How long is your boil? Why that length?
60 minutes
Inertia. 60 minutes is what all the home brew books and recipes said to do when I learned to brew, so that’s what I do. It ain’t broke so, I don’t feel a need to fix it.
4 Likes
My last batch of witbier I boiled for 45 minutes because:
- bitterness isn’t significant for this style,
- don’t care about clarity or haze for this style,
- 45 minutes ain’t that different from 60 minutes anyways regardless of style,
- save a few minutes of your life.
When I care about clarity or getting the most bitterness from my hops, I’ll boil for 60-75.
If I am brewing a high gravity beer, I’ll sparge extra to collect extra wort, then plan for a long 2-3 hour boil, which maximizes efficiency, and might result in a little extra color and caramelization vs. standard 1-hour boil.
But most often I boil an average 70 minutes just because. And maybe I’ll turn this into 45-50 to save a little time without much loss on bitterness or clarity.
2 Likes
However long it takes me to reach OG. Generally 45-75 minutes
3 Likes
30 to 60 minutes generally.
For a while I was doing 30-min boils, even for my all pilsner malt beers, just to save time. It worked fine, there was no DMS at all (I don’t think DMS is a major concern with today’s malts).
But clarity suffered from the shorter boil, and the flavor of my bittering addition came through a bit–not always a good thing. So I went back to 60-min boil.
Isomerization is pretty much complete after ~45 min, so boiling longer isn’t necessary from a bitterness perspective. At that point, it’s about achieving the target end-of-boil gravity.
2 Likes
I’ll add that I have boiled for as little as 20 minutes. Other than having to adjust bittering hops, there were no issues.
Seldom under 75, sometimes 90 but like Denny said, and I’ll paraphrase, when it’s ready. I might add to this that I boil hard too. Most, about 99% of my brews are light pilsners/lagers and I want to blast that DMS out.
1 Like
I’ve gotten in the habit of doing pale malt, et al, for 60 minute boil and Pils malt for 90 minute boil.
However, I’m always seeking ways to shorten the L… O… N… G… brewday. If someone recommends less than 60 or 90 minutes, I’m listening.
Most pils malt I’m aware of and use doesn’t need a 90 minute boil any more. 60 is more than sufficient, especially if you have a good rolling boil. Vigor is at least as important as time.
Denny,
Thanks! Appreciate and respect your input.
Is DMS in Pils malt no longer a concern?
This is only a personal observation, but if I add an extra 30 minutes to my brew day, I am good with that. Its not a chore to me to be in a place I enjoy to be. Alone and in MY element without the intrusion of (fill in the blank)
Happy Brew Day!!
2 Likes
IDK, tweak where and there… time adds up… always looking to shorten brew day.
1 Like
A minor concern. A good rolling boil for 15 minutes is pretty much all it takes. Of course, depends to some extent on the particular maltster.
I understand what you’re saying, but I hate wasting time on unnecessary things when I could use that time to do something else I enjoy.
Good to know. If you have some data on that I would like to view that. If its your personal take I would take that as sufficient data too. I guess certain dogmas die a slow death regardless. The only way to really know for myself would be to do a comparison of exact recipe, all things being equal, except length of boil.
Cheers!!
According to this you’ll reach a balance between DMS boiled off and production of new DMS from the precursor (S‑Methylmethionin, SMM) after around 20 minutes. After that, the amount of DMS in your wort stays the same, and you’ll have to boil for a rather long time to get rid of all of the precursor.
In a beersmithpodcast Charlie Bamforth claims that most of the DMS in beer is produced from DMSO during fermentation. So i really don’t think we have to worry too much about DMS when boiling, and i don’t think a rolling boil is necessary - even if Bamforth keeps talking about it. I’m just letting it simmer now, and I don’t notice any difference. It might lower the heat load somewhat, though, which is a good thing.
I still stick to the 60 minutes, though. I’ve tried Marshall Schott of Brülosophy’s “short and shoddy”, and it worked just fine - but it stressed me. I found I like the slower rythm of an ordinary brewday better - I mash for ages, too:) - and as I brew for the fun of it (and the beer, of course), that’s what I’ll do. But if saving time is paramount, “short and shoddy” is the way to go.
90 minutes seems meaningless to me - unless you want to reach a higher OG, which I never need to.
2 Likes
One way to have a low heat load on the wort is to do a low boil then in the last 5 or 10 minutes go to a rolling boil.
1 Like
I’ve been boiling for 30 min for years. No issues at all including off flavors or clarity.
2 Likes
I switched to 30 minute boils from 60 about a year ago. I don’t perceive any difference in the finished beers and so even though I wasn’t trying to rush brew day, I managed to pocket an extra half hour. The only time I change my boil time is if I’m trying to make an on-the-fly adjustment for volume or gravity.
1 Like