| |
Main
Date: 30 Sep 2006 15:06:23
From: Scott L
Subject: WLP 005 British Ale with reaaally low mash temp
|
Does anybody know what would happen to a basic pale ale mashed at
ohhhh, say 140 F for an hour and fermented with WLP005 yeast? Because
that's what I (accidentally) did this week!
I'm expecting a pretty dry beer. And I overshot my efficiency (instead
of 75%, got like 82%) and ended up with an OG of 1.058 which is going
to be nuts. The runoff was very clear, so I think I got total starch
conversion. Is the higher-than-usual efficiency due to the low mash
temp, or did I just crush my grain properly for once?
How did I mash at such a low temp, you may ask... Well, let's just say
it involved forgetting to put the manifold in the mash tun.
Scott
|
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 19:34:32
From: David M. Taylor
Subject: Re: WLP 005 British Ale with reaaally low mash temp
|
"Scott L" <scott-sp02@neuralnw.com > wrote in message
news:1159653983.135602.121320@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Does anybody know what would happen to a basic pale ale mashed at
> ohhhh, say 140 F for an hour and fermented with WLP005 yeast? Because
> that's what I (accidentally) did this week!
>
> I'm expecting a pretty dry beer. And I overshot my efficiency (instead
> of 75%, got like 82%) and ended up with an OG of 1.058 which is going
> to be nuts. The runoff was very clear, so I think I got total starch
> conversion. Is the higher-than-usual efficiency due to the low mash
> temp, or did I just crush my grain properly for once?
If your OG ended up on the high side, then your FG would normally also end
up a little higher. However, due to the low mash temp, the beer would
indeed be expected to be drier, assuming conversion was complete after the
hour mash. Maybe the two effects on FG will cancel out, leaving you with
approximately the same FG, but higher alcohol content due to the higher OG.
Might not be so bad. I would guess you might be right, though, it might be
more on the dry side. Let us know how it turns out, I am curious.
I'm not sure if lower mash temp would give you better efficiency. If
anything, I would have thought lower efficiency. Could be the crush. Could
be the water to grain ratio. Could be the acidity. Could be a lot of
things.
If you're not happy with the FG at the end, you could always try adding some
lactose or maltodextrin to raise the FG using nonfermentables. I've done it
before with lactose with good results. Lactose isn't very sweet, but it
will increase body.
--
Dave
"Just a drink, a little drink, and I'll be feeling GOOooOOooOOooD!" --
Genesis, 1973-ish
|
| | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:59:43
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: WLP 005 British Ale with reaaally low mash temp
|
On Sun, 1 2006 19:34:32 -0500, <dmtaylor@SPAM.geocities.SUCKS.com > wrote:
> I'm not sure if lower mash temp would give you better efficiency. If
> anything, I would have thought lower efficiency.
I don't think it will make a significant difference either way. Efficiency
is mostly about the sparge, not the mash. Theoretically the mash can
have a minor impact, but not nearly on the scale they noticed.
John.
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 15:57:05
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: WLP 005 British Ale with reaaally low mash temp
|
On 30 Sep 2006 15:06:23 -0700, <scott-sp02@neuralnw.com > wrote:
> Does anybody know what would happen to a basic pale ale mashed at
> ohhhh, say 140 F for an hour and fermented with WLP005 yeast? Because
> that's what I (accidentally) did this week!
You'll get higher attenuation than normal. IOW, a bit more alcohol and
less residual sweetness... aka "drier".
> I'm expecting a pretty dry beer. And I overshot my efficiency (instead
> of 75%, got like 82%) and ended up with an OG of 1.058 which is going
> to be nuts. The runoff was very clear, so I think I got total starch
> conversion. Is the higher-than-usual efficiency due to the low mash
> temp, or did I just crush my grain properly for once?
Probably just crushed well. FWIW, the runoff being clear has to do with
the vorlauf and/or the grain bed setting up well. You should always get
complete starch conversion, unless you've got real problems.
John.
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 10:48:51
From: Scott L
Subject: Re: WLP 005 British Ale with reaaally low mash temp
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> Probably just crushed well. FWIW, the runoff being clear has to do with
> the vorlauf and/or the grain bed setting up well. You should always get
> complete starch conversion, unless you've got real problems.
Well, yeah. I just wasn't sure whether mashing at 140 F (which is
something I've never done) would slow things down enough to not be
fully converted in an hour.
Scott
|
| | |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 18:12:48
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: WLP 005 British Ale with reaaally low mash temp
|
On 2 2006 10:48:51 -0700, <scott-sp02@neuralnw.com > wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>> Probably just crushed well. FWIW, the runoff being clear has to do with
>> the vorlauf and/or the grain bed setting up well. You should always get
>> complete starch conversion, unless you've got real problems.
>
> Well, yeah. I just wasn't sure whether mashing at 140 F (which is
> something I've never done) would slow things down enough to not be
> fully converted in an hour.
IMO, an hour should be plenty of time. I think you'd have to go lower
than that in order to make conversion slow enough that it won't be done
in an hour. The typical 60 minute mash already has a margin of safety
factored into it. Technically, most mashes are probably already
converted after 30 minutes. Homebrewers usually just leave it for 60
minutes to be sure that it's done.
John.
|
|
