On the other hand, for styles that benefit from oxidation (I’m sold on low O2 brewing, I just don’t believe it’s appropriate for every style) a 90 minute boil might help…Doesn’t Toby use an extended boil for his Scotch Ale? It’d certainly explain why I’ve seemed to have better luck with longer boils with British styles. (Real ale must be slightly oxidized almost by definition.)
Yes. Toby does a long boil for his wee heavy. I was impressed with the results and just recently did a 90 minute boil for my old ale (which admittedly is not necessarily to bjcp style guidelines).
I now do reduced boil-off. I have been doing 90 min mashes, and 90 min boils. My beers are the best I’ve ever made, not saying much. Is it because I moved to 90/90, or is it just getting better at the process? I would love to cut an hour from brew day. I think I will go 90/60 on my RIS I plan to brew tomorrow. I doubt 90 min boil is needed. Now people are covering their BK with reduced boil-off. Lots of great tests and changes going on. Glad everyone comes here to share experiences.
I’ve done a few no boil extract IPAs where I’ve just heated the wort to whirlpool temps. The results were just fine - as good as any other extract IPA using a normal boil that I’ve brewed.
I have a Berliner Weisse that is almost ready that uses an even simpler method. I fill my fermentation keg with hot tap water, add wheat DME, pitch lacto, and let the sour fermentation go. I did a short 15 minute boil to kill the bugs and add a small amount of IBUs, then chilled and pitched Sacc.
I don’t think that this would work for every style, but it does have a place for some brewers and styles. I might try an extract and dry hop IPA with no heat at all sometime soon just for the heck of it.
I tend to boil 60 + whatever it took to hit hot break. That usually works out to about 75 mins from first runnings hitting the boil kettle until flame out.
The whole calculation issues in the reduced temperature (substituted “boil”)/reduced mash time approach seem daunting to me. Differences (if any) in evaporation rate, IBU’s, conversion, etc…would mean a major shift to me and I am just getting my new system down (BIAB - single vessel electric). So it will be a while before I try that approach whole hog. I’m not saying it doesn’t merit it for those who are more in tune with the calculations, but I have to dial things in better before trying it. Very interesting discussion for sure.
I’m on the fence about sorter boil times. Like everything else in brewing, it depends on what your goals are.
For your average beer, I don’t boil longer than 60 minutes, and I could see how some may be able to get down to a shorter boil time.
However, I once brewed a beer that was on the fence between being a pale mild or a bitter. Using a Ron Pattinson recipe, I boiled for a whopping three hours. The resultant beer had a noticeable caramel flavor, despite not having any crystal malt. (Just MO, flaked barley, and invert) While I haven’t played around with the variables to try and nail down if it was the invert or the boil length (or both), I think it’s worth stating that certain styles may require longer boils.
I see your points. When I moved to fly sparging it was an entirely new process to iron out. I’m reluctant to change any processes. I just ordered all the stainless for my new manifold to rid myself of the copper. I’m also going to make a DIY stainless CFC. I’m not sure why everyone quit selling the stainless CFC chillers. I’m making the best beer I’ve ever made, so I’m not sure I even care about the time saving changes. I am going to make the BIAB for my old 10gal kettle. Maybe those small batches will be a good place to experiment.