<p>We have different brands here, but I've found the bags to be consistently disappointing, a rather expensive way to get bad coffee.  I'd never use them at home.  Neither would I use pods again; they're just too expensive and wasteful, though they can taste pretty decent.</p>
<p>The bags end up weak, however much you stir/press them and however long you leave them in.  Using double is better but still disappointing.  At home, when I don't have time to make my moka pot for just me, I have a resuable one-cup drip filter, and in work I use an aeropress.  Both are also more environmentally friendly as the only per-cup waste is the actual grounds that get composted.</p>
<p>I do use bags occasionally - hotels here tend to have kettles in the rooms but no way of making acceptable coffee (we're stereotypically a nation of tea-drinkers).  The bags are useful then for the odd night.  When travelling light for longer, including when bikepacking, I use a coffee sock, just a cheesecloth pouch sized to fit in a mug.  The grounds make much better contact with the water than in coffee bags.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-08T14:46:56.703Z
I guess I should clarify. If pods can make an ok cup of coffee, why are bags so bad?
mroll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-08T14:53:16.573Z
That's a very different question.  So different that I think it should be asked as a new question, but editing this one could also be OK.
Chris H
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-08T14:53:58.423Z
Pods and bags work fundamentally differently.  The pods pass water through the grounds in some way, often reasonably quickly but the bags just sit in the water in your cup, in the hopes that enough water will come into contact with the grounds to extract some flavour.  The bags I can get happen to be the same supermarket own-brand roast that I choose for everyday use; that's not available in pods and I gave away my pod machine anyway.  My disappointment is therefore based on a direct comparison of brewing methods, but not the one you're most interested in
Chris H
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-09T23:30:52.403Z
"a rather expensive way to get bad coffee"...a good description.  :-)
fixer1234
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-10T05:52:56.677Z
@fixer1234 I've got a couple with me today, because I know I'm going to be somewhere where the alternative in the right place at the right time is likely to be decaff instant. That puts "bad" into perspective
Chris H
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-07T14:14:22.067Z
2022-09-07T14:14:22.067Z
Chris H
<blockquote>
<p>Where I live (large American city) you can only find one brand (Folgers) of coffee sachets.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Maxwell House makes (or at least made) &quot;Coffee Singles&quot;.  If they aren't available in local stores, you could find them online.  I've never had Folgers sachets, but I wouldn't expect Maxwell House Singles to be in a different league as far as taste.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Folgers isn’t exactly known for great coffee so I’m not surprised that their sachets don’t make good coffee. Would a better coffee make good sachet coffee?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Nothing precludes the possibility of making good coffee with a sachet.  Start with good coffee, recently ground to an appropriate fineness, put an appropriate amount in a bag, let it steep in water of an appropriate temperature for an appropriate time, and you could produce a decent brew.  But few, if any, of those conditions are met with the commercial sachets we're talking about.</p>
<p>Sachets pre-date pods.  The first convenience coffee before pods were invented was instant coffee.  It doesn't get more convenient than stirring a spoonful of coffee concentrate into hot water.  Sachets followed as the convenience coffee that was supposed to taste more like fresh-brewed.  &quot;Taste like&quot; are the operative words; it isn't really brewed coffee, it's essentially flavored instant coffee.</p>
<p>In a typical setting where commercial sachets would be used, the brew is poorly controlled.  The water may not be at a good temperature for extraction (at least the Maxwell House Singles say to use boiling water, which is too hot), and the brew timing in relation to the actual temperature often isn't precise enough to avoid over- or under-extracting.</p>
<p>So they use a mix of instant and ground coffee, heavy on the instant.  The instant provides the base coffee flavor, and the ground provides the &quot;fresh-brewed&quot; nuance.  If the ground coffee is poorly extracted, you still get something that tastes different from instant, and the instant mellows any off-flavors.</p>
<p>You could make sachets and make decent coffee with them (easier with some supplemental paraphernalia).  But even using just ground coffee, the results would be hit-or-miss if you merely plop it in recently-off-boiling water and wait a generic time (the typical conditions where sachets are your only option).  With the commercial sachets, most of the flavor is instant coffee.  Good brewing conditions make it a little better than the instant.  Poor brewing conditions degrade the flavor of the instant (although it might still be better than 100% of the botched brew).  The commercial sachets are never as good as brewed coffee because they contain little ground coffee, and what's there doesn't get brewed well.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I would imagine sachets are a much better option as they don’t require a dedicated machine.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>True, they don't require a dedicated machine; just any source of near-boiling water.  If you really crave coffee but there's none available, and you have access to hot water, that's when you will appreciate sachets.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Whereas pods are commonly available and many brands, flavors, variety exists. ... Is there some issue with sachets that leads to them being so unpopular?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The popularity of sachets and pods relates entirely to convenience.  Commercial sachets let you make coffee when it otherwise would not be available.  Most people are satisfied with the taste only as &quot;emergency&quot; coffee.  The main issue with sachets is that they taste roughly as good as instant coffee, which is even more convenient than sachets.</p>
<p>Pods brew ground coffee under controlled conditions, producing a consistent result.  The amount of coffee in an average pod will make roughly a 6 oz serving of &quot;standard&quot; strength coffee, so the brew will be weak or a little over-extracted if you stretch it to a larger serving.</p>
<p>It is extremely convenient in that you can choose from a variety of options, make a single serving of what you want when you want it, with a few quick steps, and cleanup consists of throwing the spent pod in the trash.  You can produce better-tasting coffee by other methods, but they involve more time, effort, and cleanup.  Many people find the pods good enough that they opt for the convenience and speed over better coffee.</p>
<p>Pods are becoming popular in office settings because it's a practical and convenient way to give people access to drinkable coffee when they want it, and it doesn't require making community coffee, or drinking or dealing with the dregs of an old batch.  As people have become used to pods in various settings, it's also starting to become popular at home for people who want the convenience and speed.  It does require a dedicated machine, but the machines have become widely accessible, and for home purchasers, it's viewed as just another one-time expense for a kitchen appliance, some version of which they normally own.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-12T18:10:17.507Z
2022-09-12T18:15:52.790Z
2022-09-12T18:15:52.790Z
fixer1234
<p>Where I live (large American city) you can only find one brand (Folgers) of coffee sachets. Whereas pods are commonly available and many brands, flavors, variety exists. I would imagine sachets are a much better option as they don’t require a dedicated machine. Is there some issue with sachets that leads to them being so unpopular?</p>
<p>Edit: Folgers isn’t exactly known for great coffee so I’m not surprised that their sachets don’t make good coffee. Would a better coffee make good sachet coffee? Why not?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-21T16:05:56.223Z
I love Folgers  coffee and it is very competitive on price.  I drink up to 2 pots a day of the stuff in bulk drip filters and then add foam with the steamer from the expresso machine. This works only when fresh.  So the steamer stays hot all day.
Tony Stewart EE75
<pods>
Single use coffee bags vs pods
mroll
# Single use coffee bags vs pods

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-08-12)

Where I live (large American city) you can only find one brand (Folgers) of coffee sachets. Whereas pods are commonly available and many brands, flavors, variety exists. I would imagine sachets are a much better option as they don’t require a dedicated machine. Is there some issue with sachets that leads to them being so unpopular?

Edit: Folgers isn’t exactly known for great coffee so I’m not surprised that their sachets don’t make good coffee. Would a better coffee make good sachet coffee? Why not?

**Tags:** pods

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I love Folgers  coffee and it is very competitive on price.  I drink up to 2 pots a day of the stuff in bulk drip filters and then add foam with the steamer from the expresso machine. This works only when fresh.  So the steamer stays hot all day.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-09-07. Score: 1

We have different brands here, but I've found the bags to be consistently disappointing, a rather expensive way to get bad coffee. I'd never use them at home. Neither would I use pods again; they're just too expensive and wasteful, though they can taste pretty decent.

The bags end up weak, however much you stir/press them and however long you leave them in. Using double is better but still disappointing. At home, when I don't have time to make my moka pot for just me, I have a resuable one-cup drip filter, and in work I use an aeropress. Both are also more environmentally friendly as the only per-cup waste is the actual grounds that get composted.

I do use bags occasionally - hotels here tend to have kettles in the rooms but no way of making acceptable coffee (we're stereotypically a nation of tea-drinkers). The bags are useful then for the odd night. When travelling light for longer, including when bikepacking, I use a coffee sock, just a cheesecloth pouch sized to fit in a mug. The grounds make much better contact with the water than in coffee bags.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I guess I should clarify. If pods can make an ok cup of coffee, why are bags so bad?  
> **username_2**: That's a very different question.  So different that I think it should be asked as a new question, but editing this one could also be OK.  
> **username_2**: Pods and bags work fundamentally differently.  The pods pass water through the grounds in some way, often reasonably quickly but the bags just sit in the water in your cup, in the hopes that enough water will come into contact with the grounds to extract some flavour.  The bags I can get happen to be the same supermarket own-brand roast that I choose for everyday use; that's not available in pods and I gave away my pod machine anyway.  My disappointment is therefore based on a direct comparison of brewing methods, but not the one you're most interested in  
> **username_3**: "a rather expensive way to get bad coffee"...a good description.  :-)  
> **username_2**: @username_3 I've got a couple with me today, because I know I'm going to be somewhere where the alternative in the right place at the right time is likely to be decaff instant. That puts "bad" into perspective  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-09-12. Score: 0

> Where I live (large American city) you can only find one brand (Folgers) of coffee sachets.

Maxwell House makes (or at least made) "Coffee Singles". If they aren't available in local stores, you could find them online. I've never had Folgers sachets, but I wouldn't expect Maxwell House Singles to be in a different league as far as taste.

> Folgers isn’t exactly known for great coffee so I’m not surprised that their sachets don’t make good coffee. Would a better coffee make good sachet coffee?

Nothing precludes the possibility of making good coffee with a sachet. Start with good coffee, recently ground to an appropriate fineness, put an appropriate amount in a bag, let it steep in water of an appropriate temperature for an appropriate time, and you could produce a decent brew. But few, if any, of those conditions are met with the commercial sachets we're talking about.

Sachets pre-date pods. The first convenience coffee before pods were invented was instant coffee. It doesn't get more convenient than stirring a spoonful of coffee concentrate into hot water. Sachets followed as the convenience coffee that was supposed to taste more like fresh-brewed. "Taste like" are the operative words; it isn't really brewed coffee, it's essentially flavored instant coffee.

In a typical setting where commercial sachets would be used, the brew is poorly controlled. The water may not be at a good temperature for extraction (at least the Maxwell House Singles say to use boiling water, which is too hot), and the brew timing in relation to the actual temperature often isn't precise enough to avoid over- or under-extracting.

So they use a mix of instant and ground coffee, heavy on the instant. The instant provides the base coffee flavor, and the ground provides the "fresh-brewed" nuance. If the ground coffee is poorly extracted, you still get something that tastes different from instant, and the instant mellows any off-flavors.

You could make sachets and make decent coffee with them (easier with some supplemental paraphernalia). But even using just ground coffee, the results would be hit-or-miss if you merely plop it in recently-off-boiling water and wait a generic time (the typical conditions where sachets are your only option). With the commercial sachets, most of the flavor is instant coffee. Good brewing conditions make it a little better than the instant. Poor brewing conditions degrade the flavor of the instant (although it might still be better than 100% of the botched brew). The commercial sachets are never as good as brewed coffee because they contain little ground coffee, and what's there doesn't get brewed well.

> I would imagine sachets are a much better option as they don’t require a dedicated machine.

True, they don't require a dedicated machine; just any source of near-boiling water. If you really crave coffee but there's none available, and you have access to hot water, that's when you will appreciate sachets.

> Whereas pods are commonly available and many brands, flavors, variety exists. ... Is there some issue with sachets that leads to them being so unpopular?

The popularity of sachets and pods relates entirely to convenience. Commercial sachets let you make coffee when it otherwise would not be available. Most people are satisfied with the taste only as "emergency" coffee. The main issue with sachets is that they taste roughly as good as instant coffee, which is even more convenient than sachets.

Pods brew ground coffee under controlled conditions, producing a consistent result. The amount of coffee in an average pod will make roughly a 6 oz serving of "standard" strength coffee, so the brew will be weak or a little over-extracted if you stretch it to a larger serving.

It is extremely convenient in that you can choose from a variety of options, make a single serving of what you want when you want it, with a few quick steps, and cleanup consists of throwing the spent pod in the trash. You can produce better-tasting coffee by other methods, but they involve more time, effort, and cleanup. Many people find the pods good enough that they opt for the convenience and speed over better coffee.

Pods are becoming popular in office settings because it's a practical and convenient way to give people access to drinkable coffee when they want it, and it doesn't require making community coffee, or drinking or dealing with the dregs of an old batch. As people have become used to pods in various settings, it's also starting to become popular at home for people who want the convenience and speed. It does require a dedicated machine, but the machines have become widely accessible, and for home purchasers, it's viewed as just another one-time expense for a kitchen appliance, some version of which they normally own.


---

