Let’s say I got about 64% attenuation on a 1.058 beer that finished at 1.020. This was a single infusion mash at 158F for 45 minutes. With the goal of hitting a FG a few points lower should I decrease the mash temp, increase the mash time, or both? My plan right now is to mash at 156F for 60 minutes. I realize it’s a pretty unpredictable ask. Any input would be appreciated.
Both. And I feel that mash TIME is the more important variable. And if you want real results, a 2 F difference is not a difference. Try mashing at like 149-150 F.
Time and/or Temperature are the key dials to turn, IMO.
Depending on your target, say if you want 1.018 instead of 1.020, you might get away with turning one or the other. But I do agree with Dave, pound for pound, time appears to make a bigger difference for me. Maybe try to mash for 60 minutes without changing your mash temperature, just to see what happens. One variable at a time.
And keep us posted!
Agree with both comments. Change one variable at a time and see what happens. But eventually lowering the mash temp will give you a more fermentable wort and thus a lower FG. That said, increase the mash time first then if you want to further lower the FG, adjust the temperature.
i no longer do any mash but the same style of infusion mash because i want predictable results for the wort. its an infusion targeted towards 148-152 (im sort of loose with it) for about 60 to 90 mins, but it generally gives me wort that falls within the fermentability guidelines of the yeast. -ie. bry97 hitting ~77% attenuation reliably
i think ive never done a hotter infusion mash temp like 156 before, i dont think i’d want that kind of body unless i was doing some very low OG beer like a 1.035 style
I wonder if the diastatic power of the grist might affect whether time or temperature is more important. I am not enough of a chemist to be able to figure out the answer, but it seems reasonable to me that a mash that has tons of enzymes and a mash with a marginal amount of enzymes might behave differently with regards to time and temperature.
i did not do any detailed calculations on this, but so far i have no had signifcantly better “efficiency” rates using 2row or pilsner malt over malts rated with lower DP, like vienna or maris otter.
It’s not a matter of efficiency, it is a matter of which sugars are produced. The longer mash allows beta amylase to break down larger sugars created by alpha amylase into smaller, more fermentable ones. If all the beta amylase is denatured before it can do that then more time won’t help.
Trust me, mashing at 156F is not going to give noticibly more body than 152, and probably not more than 148. You may see a point or two higher FG, but in my experience, that is pretty much undetectable to the palate. Honestly, I’ve mashed as high as 162F and really haven’t noticed a huge difference for low-to-normal gravity beers.
There was a brewer in our homebrew club who swore by a 158-160 F mash for his low ABV English Milds- he made award winning milds that seemed to have more body than most. Confirmation bias, perhaps for those of us who knew his process, but the medals were earned without any judges knowing his mash temp.
Noted, although malt choice, recipe, yeast strain, carbonation level, etc. are probably all other variables that he has dialed in. These all will have more impact than mash temp as far as winning medals goes, and in relation to perceived body as well in my experience.