number of rotations (I settled on 10).
The one wonderful positive was was the inbuilt tamping station was a game changer. It was sturdy and perfect for tamping. You could also go hands free as it held my portafilter very securely.
Week 2: Trying Simplicity
I went into these week not wanting to overcomplicate things. As they say, “Keep it simple stupid.” and I was conscious of falling into the trap of adding all this gear with little benefit. I had reflected on how barista’s in speciality coffee shops don’t even distribute coffee when making it for customers – and the drinks come out great. I also had a grinder (DF54) that is notoriously good at not clumping its grounds if cleaned regularly.
I decided to start playing around with cutting out steps. Firstly, I dialled in a coffee and decided to stick with it going forward. Then I wanted to play around how much cutting out a step would impact things.
I couldn’t find an efficient way to just tap the coffee to distribute it so I tried a simple process of grinding into a container, flip over and shake for distribution. I compared this to grinding straight into my portafilter and distributing it with my WDT tool. I couldn’t commit to this experiment however as I noticed an immediate potential problem. The container I ground my coffee into left a small groove around the edge of my coffee bed – a very likely highway for my water during extraction.
The Data
Quantitative (measurable stuff)
Let’s compare an anaerobic natural coffee that I pulled manually and with the spirographic WDT. This was during the dialling in process so don’t judge the parameters folks.
| Grind Setting | WDT Tool | Time (s) |
| 8.5 | Spirographic | 9 |
| 8.5 | Manual | 12 |
| 4.5 | Spirographic | 16 |
| 4.5 | Manual | 14 |
| 2.0 | Manual | 27 (success!) |
Qualitative (descriptive stuff)
When preparing the puck with the finer grind settings (4.5 and 3.0) with the spirographic tool, I started to notice the imprint the tool left behind. When I removed the tool after my rotations, I noticed the little tunnels left by my thin needles as well as the tracks made by its rotations. This was even visible after tamping and if I can see it with my naked eye, in terms of particle sizes – those tunnels are big. I tapped the portafilter in the hopes to fill them but judging from the very fast extractions and soupy puck at these grind settings – it was supporting my channelling issues and the culprit was likely these tunnels and tracks.
The Verdict: Back to Basics
This was a classic case of new gear hype and dealing with the disappointment of an investment that wasn’t worth it.
In the end, the data from my log told a story that my taste buds had suspected. Despite grinding finer and finer to compensate for the gushing extractions, the spirographic tool consistently left me with soupy pucks and extractions. The precision of these 3D-printed gears was actually its downfall. The needles were following the exact same geometric path every rotation and were ploughing those same areas again and again, leaving visible circular tracks in the coffee rather than truly distributing it.
The moment I went back to my manual WDT tool and dropped my DF54 to a 2.0, the magic returned. I finally hit that tea-like, 27-second sweet spot, bringing out the fruity berry notes I knew were hidden in my beans. My manual stirring, randomized but thorough, created a textured, stable bed that the machine couldn’t just punch through.
This whole experience reminded me that consistency and ‘standardising’ a process can work against you. The randomness of it all is actually in your benefit and making everything so replicable can result in you being unable to make a coffee at all (plus doesn’t it strip away the soul of my coffee making ritual?). While I’m keeping the tamping station for its undeniable sturdiness, the spirographic tool is heading back to its maker. Sometimes, the best mod for your machine isn’t a new piece of gear; it’s trusting the technique you already spent the time to master.
I think this tool is probably perfect for someone who wants a fast and easy process and hasn’t got such a sensitive coffee machine. If you don’t fit into any of those categories and want a spirographic tool – it’s worth thinking again about the spirographic tool. Maybe give it a miss and stick to what you know and what you’re good at.
Until our next lesson,
Coffee Log 
Leave a comment