Two questions:
In the metered depositor mode, what is the range of the smallest shot to the largest? Can it do 4oz per shot? 0.3oz?
How flexible are you on the price?
please reply to ilya@luvicecream.com
thanks.
Hi @luv-ice-cream, thanks for sharing your honest opinion. It was what we were looking for!
However, I believe you are arguing on the contents of the study, not the technology. Reducing fat-content is of secondary interest to most chocolate producers. But many expressed interest in the machine's ability to reduce cocoa butter usage, this is what we wanted your opinion on. Assuming it tastes the same and is cost-efficient, do you believe this technology is something you would want to use? Why? Why not?
[/quote]
Good morning or some other time of day!
I do apologize for a few shortcuts in my response.
While you are correct to say that I am arguing the contents (& really the motivation) of the study & not the tech, I do believe the two are inexorably linked.
The chocolate industry, I find as a somewhat an outsider, is rather set in its ways. It is fairly set in its ways and practices and is slower to change than, say, coffee industry. These are very general statements based on my admittedly limited observations & communications, but that is mho, as in "imho". The likelihood of a chocolate producer embracing new tech is related to cost benefits first and foremost.
The interest in reducing fat content aka cocoa butter content is a FINANCIAL one for the producers, not a health one. Cocoa butter is the single most expensive ingredient in the mix for the producers, unless they use stevia like we do. So, cutting down cocoa butter content reduces the cost. If the gizmometry required to accomplish this makes financial sense from the cost/benefit analysis, then it might have an inroad.
Here is my proviso, however. I come to chocolate from a science R&D background with over 30 years in the latter. I know the path of a technology/invention looking for a problem to solve. We call that pushing a rope.
Using high voltage to orient molecular dipoles is now a classic technique. It was applied in liquid crystals, then in non-linear optics (second harmonic generation in polymers/organics) to pole the molecules then, apparently to lower effective viscosity in fluid dynamics of...be it oil/gas or molten chocolate mass. And, I bet, this is not a complete list.
I am not sure how much other industries have embraced poling technology to reduce viscosity thus far. I know of surfactants, fluorinated additives & coatings making significant inroads into oil/gas. Those approaches are chemically intrusive & not applicable to foodstuff. Still, my fear is that in chocolate processing this is a solution in search of a problem.
My sincere hope is that Clay or some of the other heavy weights of the site will chime in with their thoughts because their experience is broader than mine when it comes to chocolates.
I read this article when it was first published.
It provides a false argument of fat being bad and completely ignores the impact of sugar on health. In other words, the old & failed war on obesity narrative.
I am not sorry that this sounds overly harsh, but the key driver for the authors (I believe the "research" was sponsored by M&M Mars, afair) was to use less cocoa butter which would allow for higher filler loading. Filler in this context is all the cheaper ingredients from sugar to milk.
To me this study reads like an argument to use filtered cigarettes over cigars because it allows for a cheaper and more plentiful smoke. It completely misses the point.
Daniel,
Was this a 250mm max web width flow wrapper or 350mm one? Just curious. We are in the process of purchasing a 250mm machine & I can totally relate to your experience.
My main question for you is sourcing custom printed multilayer (I am assuming yours is a multilayer) film. I am also assuming your film is custom printed with the logo of your bar, nutritional/ingredient info, bar codes, etc.. Did you source that in China as well or did you go local? I am having a devil of a time getting quotes on what I need.
I am thinking 2.5mil to 3.5mil thick PET / VMPET (metallized PET)/ LLDPE film; flexographic plate printed.
If you an share your experience with this and give me some supplier ideas, it'll help me gauge how the estimates I am getting are falling in line.
Thanks, Daniel.
PS: Where in WI are you? We are in the Twin Cities just over the river from you 
Virgilio,
Is the pump a transfer pump or a metering pump?
If the latter, what is the range of the piston displacement per stroke; i.e. how many grams/oz per shot, min & max?
Thanks.
What would the freight be to 55109?
I am assuming each sack is 50 lbs?
Thanks!
FWIW,
LUV Ice Cream now makes sugar-free, organic stevia sweetened bean-to-bar using direct trade Nicaraguan beans.
Hi,
Does this unit have a depositor?
Also, any pics would be appreciated.
Thanks!
We are interested in these as well. Please provide contact info.
We are interested in the depositing pump.
Can you please let me know whether this is the mini-pump (3.5 oz stroke) or the Savage 1324 with the 8.5 oz stroke? What kind of depositing heads does it have with it? Do you have port adapter (Savage #1300-09-151 TANK-PUMP 1"FPT-1.5 ILINE FEMALE ADAPTER) to mount it onto the tank?
Also, do your tanks (especially the analogue controlled one) have a port for mounting the pump controller? Savage pump controllers mount on the port that is on the side opposite the melter controller box, towards the top. Your photos show only the controller side; could you please email me the other view(s) to ilya@luvicecream.com along with the pricing info and all other answers?
Thanks!
These have been discontinued by the CK a while back and nobody seems to make a bar mold like it. We will buy whatever number you have. ilya@luvicecream.com
How many molds do you have?
We will take them off your hands
- Ilya
ilya@luvicecream.com
