Re: Hamilton Beach Big Mouth Juicer. Version #67650. I wanted to add:

The juices come out slightly pulpy, a fine, pudding-y pulp which is removed by putting the juice through a fine stainless steel strainer.

The electric cord is way too short. My Omega's cord is 5 feet long and maybe I've been spoiled by that, being able to move it about without unplugging it.

The 67650 version has metal clips. I believe that the new & improved (?) version of the Big Mouth now has plastic ones.

If you don't have a lot of money, this is a good juicer to get. But, strangely, I read reviews of much more expensive centrifugal juicers which are far less positive than the many reviews of the HM Big Mouth. Can't figure this out at all.

Er...what is the Yogi Bear incident?

Well...

I see I'm a wee bit late to the game here - WY "called me out" a few weeks ago, lol. I started a thread about the Norwalk awhile back -

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]

The "throwback" mentioned from the cutter is a non issue to the experienced Norwalk user. In fact, a first time juicer can use it & not have this problem.

Simply cut a carrot in half & place both halves in the feed tube. Put pusher in place, turn on. At this point you have your layer of pulp on top of the cutter & you can proceed with normal juicing until you are finished.

At this point, my only issue would be the extra clean up time, esp. rinsing the bags when I am finished. If you have a helper to assist it does take some of the chore out of it.

I will keep it for life, as I love "leather consistency" dry pulp that it produces. If I am pressed for time I will use a faster machine, but all in all, you can't beat the Norwalk for quality juice.

Horsea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Re: Hamilton Beach Big Mouth Juicer. Version
> #67650. I wanted to add:
>
> The juices come out slightly pulpy, a fine,
> pudding-y pulp which is removed by putting the
> juice through a fine stainless steel strainer.
>
> The electric cord is way too short. My Omega's
> cord is 5 feet long and maybe I've been spoiled by
> that, being able to move it about without
> unplugging it.
>
> The 67650 version has metal clips. I believe that
> the new & improved (?) version of the Big Mouth
> now has plastic ones.
>
> If you don't have a lot of money, this is a good
> juicer to get. But, strangely, I read reviews of
> much more expensive centrifugal juicers which are
> far less positive than the many reviews of the HM
> Big Mouth. Can't figure this out at all.
>


Since I've been using the above mentioned Hamilton Beach Big Mouth Juicer for some months now, I would like to conclude as follows:

I can't compare the various inexpensive basket-type juicers because this Hamilton Beach product is the only one of its type I've used.

I can only compare it to the slow-moving auger-type that I have (Omega 8001, an older model of its kind).

*** The spinning basket type makes for way too much cleanup work if you want only
1-2 cups of juice. Much easier cleanup when the auger-type is used.

*** The spinning basket type of juicer is much more efficient and worth the
cleanup effort where you are making a quart of juice.

*** However, if you want anything more than a cup of juice, you will spend
a long, long time chopping all those vegetables or fruit into little pieces
to get them into the feed chute. Not worth it

So, I know the above has all been said before. And I think you need 2 different types of juice making machines.

Why can't somebody invent an inexpensive spinning-basket type where you don't have lots of parts with nooks & crannies that require a fair bit of concentration and labour to clean?