Ss Brewing Technologies Giveaway!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > Equipment/Sanitation > Best grain mill
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-01-2012, 02:46 PM   #21
Lildogbrewing
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Oregon City, OR
Posts: 2
Default

I LOOOOOOVEEEEEEE my Barley Crusher. You definately want to hook up a drill to it though.

__________________
Lildogbrewing is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-01-2012, 02:55 PM   #22
Lildogbrewing
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Oregon City, OR
Posts: 2
Default

Here is a pic of how I mounted it to a table I built.

grain-mill.jpg  
__________________
Lildogbrewing is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-01-2012, 03:46 PM   #23
bkl63
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Pennsville, New Jersey
Posts: 223
Liked 8 Times on 8 Posts
Likes Given: 21

Default

I spent several months going over the various mills and settled on the Rebel Mill. I felt that for the price, it couldn't be beat. Having it for a couple months now, I feel my prior research has been spot on for the Rebel Mill. I have been getting Mash Eff. of 80 to 90% and the crush has been as good as one could exspect and far esxceeding the LHBS.

__________________
Always amazed at the helpfulness of those here at Home Brew Talk. Easily the best source for questions around making great beer!
Member of First State Brewers!
bkl63 is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-01-2012, 07:11 PM   #24
tryn2brew
On the road again
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Azle/Wichita, TX/KS
Posts: 108
Liked 5 Times on 5 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

+1 for the Rebel Mill. Used mine for the first time, worked great. Seems very well built for the price.

__________________
tryn2brew is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-01-2012, 08:17 PM   #25
Rundownhouse
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cincinnati, Kentucky
Posts: 331
Liked 8 Times on 8 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

I got a non-adjustable JSP MaltMill used off CL. At first I was worried about not being able to adjust it, but I get 70-80% no problems. My only gripe is the hopper, which holds ~3#, but as others have said, its easy enough to build a bigger hopper.

__________________
Rundownhouse is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-02-2012, 09:55 PM   #26
Accidic
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Accidic's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Millbrook, Alabama
Posts: 1,432
Liked 81 Times on 72 Posts
Likes Given: 66

Default

I run the Monster Mill MM2-2.0 (stainless) with a .0365 gap presently. I ran a batch through it this weekend and the crush looked pretty great with a huge amount of mostly undamaged barley husks (hulls?) and mashed it along with about 3.5 pounds of sticky pumpkin flesh with no rice hulls and didn't have the first issue with any kind of stuck sparge or otherwise. The people reporting the best results seemed to be between .035 and .039 on here typically. If you're willing to condition the malt first you can also go much smaller apparently with even more success. I didn't notice a difference from .039 to .038. At least no calculatable difference anyway. I saw a small gain @ .0365 (never tried right on .037 to be fair). I do get a fair bit of flour out of it at that gap but the intact husks make it a largely moot point in my experience. I'm thinking about trying to squeeze that down further to the 0.035 range for my batch this weekend as I did find a couple of the smaller pieces of malt slip through uncrushed but part of that might have just been them being rather small and fell at just the right angle.


I was extremely conflicted over the hardened/stainless question and eventually just went with the Stainless. Fred basically pointed out that plain steel would have probably been fine for 95%+ of my need/use but I couldn't bring myself to not boosting it slightly for only a tiny bit more $$ on something that you don't really purchase everyday. Honestly though, unless you want it for the bling factor, the slight rust resistant advantage (perhaps a wet crush?), or you can't bring yourself to buy something without picking up some sort of upgrade (*cough*), I don't think Stainless is really even necessary (my previous mill was offbrand and raw steel and worked without hitch for years until I parted with it with little to no rust and basically no problems). The hopper is absolutely top notch and as far as I'm concerned (it is definitely galvanized steel but is moderately thick albeit not what I'd consider bulletproof "heavy gauge" metal but to be fair I think anything over 18 is considered heavy gauge at this point) is a must have as for the price it's incredibly hard to beat. I can see why people would say get the extension though if you are going to motorize it but really it's not a pain to me to throw in the stuff in a couple batches at worst.


I have no heartburn for the Rebel Mills either. For me I was debating between that one and the Monster. The hopper on the rebel looks incredibly solid (at least as much as stainless steel is "solid" anyway). The quoted spec of 1" rollers was said to be off by several users (I think they quoted like 1 5/16" or something?) and of course it's in all stainless. At the end of the day though, If given the choice and the small difference I'd personally take the Monster Mill with 2" rollers (1144 rather than stainless) over the Rebel for the ~20-30 bucks extra. It's not that I have anything against the Rebel mill outright as it looks like a pretty good mill and very well made from near where I live. For me it was a friend of mine's Crankenstein with 1.5" rollers. At comparable gaps he gets more tearing than I do by a noticable margin. So yes, to the above poster I do believe it makes a pretty significant difference what the roller differences in size are. I don't know if the 3/16" difference is enough to justify the expense but I do truly believe the 0.5" difference (actually 0.688" which is about 50% larger) is truly huge. As for the reason diameter makes such a huge difference I can only go by what others have posted but my understanding is the larger the diameter the smaller the pinch angle is creating less damage ultimately. Granted, either mill can drag the grain through outright if need be (hence the knurling on the rollers) but if the pinch starts before the drag then it stands to reason the husk is going to be that much less damaged. I've even seen some people post with really large diameter rollers that didn't even need to knurl the rollers as a result (there is a guy on here with 6" rollers he custom fabbed that's pretty freaking cool).


Plus, I figure if I ever go bugnuts and get an itching for that 3rd roller type model, I'll pick up a hardened steel roller version and mount it over/under with the stainless with a belt driven setup powering both rollers for a 4 roller model!



That said though, honestly at the end of the day I'd say go with whichever model excites you the most. The monster mill for me added the amusing comment of doing the "Monster Mash" which my 6 year old continually sings while mashing grain for example. It's manufactured very close to home (so is the Rebel for that matter) so turnaround would be very short in a pinch. It's also got a nice huge driveshaft (durability) and a very large gap setting range which is great if you want to do more than just Barley/Wheat/Oats such as Corn which really benefits from a pre-crush before crushing finer. To be fair, the Rebel may do this as well but I don't know of it's range of adjustment and I think Crankenstein has a model with similar levels of adjustment as well. I would imagine they're all about the same difficulty (that is to say not very) to adjust unless they have 3 rollers although I believe I read the BC (and I think some of the Crankensteins) have preset adjustment increments where you can just turn it to where you want it and go.

__________________
Accidic is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-02-2012, 11:36 PM   #27
Accidic
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Accidic's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Millbrook, Alabama
Posts: 1,432
Liked 81 Times on 72 Posts
Likes Given: 66

Default

Also as a sidenote, it would appear the RM is set to .027" gap initially as listed for it's "optimal" setting. I may try gapping mine down to about that but it seems awfully small.

__________________
Accidic is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 12:16 AM   #28
barrooze
Feedback Score: 6 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Pearland, TX
Posts: 2,289
Liked 103 Times on 87 Posts
Likes Given: 133

Default

I tried that gap setting on my MM2 and my unconditioned grain just wouldn't get pulled through. Worst mill experience yet. I'm opening my gap to 0.032" and see how that goes...

__________________
Kegged: Flanders Blonde, Saison (WLP585), Saison (Belle Saison), Mid-ABV Janet's Brown, Texas Brown Ale (A.K.A. The Creature) Primary: Octoberfest (ECY15), Sour Brown (ECY01) Souring: Oaked Brett Blended Saison On Deck: Pale ale, Ginger Beer On the Horizon: Epic Pale ale clone, Tonguesplitter Updated: 2014/08/23
Untappd: barrooze
barrooze is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-03-2012, 01:10 AM   #29
Golddiggie
HBT_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Golddiggie's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Between here and there, and everywhere
Posts: 12,058
Liked 477 Times on 420 Posts
Likes Given: 266

Default

The gap size you use is also impacted by the manifold/false bottom you use in the mash tun. For me, .038-.039" gives good results (repeatable) and don't result in a stuck sparge. I might experiment with tighter crush settings at some point, but for now, I'm happy with the results.

__________________
Hopping Tango Brewery

跟猴子比丟屎 ・ Gun HOE-tze bee DIO-se

On Tap: Caramel Ale, Mocha Porter II, MO SMaSH IPA
Waiting/Carbonating: 12.5% Wee Honey II, 8.9% Old Ale, English Brown Ale, Lickah ESB, Mocha Porter II
Fermenting
K1:
K2: Epic mead
K3: TripSix
On Deck: Caramel Ale
Aging:mead
Mead [bottled]:Oaked Wildflower Traditional, Mocha Madness, Blackberry Melomel, maple wine
Golddiggie is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-08-2012, 04:00 PM   #30
barrooze
Feedback Score: 6 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Pearland, TX
Posts: 2,289
Liked 103 Times on 87 Posts
Likes Given: 133

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrooze View Post
I tried that gap setting on my MM2 and my unconditioned grain just wouldn't get pulled through. Worst mill experience yet. I'm opening my gap to 0.032" and see how that goes...
So last week I disassembled my mill housing, brushed it all off with a clean brush, reset the gap to 0.032", made sure the passive wheel spun just as easily as the drive wheel, and milled 12.5# of pilsner malt. No issues whatsoever. Got 80% efficiency. I'll be using this gap setting for the next several batches assuming I don't get any feeding issues, and hopefully will be able to get a repeatable brewhouse mash efficiency.
__________________
Kegged: Flanders Blonde, Saison (WLP585), Saison (Belle Saison), Mid-ABV Janet's Brown, Texas Brown Ale (A.K.A. The Creature) Primary: Octoberfest (ECY15), Sour Brown (ECY01) Souring: Oaked Brett Blended Saison On Deck: Pale ale, Ginger Beer On the Horizon: Epic Pale ale clone, Tonguesplitter Updated: 2014/08/23
Untappd: barrooze
barrooze is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply



Quick Reply
Message:
Options
Thread Tools