Same here, Denny.
I’ve got a five gallon round cooler. I kinda wish I’d gone bigger and will wind up doing so at some point.
I can’t speak to heat loss, since I haven’t used a bigger cooler yet, but I really dont’ relish having yet another cooler kicking around and taking up space.
Get the right cooler the first time. Based on everything I’ve read, I’d go with Denny’s recommendation here.
I used a 10 gallon round before upgrading to a RIMS and I no longer use a cooler. If I had it to do over again, I’d have gone 5 gallons for the cooler size.
What about the filtering aspect of a round cooler vs rectangle?
A client of mine has brewed for decades and told me to go with the round because the grain bed will be taller and act as a better filter. Of course this guy is a very meticulous and to style kind of guy so he may be over-exagerating for most people’s expectations.
I’m sure you you could get a grain bed shallow enough that it’s physically impossible to avoid channeling, but that isn’t a practical concern IME. Manifold design, flow rate, and vorlauf technique are all going to be bigger factors.
For example, I routinely mash an 8.5 lb grist in a 50 qt cooler and have no problem setting up for a good lauter.
I have used 5 gallon and 10 gallon round coolers for 5 gallon batches. They both worked without much issue. The 5-er would get tight on space on some beers. The 10 always had enough head space for anything I threw at it. I had to preheat either one to make sure they held temp.
I now use a 50(ish) quart rectangular cooler and am very happy with. Plenty of space, yet small enough for all my typical recipes. I preheat this one too and see a bit more temp drop on longer mashes than either of the round coolers.
My reasons for changing coolers over the years have been:
I was broke and 5 gallon was cheaper than 10,
My inner Tim The Tool Man decided bigger was better so I bought the 10 gallon
Two 10g coolers cracked inside and could not be repaired so I listened to Denny (and the gang) and bought a Coleman Extreme rectangular.
They all worked. Having so much access for stirring in the Coleman is a big advantage too. Barring anymore physical issues with coolers I would guess I’ve bought my last one.
If it helps anyone…
Paul
If you batch sparge, as I do, then grain bed depth doesn’t matter.
I started out using Rubbermaid/Gott 10-gallon beverage coolers. I then switched to using Rubbermaid 7-gallon beverage coolers (Home Depot used to carry this size) before finally settling on Igloo 5-gallon industrial beverage coolers for my mash/lauter tun and hot liquor back. Bigger is not always better, and a round cooler works for all lautering techniques due the pressure equalization that occurs in a cylinder (one of the reasons why pipes are round). When brewing small batches, a 5-gallon beverage cooler sinks less heat at mash-in and maintains temperature better than a larger cooler. A 5-gallon beverage cooler is even more efficient when brewing 5.5-gallon batches up to its capacity.
One last thing: if you continuous sparge like I do, grain bed thickness, tun geometry, and false bottom design all make a difference. If you think that you will ever want to continuous sparge, think round, not square or rectangular. The goal in continuous sparging is to have equal fluid flow down through the mash bed. A cylinder works best for continuous sparging due to the fact that pressure is distributed equally around the perimeter. With a square or rectangular shaped tun, pressure forces concentrate in the corners.
The answer to the question, as in most cases, appears to be “it depends.”
This is what’s so great about brewing.
I’m also starting to think that Denny and Mark are like the Yin and Yang of the home brew world. Batch sparge/stir plate or continuous sparge/shakey-shake, whichever you prefer. Or mix 'em up.
I guess that we are like the yin and yang of the homebrew world. However, that does not stop us from having a civil conversation in person. Maybe, it’s because Denny is so darn likable in person. :) It’s difficult to find someone with a more “glass is half full” attitude than Denny. However, then again, Denny is retired while the rest of us are still doing the grind.
I didn’t mean to imply incivility. I was thinking more along the lines of opposite but complimentary.
I read it over, you weren’t implying, and mark was just adding on, not insinuating that you were implying .
And, in a nutshell, that’s what separates this forum from many (or all) of the other ones - civility. Common theme? That there are lots of ways to make good beer. so therefore there is no need for it to get dickish. A healthy debate is a good thing.
No offense was taken by your comment. I was trying to highlight that two people with very different approaches to brewing can still learn from each other. That’s what is good about this hobby, and more so, this forum. I have seen brewing topics discussed on this forum that would erupt into take no prisoners flame wars on a large home brewing forum whose name will remain anonymous.
[quote=“, post:30, topic:20283”]
I guess that we are like the yin and yang of the homebrew world. However, that does not stop us from having a civil conversation in person. Maybe, it’s because Denny is so darn likable in person. :) It’s difficult to find someone with a more “glass is half full” attitude than Denny. However, then again, Denny is retired while the rest of us are still doing the grind.
[/quote
Just becasue my experience often disagrees with Mark’s science doesn’t mean I don’t respect his point of view. I greatly enjoyed hanging with him at NHC and look forward to Baltimore. I think it proves a couple things…first, that there’s more than one road to the same destination. Second, malted barley want to become beer and even if you don’t do it the way that science says you should, you can still make great beer.
Just because my experience often disagrees with Mark’s science doesn’t mean I don’t respect his point of view. I greatly enjoyed hanging with him at NHC and look forward to Baltimore. I think it proves a couple things…first, that there’s more than one road to the same destination. Second, malted barley want to become beer and even if you don’t do it the way that science says you should, you can still make great beer.
BTW, although I’ve been involved in some flame wars over homebrewing in the past, I’ve come to realize how silly that is. It’s a goddamn hobby…do what works for you!
I’m pretty sure it’s the 52 quart.
With the round cooler there is less floor space and in my experiance it drains better. With the rectangle cooler I’d always have to tilt it to try and get all the wort out. The round one I just open the valve and it drains itself dry.
I too brew batches around the 3 gallon size. I used a 5-gallon cooler just fine when I was sparging. About a year and a half ago I adopted a no-sparge model that works for me. Think of it as BIAB without the bag (no lifting, gravity drain into the kettle, etc.). That’s when I went to a 9-gallon rectangular Coleman Xtreme, which works great for me for this purpose.
I kept the 5-gallon cooler just in case I want to sparge a batch for any reason, and it would be a three-minute job to swap out the ball valve and modified plumbing supply line. But if I were not using the no-sparge model, I would have stayed with the 5-gallon. It worked well for that purpose, and even with no-sparge there is enough space in my 9-gallon mash tun that I lose temp faster than I did in the 5-gallon. (I throw a blanket over the tun, which seems to help.)
Regarding equipment cost, I found that 5-gallon cooler on sale for $15 – but the Home Depot version is $20 today, which seems like a good deal.
What’s the highest gravity that can be mashed in the 5 gallon round cooler?
That will depend on batch size and mash thickness. At 1qt/lb (fairly thick), a 5 gallon cooler can handle 15lbs of grain.