MHW-3Bomber R3 Blade

This review is long over due. I have had the R3 Blade in rotation for over a year, and I also used it exclusively on a 12-day trip to Japan. So by now I know it pretty well.

As we have come to expect from MHW-3Bomber, the construction, and the quality of materials are surprisingly excellent in spite of being positioned as a budget brand.

The grinder looks and feels premium: solid metal, crisp machining, magnets everywhere on the catch cup. This thing punches way above its price point.

First Impressions

All-metal body, tight tolerances, smooth bearings and a long handle that adds real leverage.

The magnetic catch cup locks with authority and has more magnets than all its pricier rivals.

External adjustment is nice. And there are 60 clicks per rotation in 16-micron steps.

Ergonomically it’s grippy and stable in hand, neither too big nor too small. The only off note is the faux-wood knob that can creak a little during fast cranking; a decent compromise at this price level.

It has a solid performance out of the box – but there’s even a surprisingly strong upgrade path for tinkerers! Recently I found out that you can replace the stock cone burr and slot in alternatives like Kinu’s pour-over burr. That makes it even more interesting in my opinion. Before it was an excellent beginner/intermediate grinder, but now there is a clear upgrade path if you ever get tired of the stock flavors.

How It Fits in the Market

I see this as the new and better alternative to the 1Zpresso J. It’s a workhorse that most people will be satisfied with.

But then you also have tools free disassembly and upgradeable cone burr.

However, compared to pricier rivals like Comandante C40, 1Zpresso K-Ultra, and Mavo Phantox, the R3 Blade feels a bit less elegant and polished.

What I Liked

• Smooth bearings, long handle, excellent leverage
• Magnetic catch cup that locks firmly and cleanly
• External adjustment with fine steps for espresso and filter
• Detachable inner burr: You can use other 48 mm cone burrs – including both Italmill and Etzinger models!
• Nice, sweet cups with a good all-round performance
• The built-in (but optional) sieves (while I don’t use it much, it still deserves credit for being innovative)

What I Didn’t

• Branding and “militaristic” naming aren’t my vibe
• Faux-wood knob can creak and feels less premium
• Static is common (RDT is advised)
• Without some kind of of revolution counter, it’s hard to know what rotation you’re at. They should look to Kingrinder and 1Zpresso for inspiration here.
• The flavor profile/clarity with stock burrs is a step below the top manual grinders on the market

Live from the Testing Bench

After receiving interest from followers on YouTube about how the R3 blade with Kinu’s POB (Pour Over Burrs) compares to the Kinu M47 with POB, I conducted a series of side-by-side tests with my Hario Switch setup.

• Test 1: Initial Dial-In
  • I started by dialing both grinders to match drawdown time and TDS.
  • Result: Too close to call. The cups tasted remarkably similar.
• Test 2: Pacamara Coffee
  • Blind tasting: I preferred the R3 blade. It was sweeter and richer.
  • Despite the Kinu M47 having a slower drawdown (about 5 seconds longer), its TDS measured 0.05 to 0.07 lower than the R3 blade.
  • Higher TDS usually creates an advantage in blind comparisons, so I didn’t put too much emphasis on this result. Maybe something was off in my brewing parameters.
• Test 3: Different Coffee, Same Settings
  • I kept grind settings identical and switched to a different mild washed coffee to verify the pattern.
  • Result: Again, I preferred the R3 blade blind, and again it measured 0.05 to 0.07 higher in TDS. It was a bit sweeter and more full-bodied.
  • This time I had ensured and verified that exactly the same amount of coffee beans were brewed down to the decimal. Despite the TDS difference potentially skewing results, the flavor profiles remained very similar between the two grinders.
• Test 4: Adjusted for TDS Matching
  • This time I ground a bit finer on the Kinu Phoenix to better match TDS and used a premium washed Panama Geisha (rose, peach, lemon iced tea, honey, silky).
  • This time the difference was clear: I preferred the R3 blade by a wide margin.
  • The R3 produced a juicy, balanced cup with silky body, clear flavor notes, and pleasing acidity.
  • The Kinu M47 exhibited similar flavor notes but was less sweet, more hollow, and noticeably astringent. Not a great cup.
  • TDS measurements confirmed they were within my preferred margin of error (0.01 to 0.02 difference), making this a valid comparison.
    
• Day Two: Testing at Coarser Settings
  The following day, I wanted to explore how the grinders performed at coarser settings with a fresh palate.
• Test 1
  • I preferred the Kinu M47 in the cup, but the extraction calculations revealed the TDS was 0.10-0.13 higher. Not a meaningful result.
• Test 2
  • I dialed the R3 finer to compensate, but the POB still had a much slower drawdown and higher TDS.
  • Again, I preferred the M47 — but again, this wasn’t a result I’d emphasize given the TDS still being 0.10 higher.
• Test 3
  • I dialed the R3 even finer and switched back to the Panama Geisha from the previous day.
  • Finally, I achieved what I was looking for: drawdown within 2 seconds between grinders and TDS within my preferred 0.01 to 0.02 range.
  • The cups were very close this time. The R3 had just a touch more body, which made me prefer it blind, but overall they were quite similar.

Summary: Across these tests, I showed a consistent preference for the R3 blade with POB when both were dialed in exactly the same.

However, going into this, the real question wasn’t really whether one setup dominates across all parameters, but rather: Is the R3 a suitable carrier for the POB or is it just a random coincidence that doesn’t offer real world value? Is even it worth buying that additional cone burr to experiment?

From what I’ve seen, the answer is yes! The R3 produces very enjoyable pour over with the POB installed.

A bonus is that the espresso is also quite good with an interesting texture. It even grinds faster than with the stock burr (a plus for me), though it does require considerably more torque, which is worth keeping in mind. If you have lower grip strength the stock burr is preferable.

Unresolved Questions

• I still haven’t found the optimal use-cases for sifting. The included screens can help clarity for pour-over, but results vary and you can lose body if overused.

First Sip Verdict

Buy if you want a budget grinder that can do everything reasonably well while offering a premium UX.

Stock burrs deliver sweet, blended cups that are forgiving across roast levels. For espresso the flavor profile is a bit muddy with tendency to astringency on medium and light roasts.

But add a Kinu 48 mm POB and it gets faster and cleaner for both espresso and filter.

If you value aesthetics or ultimate light-roast clarity, look to higher-end options; otherwise this is one of my top picks at its price range.

Check price

Alternatives & Links

• Mavo Phantox Pro – a better option for clarity and light roasts
• See my manual grinder round-up for many more options!

Specs

• Burr geometry / material / size: 48 mm with a 32 mm cone, stainless steel. Works with several other cone burrs; for example those from Italmill and Kinu
• Grind range: espresso through filter; 60 clicks per rotation in 16 µm steps
• Grind time (espresso & filter): stock ~50–60 s for 16 g espresso depending on roast level; ~30 s for 15 g pour-over
  • with Kinu 48 mm POB ~40 s for 16 g espresso!
• Capacity: ~30 g
• Price: budget tier, notably cheaper than most “flagship-feel” competitors