Introduction

Born in 1956 with the market debut of the Faema Baby, this category of boilerless lever espresso machines has exploded over the past few years thanks to the arrival of countless new models. Their popularity is due to several factors, chief among them their small size, which makes them perfect for the increasingly tight living spaces many of us occupy, and their easy portability when travelling, allowing enthusiasts to brew high‑quality coffees even when away from home. The absence of a boiler lowers costs as well as the number of appliances that need to be plugged in if you already have a kettle, keeping the countertop clean and flexible. Using a kettle also lets people heat only the small amount of water needed, saving time and energy, and even allows to experiment with different waters without having to empty a boiler first, sometimes a tricky operation. Finally, let’s not forget that modern kettles now allow very precise temperature control, and there are ever more dedicated solutions for steaming milk, giving more people the chance to play and achieve results that once required much larger, more expensive machines. The result is that a big number of products now crowd this segment, and their differences are often anything but obvious, making it increasingly hard for buyers to choose wisely. Reason why I decided to put a representative sample of these machines through a thorough head‑to‑head test and shed a bit of light on the landscape.

The models tested

Given the abundance of options, it was first necessary to define a few criteria to decide which machines would make it into this comparison. To qualify, a coffee machine had to have no boiler and be electricity‑free, small‑to‑medium in size (yet still portable for at least some kind of travel), and operated by a lever system. That last requirement ruled out many potentially excellent products whose manual mechanisms differ from a lever, but it was essential to compare machines that share the same operating principle and at the same time keep the test group to a realistically manageable number. Some examples of functioning principles excluded from this test are the hand-pump system of the Wacaco Picopresso and Handpresso, the screw system of the Aram Soulcraft, Portaspresso Rossa HC or Emanuale, the plunger system of the Cafflano Kompresso, Staresso Plus or The Forge, and many others. Should there be demand, an extension of the comparison to these types of espresso machines could be considered in the future. There are also models that fit the criteria but were not included in the test because it has not been possible to obtain a unit for testing, either through the manufacturer or in different ways (read more on the criteria and how each product was sourced here). Finally, a few machines were left out simply because they were announced when the test phase was already well under way.

The portable boilerless lever machines that have been compared are therefore 10 and are the following:

• Cafelat Robot (Barista Edition)
• Flair 58x
• Flair Neo Flex
• Flair Pro 2
• Hugh Leverpresso Pro
• Olympia Express Mina
• Rok EspressoGC (Commercial Edition)
• Rok Presso Smartshot
• Superkop
• Uniterra Nomad

One note on the Flair 58: the version in possession for this test (and pictured) is actually the 58+, which differs from the 58x only in a few cosmetic touches and in the presence of an electrical unit for pre‑heating the group; however, to respect the criteria listed above and keep the playing field level, it has always been used exactly as if it were the X version, without the electrical part.

Finally, it should be noted that this article will cover multiple aspects of each product in depth, but it is not a review. The focus will be primarily on highlighting the differences and similarities between the machines rather than evaluating specific features of each one.

Materials, included accessories and prices

Let’s begin with a quick, but necessary, overview of three fundamentals: the materials used, the accessories supplied and the price of each machine. It should first be mentioned that all the machines analyzed are made from certified materials (by agencies from various countries) for food contact and safe at 100 °C or higher, crucial when working with boiling water. Of course talking materials and accessories without mentioning price would be unfair, and while the numbers can vary significantly from country to country due to availability, taxes, duties and shipping, for each model, an approximate price has been indicated when ordering directly from the manufacturer's website at the time of writing this article. All prices are excluding VAT and do not include possible customs or shipping fees; where needed currencies were converted at the current rate.

Flair Neo Flex
The Flair Neo Flex sports a body made entirely of plastic save for the brew cylinder, which is stainless steel. It comes with two filters, one pressurized and one classic with a plastic exterior support and stainless steel interior. Also in the box are a plastic measuring scoop that doubles as a tamper, a plastic funnel to help dose the grounds, a single‑spout plastic adapter that converts the bottomless “portafilter”, a metal shower screen that sits on top the baskets, a silicone cap to pre‑heat the cylinder / group, a plastic piston with integrated pressure gauge and a spare valve for the pressurised basket. Build quality is the lowest of the machines here, but at roughly 99$ / 89€ it is by far the cheapest.

Rok Presso Smartshot
Second‑cheapest at about 179€ / 199$ is the Rok Presso Smartshot. Available in various colors, the central part of the body, as well as the assembly where the water is inserted is made of a glass-filled nylon polymer; while the levers and top ring are made of die-cast aluminum, the springs and basket of stainless steel, the shower screen of silicone, and the portafilter of chrome-plated zinc with wooden handle. It comes with a plastic spoon that doubles as a tamper.

Rok EspressoGC
The bigger sister, Rok EspressoGC, sells for around 249€ / 277$ in the standard version or 279€ / 310$ as the Commercial Edition tested here, which includes the addition of a pressure gauge. Compared with the Smartshot, its full die‑cast aluminium frame feels sturdier yet not overly heavy, while the black part of the group, including the piston, is made of the same glass‑filled nylon. The shower screen and basket are stainless, the portafilter is chrome-plated zinc with a plastic handle. The spoon that serves as a tamper is made of plastic, and a lightweight funnel to be placed on the basket made of glass-filled nylon is also provided.

Uniterra Nomad
The Nomad, like the Neo Flex, also features a large number of plastic parts, but feels far more solid and well‑built. Made of metal there are contact parts such as the handle for engaging the portafilter, the lever and part of its mechanism, the True Crema Valve, the basket, and the shower screen. The portafilter itself is two‑piece: an upper POM (polyoxymethylene) section and a lower plastic shell. A metal tamper is included, and price is roughly 299$ / 267€.

Hugh Leverpresso Pro
The Hugh Leverpresso Pro is sold at a price of approximately  325$ / 292€ to which approximately 44$ / 40€ must be added if the stand is also desired. The product is made almost entirely of metal, with the main body, as well as the bottomless portafilter, basket, and showerscreen made of stainless steel, while the levers and decorative lid are made of aluminum. Exceptions, however, are the cup, double spout, and tamper, which are made of plastic. A practical hardshell carrying case is also provided. There is also available a version called Lite which is composed of more plastic parts but benefits from a halved weight and at 109$ / 97€, a considerably reduced price.

Flair Pro 2
The Flair Pro 2 shares many traits with the Neo Flex but uses more premium materials. The main frame is die‑cast aluminium, while the brew cylinder, shower screen, piston base and entire basket assembly are stainless steel. However, the piston still features a hole for the shaft that integrates the pressure gauge, which is made of plastic. Among the other accessories included are a stainless drip tray and basket spout, a plastic funnel to help fill the basket and a plastic cup to help lift the piston, a silicone cap for pre‑heating, and a metal tamper. Everything is protected by a sturdy hard case. Sadly the Flair Pro 2 was discontinued as this article was being written and replaced by the Flair Pro 3, which sells for roughly 325$ / 292€ and differs mainly in a thinner stainless steel cylinder plus, among the accessories, a swing‑arm mirror and a silicone funnel for pre‑heating the group on a kettle.

Cafelat Robot
The Cafelat Robot is made entirely of metal, with the main body made of die-cast aluminum and then powder-coated in multiple colors, while all parts in contact with water such as the plunger, basket, shower screen, and the 2 spout attachment for the portafilter are made of stainless steel. The remaining part of the portafilter and the tamper are also made of stainless steel. Also provided is a silicone mat to protect the paint on the base from potential scratches, a silicone cap to facilitate preheating, replacement gaskets with even a small packet of silicone lubricant, and paper filters that can be used in place of the metal showerscreen. Prices are about 385€ / 428$ for the Classic and 456€ / 507$ for the Barista version with pressure gauge as tested here.

Flair 58
The Flair 58 is also constructed primarily from metal with the die-cast aluminum frame painted black and the group including the piston made of stainless steel. The traditional showerscreen in this case has been removed altogether and replaced by a PVD (physical vapor deposition) coated puck screen. The portafilter, on the other hand, is of the bottomless type and is made of chrome-plated brass with a wooden handle that echoes the wooden accents of the lever handle. It also comes with a so-called “low-flow” basket and a stainless steel tamper, a handy articulating mirror, a silicone mat for laying cups or scales on, a pair of replacement gaskets, and two Allen wrenches for tightening the screws on the base and group. The Flair 58 in the 58x version starts at a price of 495$ / 445€.

Superkop
The Superkop combines a powder‑coated die‑cast aluminium body (available in various colours) with a hefty base of recycled Hevea wood (also known as rubberwood or parawood). Internal lever mechanics, the lever itself, the double‑spout portafilter (handle included), basket, shower screen and drip tray grid are all stainless steel; the piston is made of POM (polyoxymethylene), the cup that integrates the shower screen is polycarbonate and the drip tray is plastic. A Torx wrench for initial assembly is also supplied. A tamper is surprisingly absent and not even available as an add‑on. The Superkop is sold for about 660€ / 734$.

Olympia Express Mina
Finally, the most expensive of the group is the Olympia Mina. For an approximate price of 957€ / 1064$ it offers an all-metal construction; with a double-walled group where the inside is stainless steel and the outside anodized aluminum. The piston as well as the lever unit, legs, showerscreen, and basket are stainless steel. The portafilter, on the other hand, is of the bottomless type and is made of chrome-plated brass while the handles are made of plastic. Also included are a tamper and a mirror-polished plate for resting the cups both made of stainless steel, an Allen wrench for maintenance, and a hard-shell carrying case.

Build and technical specifications

Although they all belong to the same category, from the very first contact with the machines, apparent differences can be seen between one and the other in terms of approach and philosophy. The Flair 58 and Superkop are definitely the largest; while the smallest is by far the Hugh. Other crucial distinctions lie in the type of lever mechanism, basket size and the maximum beverage output each can generate.

Lever types
Lever machines are often lumped together as a single category even though there are many different kinds of lever mechanisms. The Olympia Mina, Flair 58, Neo Flex, and Pro 2 feature the classic single direct-lever system, while the Cafelat Robot, Rok EspressoGC, and Hugh adopt a dual-lever arrangement to generate pressure.

The dual‑arm system of the Rok EspressoGC, updated in 2022

The Rok Presso Smartshot also uses a dual-lever system, but unlike the models mentioned above, this one is assisted by two springs. Finally, the Uniterra Nomad employs a proprietary rocking mechanism that uses the lever through both its downward and upward strokes to create pressure, whereas the Superkop introduces an innovative rack system designed to reduce the effort required during use. The peculiarities of these different systems will be discussed in the chapter regarding ergonomics.

Basket sizes
There are also significant differences in basket sizes, both in diameter and in usable capacity. In terms of diameter, the range starts with the Superkop, Flair 58, and Cafelat Robot, which use 58-59 mm baskets; continues with the Rok, Hugh, Olympia, and Nomad at 50-51 mm; and ends with the 45 mm basket of the Flair Pro 2 and the 40 mm basket of the Flair Neo Flex.

In order of effective capacity, left to right, top row then bottom: Cafelat Robot, Flair Pro 2, Flair 58x, Hugh Leverpresso Pro, Superkop, Uniterra Nomad, Rok EspressoGC, Flair Neo Flex, Olympia Mina, Rok Presso Smartshot.

Smaller diameters, however, don’t necessarily translate to lower capacity, as the amount of coffee a basket can hold can vary significantly depending on its depth, as well as the presence or absence of a shower screen and how it interacts with the basket. To measure this value, each basket was filled to its maximum, stopping just before the coffee touched the shower screen (when present), and then the weight of the coffee was recorded.

It is important to note that this is only a reference measurement used to highlight the differences between machines, since the amount of coffee a basket can hold may change considerably depending on the density of the coffee used and the grind size. Additionally, the Rok Presso Smartshot comes exclusively with a pressurized basket; the Flair Neo Flex includes both a pressurized and a standard basket; and the Nomad features a valve called the TCV (True Crema Valve), which allows the traditional basket to be used in pressurized or non-pressurized mode depending on whether the valve is installed or removed. All other machines include a standard basket as part of the kit.

A note must also be made about the coffee used for these tests: a commercially available dark-roast blend, ground with a Bentwood Vertical 63 set at 120 microns. While this may not be the kind of coffee most readers of this article would typically drink, a commercial blend was chosen out of respect for the work that goes into producing high-quality beans. Wasting a specialty coffee, hand-harvested and hand-sorted by people who spent many hours doing so, would have been disrespectful.

Now lets get to the results. Among the machines tested, the basket with the smallest capacity was that of the Rok Smartshot. Because it is a classic pressurized basket, its internal volume is limited despite its outer size. However, thanks to the flat, flush silicone shower screen used by the Smartshot, the basket still managed to hold up to 16 grams. Filling the basket close to the rim, as is possible with machines that either lack a shower screen or use one that does not protrude, was not easy and absolutely required a funnel to keep the grounds in place before tamping. Next, with a capacity of 17 grams, is the Olympia Mina’s basket, followed by the 18 grams held by both the Rok EspressoGC and the small but deep 40 mm basket of the Flair Neo Flex. At the 19-gram mark, we find three machines, two of which use 50 to 51 mm baskets: the Nomad and the Hugh. The third is the Superkop, which uses a 59 mm basket. In this case, both the Nomad and Hugh are able to hold more coffee than expected thanks to their flat shower screens, while the Superkop holds comparatively less than its diameter would suggest because of the water cup with built-in shower screen that sits inside the basket. Finally, the machines with the highest coffee capacities are the Flair Pro 2, which managed to hold up to 22 grams of coffee, and the Robot. Thanks to its unique design, the Robot technically has no fixed limit on how much coffee it can hold, as its basket is extremely deep, but the more coffee you add, the less space remains for water.

The ideal capacity depends on personal preference. A larger capacity is not always an advantage, as it may reduce efficiency when brewing with smaller doses. Some users prefer to use 14 to 15 grams to save beans or to achieve longer brew ratios; others would never go below 18 to 19 grams. This is why it is important to evaluate a basket’s usable volume in relation to its diameter and one’s personal brewing style.

Maximum output
Another factor that heavily depends on a machine’s design, and not necessarily on its external size as one might assume, is the maximum output, meaning how much brewed coffee you can get in the cup. Like the usable basket volume, this figure is approximate, since it can vary depending on the dose, how much water the puck retains, the presence of air between the piston and the puck, and, when the group holds more water than what fits under the piston, the length of the pre-infusion phase. To address this, the same parameters used in the previous test were applied here, to assess the maximum output of each machine when using the maximum amount of coffee the basket can hold. All results refer to a single piston stroke. No "Fellini moves" were performed, which in some cases can allow for recharging more water. It is also worth noting that the coffee used in these tests had been roasted several months earlier and was already heavily oxidized, which made it easier for the water to pass through. In contrast, fresher coffee generally holds more water and offers greater resistance. The same coffee was used in every test, but should a fresher coffee be used, the values may be slightly lower.

The machine with the most limited maximum output was the Olympia Mina, which managed to extract 32 grams of espresso with a 17-gram dose before the flow slowed to mere drips. Next was the Rok EspressoGC with 34 grams, followed by the Rok Presso Smartshot and the Flair Neo Flex with 40 grams, then the Flair Pro 2 with 45 grams. At the 50-gram mark we find the Cafelat Robot, followed by the Flair 58, which reached 55 grams. With a noticeable gap, and rather impressively considering it is the smallest product in the lineup, the Hugh delivered an outstanding 65 grams from a 19-gram dose. Only the Superkop beat it, managing a remarkable 80 grams from the same dose, thanks to its larger design.

User experience and cup quality

When it comes to the user experience, it must first be noted that the main factor influencing this aspect for any coffee machine of this type is the kind of kettle you own. Having a kettle that can quickly heat the necessary amount of water, ideally to a specific temperature, and pour it in a more or less controlled way is a major advantage in terms of usability and overall enjoyment of these products. Therefore, if you do not already own one, the cost of a good kettle should probably be considered alongside the cost of the coffee machine, unless you intend to use the coffee maker exclusively for travel.

With that in mind, it can be said that the factors which most strongly influence the user experience of these machines, either positively or negatively, are mainly three: ergonomics, workflow, and ease of achieving good results.

Ergonomics
In this case, there is no escaping physics, and the larger machines are also the ones with better ergonomics, while the smaller ones tend to sacrifice this aspect in order to concentrate as many components as possible in the smallest space. The Flair 58 and the Superkop are therefore more practical to use than the others because their larger footprint allows portafilters to be inserted and removed easily, without the constant risk of knocking over your espresso cups. There is ample room to comfortably use a scale, the levers are long and equipped with comfortable grips, and the machines have a stable base that feels secure and does not require being held in place. In particular, Superkop's rack system requires the lever to be lowered and raised several times, but what benefits greatly is the pleasure of use since the force required is truly minimal.

On the other hand, the smaller the machines get, the more they require the use of both hands, whether it is one hand to pull the lever and the other to stabilize the base, as in the case of the Flair Pro 2, Neo Flex, and the Olympia Mina, or both hands to lower the two arms and focus the force toward the center, as with the two Roks, the Robot, or the Hugh. As demonstrated by the Superkop, the amount of force needed for extraction does not depend only on the length of the lever but also on whether there are one or two levers, on how they relate to the diameter of the basket, and on the overall design. In this case, however, the smaller the machine was, the greater was the force required on the levers to reach proper extraction parameters, with perhaps three exceptions.

The first is the Flair 58, which, despite its long lever, still requires a fair amount of force to reach 6 to 9 bars of pressure due to its large 58 to 59 mm basket, at least more than one might initially expect.

The second is the Rok Smartshot, which, thanks to its levers that are as long as the entire body of the machine, the way the pivot system is designed, and the assistance provided by the springs, requires less force than other machines of similar size. The Hugh uses a similar approach in terms of levers that are as long as the body, but since the body is only half the size while the basket is nearly the same diameter as the Smartshot’s, it requires much more force to operate.

Finally, something truly remarkable is achieved by the Nomad, which, thanks to its innovative lever system, manages to be one of the most compact machines while also being the second easiest to operate in terms of required force, surpassed only by the Superkop. The biggest drawback of the Nomad in terms of user experience is its low height, which forces the use of very low-profile cups and, in most cases, does not allow for the use of a scale. This issue can be solved by 3D printing a dedicated stand that raises the Nomad off the surface while following the shape of its base.

Another important aspect to highlight regarding ergonomics is the shape of the levers and the handle. The Flair 58, for example, is the only one with a T-shaped handle, which, compared to the other machines with a single lever (excluding the Nomad and Superkop), puts less strain on the wrist joints. The Mina, on the other hand, has a relatively short handle, which means the end angle of the grip often presses into the center of the palm. The Robot (unless you purchase the optional grip accessories) and, to a lesser extent, the Hugh, have thin levers that, when significant force is applied, can also feel uncomfortable against the palms.

Workflow
Another key aspect that affects whether a product is enjoyable to use on a daily basis is the number of parts that must be assembled and disassembled for each use and how easy they are to clean.

Cylinder, piston, basket and shower screen of the Flair Neo Flex

Standing out in terms of workflow complexity and number of components that must be assembled for each shot are the Flair Pro 2 and the Flair Neo Flex. This is not only because they require assembling 4 to 5 pieces compared to the 2 to 3 of all the others, but especially because they have a piston that the machine is only able to push downward and cannot lift back up. This particularity means that after the shot is pulled, once everything is cleaned, you need to find the small cup designed for this purpose (which in the case of the Neo Flex is the same one used as a tamper, but in the Pro it is an additional part) to manually push the piston back up and reset it for the next use. Separating the brew chamber from the basket while it still contains coffee is also not particularly pleasant and may result in splashes of hot water mixed with coffee grounds. On the other hand, the funnel provided with both models is very convenient. Although it is made of plastic, it works exceptionally well as it fits securely around the outside of the basket, making it easy to pour in the grounds and even allowing you to tamp the coffee while it is still in place.

Another point worth mentioning is the choice of basket design. Some people, myself included, have a certain hostility toward ridged baskets and would argue that they should be banned from home espresso machines. This is because many home baristas want to remove the basket from the portafilter for cleaning after each use, and the ridge makes this operation extremely difficult without external tools, especially when the portafilters are not bottomless. This need may also be driven by portafilters that do not sit flat when placed down, leading users to prefer preparing the puck inside the basket separately before inserting it into the portafilter, particularly when using a single-dose workflow.

In the group of manufacturers that have chosen to adopt this questionable feature, we find four machines. The first two are the Superkop and the Flair 58, both of which thankfully have access to a wide selection of compatible ridge-less baskets. The other two are the Rok machines. These have managed to surprise with how complicated they made something as conceptually simple as the basket. In fact, they do not have the usual ridge that sticks outward but rather one that protrudes inward. This (fortunately) undermines what should be the main advantage of such baskets, namely staying locked in place inside the portafilter, but it also introduces two additional major issues. First, it forces the use of a much smaller-diameter tamper, as a standard one would hit the ridge. Second, the ridge holds on to the puck during cleaning, making it difficult to knock out with a single tap on the knock box and often requiring additional tools to break and remove it in pieces.

The two Rok machines also come with a plastic spoon-shaped tamper that is particularly annoying to use, not only because it is imprecise and far from ergonomic, but also because the side handle prevents it from being used together with a funnel. A metal tamper is always more pleasant to use, but especially for this category of machines, which are often used while traveling, weight matters too, and a well-made plastic tamper can be perfectly adequate. A great example is the Hugh, where the tamper is nothing special, but it is light, solid, has straight vertical walls without excessive tapering, is the right size, easy to use, and fits perfectly inside the brewing cup without taking up extra space in the travel bag. Not quite as good but still functional, especially considering the price, is the plastic tamper provided with the Neo Flex. Flair Pro 2, Olympia Mina, Nomad, Cafelat Robot, and Flair 58 all come with well-made metal tampers. The only machine that includes neither a tamper nor a funnel to help with basket filling is the Superkop, meaning you will need to factor in the additional cost of these two components, without which the machine cannot be used optimally.

Left to right, top to bottom: Flair Pro 2, Cafelat Robot, Flair Neo Flex, Uniterra Nomad, Flair 58, Hugh Leverpresso Pro, Olympia Mina, Rok EspressoGC, Rok Presso Smartshot.

When it comes to the always much-discussed topic of preheating, other users of these machines with different habits and preferences might disagree. In general, for the type of espresso I tend to brew, using a very fine grind, medium to long pre-infusion, a ratio that rarely goes beyond 1:2, and a medium to light roast, there has rarely been a need to spend much time preheating the various components of each machine. This category of coffee makers may not be ideal for those living at altitudes above 2'000 meters (6'600 feet), where water cannot be brought above 93°C (200°F), but otherwise it is often enough to set the kettle to a few degrees above the desired temperature or, in the worst-case scenario, place a few components on top of the kettle while it heats up. Of course, in some cases having all components fully preheated can help bring out a few more flavor nuances in our espressos, but in most cases I was able to achieve good results even without taking these extra steps. In this test I did not measure how much the water temperature drops on contact with the machines because, due to the many differences in construction, such data would have only added confusion. I therefore preferred to let my palate decide and only preheat when I felt it was necessary.

More impactful on the workflow than preheating, however, is often the water that can remain inside the machine between extractions, which, if forgotten, can significantly throw off the extraction temperature. The most striking example is the Nomad, which has a large reservoir that can hold enough water to brew multiple espressos, but unless you have several prepared baskets ready to go one after the other, the leftover water from the previous shot must first be completely removed and replaced with fresh water for the next coffee. Some models are exceptions to this issue, such as the Robot, the Superkop, the Flair Pro 2 and the Neo Flex, where this problem does not occur because it is impossible to clean the basket without also removing the excess water. It is a different story, however, for machines like the previously mentioned Nomad, the Roks, the Mina, the Hugh and the Flair 58, where it is essential, at the end of the extraction, to place a second cup and lower the lever again to flush out all the remaining water. Alternatively, the water can be emptied by turning the entire machine upside down over the sink.

Cup quality and ease of use
Judging the quality of espresso and comparing it across different machines is always a very difficult task because everything depends on the coffee being used, the experience one has with one machine compared to another, how much time has passed between tastings, what was eaten beforehand, the tasting order, palate fatigue, time of day, the cup used, and many other factors. To try to minimize these differences and give the most objective judgment possible, I chose a coffee I personally enjoy, in this case a natural Ethiopia Duwancho roasted by Skylark with a medium roast, and I dedicated several days to finding the best parameters with each machine. I did not try to extract all coffees in the same way but rather, after spending a long period using each machine and becoming familiar with its specific characteristics, I tried to adapt the brewing method in order to get the best out of each one. Then, once I had found the best parameters, I set aside a full day to brew and taste each coffee one after the other, following the preparation data I had recorded.

For a fair comparison, the only parameters that were kept constant were the coffee beans, which came from the same roast batch for all machines, and the brew ratio, which was kept constant at 1 to 2 for every coffee, in order to compare the same type of espresso rather than, for example, a ristretto against a lungo. In addition, all tests were carried out with equipment at room temperature without preheating, every coffee was ground with the same grinder (a Bentwood Vertical 63), fresh water was brought to a boil for each shot, the same cup was always used, and extractions were repeated whenever the result did not reflect what had been observed in previous tests with that specific coffee machine.

In the table below you will find a summary of the test results, while if you are interested in the full version including repeated extractions, dose in and out, water temperature, grind setting, tasting temperature, tasting time, TDS and Extraction Yield for each coffee, you can find the file I uploaded on Patreon at this link, which, if you are appreciating this article, is also a good way to support the efforts made.

It is important to keep in mind that the data shown above should not be considered absolute values, because although I tried to be as objective as possible, they still refer to a single coffee combined with a specific grinder. Simply changing the coffee or the grinder used could lead to a different preference for one machine over another. This is why it is important to talk not only about the best result that was possible to achieve with each of the machines tested, but above all about how easy it is to reach those results and how consistently each product is able to deliver excellent outcomes.

From this point of view, the Leverpresso Pro by Hugh was a real surprise, as it rarely produced espressos that were not good and often delivered results that exceeded expectations, even when used in its most minimal setup, without the stand and therefore without a scale, relying purely on feel. It is hard to explain the reason behind this, which likely stems from a combination of factors, but it probably has a lot to do with its ability to wet the coffee extremely evenly, resulting in espressos that were always smooth and pleasant on the palate, with no signs of channeling, whether in its more obvious or more subtle form.

Next, it is worth mentioning the Flair Neo Flex and Pro 2, which, thanks to their narrow and very deep baskets, are extremely forgiving. Like the Hugh, they rarely produce an unpleasant espresso if the coffee used is of good quality. Machines with a more limited output also have an advantage in this respect. Although a limited output can be a drawback in terms of the types of espresso you can produce, it can also be an asset if you want to stay within a more traditional 1 to 2 ratio, as you can simply push the piston all the way down and, even without using a scale, you will usually end up in the correct range. Machines that fall into this category include the Rok EspressoGC and the Olympia Mina. The latter, along with the Hugh and the Robot, are also the only ones that come with a basket featuring electro-polished holes, which in my personal experience tend to give more consistent shots and are also easier to clean.

The Nomad tends to deliver results that, much like its lever, go up and down. The shots are generally good, but its lever system requires some practice, and its virtually unlimited output combined with the difficulty of using a scale without a riser often leads to shots that run longer than intended.

The shower screen of the Superkop, like that of the Hugh, also does an excellent job, first in protecting the coffee puck when pouring water from the kettle, and then in distributing it evenly. However, due to the wide diameter of the basket, the resulting thinner puck is slightly more prone to occasional channeling issues. These issues are way more frequent with the Flair 58, which uses a simple single-layer puck screen with relatively large holes.

Finally, the Rok Presso Smartshot delivered some excellent results during testing, but they were sporadic, mainly due to its low-quality pressurized basket. The basket does not succeed in its intended purpose of reliably delivering decent results for a less demanding audience, and it complicates things when trying to achieve high-quality extractions.

Travel friendliness

In terms of portability, the machines tested can be grouped into three main categories. First, there are those best suited for van travel or road trips to a vacation home, where bulk and weight are not a major concern. Then there are machines that are already more compact, some of which come with a carrying case, making them suitable for air travel as well. Finally, there are those so compact that you might even consider packing them in a backpack for hiking trips.

In the first category we find the Superkop and the Flair 58, which weigh approximately 6.5 kg (14.3 lbs) and 3.8 kg (8.3 lbs) respectively, making them the heaviest in the group. If weight is not an issue, the Superkop is still easy to transport thanks to its minimal number of parts, and if you want to disassemble it, all it takes is loosening two screws underneath the base. The Flair 58, although it has a few more components, offers a sturdy “Pelican-style” case sold separately that rivals the best professional gear. Each accessory has its own dedicated compartment inside and is even water-protected.

Among the machines that the most dedicated enthusiasts might consider packing for a train or plane trip, or perhaps even a tent camping trip, we find the Cafelat Robot, the Olympia Mina, the Flair Pro 2, the Rok EspressoGC, the Rok Presso Smartshot, the Uniterra Nomad, and the Flair Neo Flex. With weights ranging from around 3 kg (6.6 lbs) for the Robot down to about 1.1 kg (2.5 lbs) for the Neo Flex. In this case, the Olympia Mina and the Flair Pro 2 are the only models that come with a protective hard case included, while the Neo Flex has one available as an optional accessory. The Cafelat Robot, the two Roks, and the Nomad do not have an official case provided by the manufacturer.

Due to the way the bases or feet are designed, nearly all of these models require a perfectly flat surface to be used properly. Otherwise, they are unstable and may even get damaged by the surface they are placed on. This became an issue in some cases, especially during outdoor use in nature, where perfectly smooth surfaces are not always available. Machines with a full base and very low feet, such as the Robot, the Roks, or the Nomad, can easily become unstable even on a simple rough stone table. But also the Flair Pro 2, Neo Flex, and the Mina do not perform much better in this regard, as even a slight unevenness in one of the contact points is enough to make the whole machine wobble and make it difficult to apply force to the levers.

Portafilter, basket and shower screen of the Cafelat Robot

Another point to consider is the size of the opening where water is poured in. If you are in a hotel with a kettle you are not familiar with, or outdoors heating water with a gas stove, having a wide opening to pour the water into is a significant advantage. From this point of view, the Robot and the Superkop are definitely the least problematic, while the Flair Pro 2, Flair 58, and Olympia Mina may sometimes present difficulties depending on the shape of the pouring vessel. The remaining machines are generally quite versatile, some slightly more and some slightly less. If the container used to boil the water does not have a sufficiently narrow spout, you will need to first pour the water into another vessel, which results in heat loss, or bring along a funnel to make the operation easier.

Finally, in the category of machines that are compact enough to be carried in a backpack, yet clearly still suitable for the use cases of the previous categories, we find a single product: the Hugh Leverpresso Pro. Light, though not ultra-light, but solid and extremely compact for a lever espresso machine, the Hugh can be taken almost anywhere, also thanks to its hard case that protects it during your adventures. With its small footprint, it can be used on more surfaces than the other machines in the test. However, you will have to leave the scale at home and rely more on your senses, since in its most compact form the force is applied directly on its brew cup. In this case, having a narrow spout is also an advantage, although with a bit of care it is still possible to fill it using containers with a wider opening.

Hard cases of Olympia Mina, Hugh Leverpresso Pro, Flair Pro 2

A note should also be made about pressurized baskets, which often get in the way of our pursuit of the perfect espresso, but when thoughtfully designed, as in the case of the Flair Neo Flex or the Uniterra Nomad, can actually be helpful when traveling, especially on short trips. It is quite common to use these machines, or even other machines, at home with an electric grinder and then switch to a smaller and lighter manual grinder for travel. In situations like these, where there are no reference points and you have to start from scratch to get a good espresso, a well-made pressurized basket can make a big difference in achieving a pleasant-tasting coffee. This is especially true for trips lasting only one or two days, where you may not want to waste large amounts of beans and time trying to dial in the perfect shot.

Sustainability, spare parts, warranties & other notes

To conclude, a few words should be said about some often overlooked topics such as sustainability, availability of spare parts, repairability, the number of warranty years for wear parts and other components, certifications, working conditions, and so on. These are all intangible aspects, difficult to measure, and their reality can often differ from what is stated on paper depending on how much each company chooses to promote or communicate them. These less tangible values, which define the environmental and ethical standards under which these machines are built, can therefore have a significant impact on the final price of the product. I have done my best to gather information on these topics so that each person can take them into account in their decision-making process.

Verifying the accuracy of this kind of information is extremely difficult, especially considering that some brands may highlight certain aspects while others may not mention them at all because they take them for granted. So instead of spending time praising one product over another, it was decided to simply include this information in the comparison table at the end of the article, so that everyone can draw their own conclusions. Any updates provided by the manufacturers will be gladly received and added.

Conclusions

Behind the apparent simplicity of these boilerless lever machines lies a surprising variety of design choices. Every detail, from the geometry of the lever to the diameter of the basket, from the type of shower screen to the organization of the workflow, contributes to defining a clear identity, both in form and in result.

Some models prioritize ergonomics and stability, offering long levers, generous workspaces, and more traditional portafilters. Others, more compact, sacrifice these aspects to maximize portability, even if that means requiring greater care in operation. Some favor a modular experience, with the ability to easily separate each component. Others follow a more streamlined approach, with slightly more complex mechanics. Even the maximum output achievable with a single piston stroke, the depth of the basket, or the presence of well-designed tampers are all elements that can significantly influence the experience. No less important is each machine's ability to manage residual water, ease cleaning, and maintain consistency from one cup to the next.

In this multifaceted landscape, there is no clear winner. The differences between the models tested are sometimes subtle nuances, and other times full-on variations in how they approach the world of espresso. Each machine, like a musical instrument, interprets the score in its own way. Some with a round and forgiving tone, others with a more demanding register full of possibilities for those willing to explore them. The goal, then, is not to find the perfect machine in absolute terms, but rather to understand which combination of features best aligns with one’s specific needs and preferences. As with music, some machines may become bigger hits than others, but each one finds its own niche of fans. Who knows if, back in 1956 with the arrival of the Faema Baby, anyone could have imagined that its language would become a musical genre still interpreted today in so many different forms.

Comparison tool