Ok cool. Just a thought though. Won’t a prolonged mash produce a more fermentable wort even at a higher mash temp?
Yes, I believe so, but my experience has been that it still lends more body by being just above the beta amylase range. You can reduce the time and still get adequate conversion for these session beers.
For session lagers, I will often go for mid-150’s to get some beta action and use a 90 minute mash, especially if using a lesser modified malt base, such as floor malted pilsner malt.
My current thoughts, I say current because some things once taken as a fact are false.
There’s an inverse relationship with mash temp and fermentable wort. Mashing high gives more
body, but less fermentable wort. I figure I get the body with mashing high at the expense of
less fermentable wort. I’m currently using high attenuation yeast to sneak out more ABV.
Cheers
So I brewed this recipe this past Sunday. Recipe is exact as posted below except I raised the mash temp to 158 for 60 mins and the yeast used was Pub A09. All things considered I am optimistic for a quality tasting beer but, my FG is 1.008 and the est. was supposed to be 1.014. That is somewhere near 80% attenuation on a yeast that is supposed to be at or near 69-74% attenuation. The yeast ripped through fermentation in 3 days and on SG sample it is already clearing nicely. Impressive to say the least. Will definitely be collecting the slurry.
Temp gauges are calibrated and my grain mill has not been or needs adjustment. I don’t miss my est. FG on proven recipes.
Other than the body being thin/watery the taste is good. Although it is not kegged and carbonated.
Any thoughts on why I had such a low FG?
What makes you think the FG estimate is correct? Have you made the exact same batch before?
What makes you think the FG estimate is correct? Have you made the exact same batch before?
Totally based on software.(Beer Smith). First time with this recipe (my own). The one thing I feel that contributed to the lower than expected FG was mashing for 60 mins. I think 45 mins may have left it more dextrinous but I may be mistaken. Also that and over attenuation.
What makes you think that the FG is correct so I can correct for the next iteration?
How did you measure FG? Did you use a floating hydrometer (Tilt, iSpindle, etc).
Hydrometer and tilt. Tilt calibrated prior to pitch and floating hydrometer after taking sample.
I wouldn’t trust the Tilt for FG. It’s great to tell you how fermentation is progressing and when fermentation is complete but use a finish hydrometer to verify FG.
I also calibrate in water at the beginning of each fermentation. My Tilt reading vs FG hydrometer reading is more often that not 3-5 gravity points off at the end of fermentation. This is due to the spooge attached to the top of the Tilt causing it to, well, tilt. I’ll bet the Tilt had a gob of goo on it throwing off the FG. Especially when using an active yeast. Like Pub.
I always go with the FG hydrometer reading in my final calculations.
There is no reason to think that prediction is accurate
So if the est. FG is just a numerical plug in (my words) that mean nothing more than a moving target wether it is estimated by software or by slide rule, why even have a FG?
Also, how does a brewer adjust to make a finished beer have a higher/lower FG? Apparently it is more common to accurately hit the elusive FG when starting with a higher OG.
I don’t know the answers to your questions.
I just wanted to state your recipe looks good and the beer will probably taste great regardless of the attenuation or FG. Those are just numbers.
You measure the FG. You adjust for higher or lower mainly through recipe. Secondarily through temp and yeast.
So there lies my conundrum. I adjust the recipe with possibly more caramel or pale malt and eliminate the biscuit all together (or whatever) in the hopes that it will give me that mouthfeel/body I am trying to achieve without climbing higher than 4% ABV.
This style of beer is going to be a challenge!
+1
Here’s what I’ve been doing in my effort to brew full body, full flavor, low(er) ABV beers lately:
- open the gap of my mill.
- mash in at higher temp range
- do No Sparge Mash
- 30 min, low wattage boil
- choose low attenuating yeast
Ok, will definitely apply those suggestions. A few questions though. 1. How low of a boil are you talking about,75-85-95%?
2. What does a no sparge mash accomplish?
Thanks BrewBama
Low boil to me means bring to rolling boil at 3.5 kw for a nice hot break then reduce to “low boil” at 1.6 kw. I low boil for 30 min to limit OG. I skim at flameout before I start the whirlpool.
The No Sparge thing is just me. It gives me the sweetest runnings. I don’t want to increase sugar or volume past what I get from the initial mash. I mash at a calculated full volume to get me a runoff volume of ~6 gal in the kettle. I boil off ~.5 gal or so. I leave ~a gal in the kettle along with the trüb.
I like the results I’ve been getting lately.
BIAB is used, and when done rinsing color is still coming through.
Just by chance my procedures and current equipment don’t allow rinsing further.
I think (just a current thought) that those who rinse (BIAB) until clear are picking up
tannin’s and astringency as you would with a tea bag.
Cheers