Home › Experiments › 1:14 vs 1:17 ratio

1:14 vs 1:17 brew ratio on a V60: a simulated comparison

One variable changed · simulated on the CoffeeScope V3 engine · updated 23 July 2026

Brew ratio — grams of coffee to grams of water — is how you set strength. We held the dose, grind, temperature and pour fixed and changed only the water: a concentrated 1:14 against a lighter 1:17 — simulated in CoffeeScope.

The question

People often treat ratio and grind as if they do the same thing, but they don't. Adding more water mostly dilutes the cup — more solvent, lower concentration — while also giving the bed a little more fresh water to keep extracting against. So the intuition is that 1:14 should taste stronger and 1:17 weaker; the open question is whether the extra water at 1:17 actually pulls more out of the coffee, or just spreads the same solubles across a bigger cup. This experiment separates strength from extraction.

The setup

Both lanes are the simulator's stock V60 recipe (16 g dose, 94 °C, 600 µm, spiral pour). The only difference is the ratio: 1:14 (224 g water) vs 1:17 (272 g water).

Exact recipe (reproducible in the simulator)

{
  "brewer": "v60", "doseG": 16, "grindUm": 600,
  "waterTempC": 94, "roastLevel": 0.4, "roastAgeDays": 7,
  "grindSpread": 0.45, "bloomWaterX": 2, "bloomTimeS": 45,
  "pourRate": 4, "pourHeight": 8, "pourPattern": "spiral",
  "bedLevel": 0, "pourHeadroom": { "stopMm": 10, "resumeMm": 13 },
  "resolution": "medium",

  "ratio": 14   // Lane A — 1:14, stronger
  "ratio": 17   // Lane B — 1:17, lighter
}

Every number on this page is read from these two runs, taken to brew completion on the deterministic V3 engine.

Simulated results

Physics-based simulation, calibrated to move in the right direction — not a measurement of your specific coffee. How to read these numbers →

Measure	1:14	1:17	Takeaway
Strength (TDS)	1.52 %	1.30 %	The headline difference: 1:14 is a distinctly stronger, more concentrated cup.
Extraction yield (EY)	18.8 %	20.0 %	The extra water at 1:17 does pull slightly more out of the bed — but the effect is small next to the strength change.
Cup volume	197.9 ml	245.8 ml	48 ml more beverage at 1:17 — the same solids, spread across more water.
Drawdown time	179 s	208 s	More water simply takes longer to pass through the same bed.
Cup temperature at finish	69.1 °C	69.0 °C	Essentially the same finish temperature.

Predicted taste axes

The taste axes are directional calibrations, not sensory-panel scores. A difference is flagged tasteable when it clears the model's own threshold of 0.045 (0–1 scale).

Axis	1:14	1:17	Direction
Acidity	Brighter	Softer	Small shift
Aroma	More intense	Softer	Small shift
Bitterness	Moderate	Moderate	Minimal shift
Body	Fuller	Lighter	Minimal shift
Clarity	Clean	Clean	Minimal shift
Sweetness	Sweet	Sweet	Minimal shift
Astringency	Soft	Soft	No shift

Exact taste axis values (0–1 scale)

Axis	1:14	1:17	Δ
Acidity	0.60	0.53	0.07
Aroma	0.82	0.77	0.05
Bitterness	0.41	0.37	0.04
Body	0.61	0.57	0.04
Clarity	0.69	0.71	0.02
Sweetness	0.47	0.46	0.01
Astringency	0.02	0.02	0.00

This is the honest surprise: the only axes that clear the tasteable threshold are the concentration-driven ones — the 1:14 cup reads a little brighter and more intensely aromatic simply because the same solubles sit in less water. The balance axes (sweetness, bitterness, clarity, body) barely move. Ratio's real effect is strength and cup size; if you want to move the flavour balance itself, grind or temperature is the lever.

How it builds over time

Cumulative extraction yield, sampled during the brew:

Time	1:14 — EY	1:17 — EY
60 s	8.0 %	8.0 %
120 s	15.1 %	15.1 %
Final	18.8 %	20.0 %

The two lanes track each other almost exactly through the bloom and early pours — the bed and dose are identical — and only separate in the tail, where the extra water at 1:17 keeps extracting for a little longer.

Why it happens

Two effects are at work, and they point in opposite directions on TDS. Dilution dominates: TDS is dissolved solids divided by water, so adding ~48 ml of water at 1:17 drops the concentration even though slightly more mass came out of the bed. Extraction moves the other way but gently: the additional fresh, low-saturation water at 1:17 pushes the extraction driving force a little harder and for a little longer, lifting yield from 18.8 % to 20.0 %. Both land inside the SCA Gold Cup window, so the flavour balance barely moves; what actually changes in the cup is the strength. See the methodology for the extraction-kinetics and saturation model behind this.

Caveats

This is a simulator, not a measurement of your specific coffee. Read the numbers as a well-reasoned direction, not a lab result.

Both ratios here happen to land inside a healthy extraction window; pushed to extremes, a very tight or very open ratio interacts with grind and drawdown in ways a single A/B does not show.
The taste axes are calibrated to move the right way by a plausible amount, not validated against a trained sensory panel (see the calibration note).
Perceived strength depends on the drinker; the model reports TDS and directional taste, not a personal preference.
The model does not capture bypass or channeling that a longer 1:17 pour can introduce in a real dripper (limitations).

Run it yourself

Load this exact A/B in the live simulator and watch the two cups fill to different volumes at different strengths:

Run 1:14 vs 1:17 live →Get Early Access →

Related experiments: Medium vs coarse grind Light vs dark roast 85 °C vs 96 °C

Methodology, validation & limitations →