Showing reviews 1 - 5 of 5
We bought this garlic press a few years ago and it's been brilliant. No need to peel the clove before hand and the left over skin peels off easily from the press, which means little mess and doesn't leave your hands smelling of garlic!
Published 02 06 2014
Love this garlic press. After 3 months of fiddling about with a cheaper press I invested in this one. Its great, no need to peel the clove first and very little wastage. Very happy I bought this one
Published 24 12 2013
Strong wrists needed, not for the elderly or infirm.”
by Mrs Pamela Putnik
Very strong pressure is needed to crush garlic with this expensive gadget. My husband did manage to do it but with great effort and I could not do it at all as neither of us have strong wrists or hands. It might be easier if the lever were longer but, as it is, it is one for the bin. My very old garlic press was simple to use with little pressure so will have to be replaced with a similar basic one. Most disappointing.
Published 21 11 2013
A note from the team: Thanks for placing your review. We're sorry that you're unable to use the garlic press and will be in touch shortly.
i love this!”
by Dr Hartgroves
I've been searching for a looong time for a decent garlic crusher. I've spent a fair bit on different ones. I was abit reluctant to spend soo much but it is definitely worth it. The whole clove is crushed. None comes out the sides, barely none left in the crusher. A very good bit of kit.
Published 19 09 2013
the best garlic press”
I've spent so much money on garlic presses lately after my old one bit the dust and the new one is not the same. This one is definitely the best - it has little teeth that go into the holes so that none of the clove is wasted, which is the same as my old one used to be. It's a bit more difficult to clean but their little plastic thingy that pushes stuff back out of the holes works well, and most other garlic presses I find you lose about 25% of the garlic clove in the holes (including the Lakeland own brand one) which is not the case with this one.
Published 01 03 2013