beretta

Recipes 

I've been working on simpllfying my brew process. I figured one way I figure I could reduce complications was to reduce my infusion mash formulas down as much as possible. I figure by always using a mash grain/water ratio to 1.25 qts/lb (or 2.5 lb/lb by weight) would allow me reduce complexity. For instance... the standard Palmer infussion formula would reduce to:

Tstrike = Tgrain + (Tmash - Tgrain) / 6.25

Thereby making the formula even simpler. But what am I losing by always using a set mashing ratio? What are the effects of different ratios, and is it all that important?

Also: Does anybody use the more complicated formula compensating for "slaking heat" created by the hydration of grain in water?

The Pol

Recipes 

I just use PRoMash... and well, I always mash at 2qt/lb

Yooper

Recipes 

I used to always mash at 1.25 quarts per pound, and recently been mashing at 1.50 quarts per pound. I do that will all of my beers, except for step mashes. It works just fine, and I don't have to think too hard about it on brewdays.

__________________
Broken Leg Brewery
Giving beer a leg to stand on since 2006
You call me a dog well that's fair enough 'Cause it ain't no use to pretend You're wrong
But when it's my time to throw The next stone I'll call you beautiful if I call at all

ODaniel

Recipes 

I started with 1.25, then moved to 1.5, which I like much better. I tend to get better efficiency with a thinner mash. I haven't gone over 1.5 though.

The Pol

Recipes 

Thinner mashes can improve eff.
http://www.brewersfriend.com/2009/03/22/mashing-thick-or-thin/

conpewter

Recipes 

I'm switching to 1.5 qt/lb as well, except for beers where I'm stretching the limit of my MLT.

__________________
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people." - V

Primary: Nothin
Secondary: Shady Lord RIS, Water to Barleywine, Pumpkin wine, burnt mead
Kegged: Crappy infected mild
Bottles: Apfelwein, 999 Barleywine, Oatmeal Stout, Robust Porter, Robust smoked porter, Simcoe Smash

ThoughtPolice

Recipes 

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081213132547AAgO1ie
Is a quick and easy description of the effects of thin/thick mashes.

Lenny2884

Recipes 

My efficiency jumped up from 68% to just over 73% by changing from 1.25 qt/lb to 1.5 qt/lb. Plus it's easier to break up all those dough balls with a thinner mash.

the_Roqk

Recipes 

True that! PLUS you gotta stir the crap (Shiite) outa that mash when you dough in. If you don't stir well then you'll have little dough balls that will affect your efficiency. A thinner mash(1.5 qts/ to 2.0 qts/) usually helps with efficiency and with sparging.

That's my $.02's worth.

BTW opinions are like a$$holes. And most of them here are considered to be fact. Sometimes you just gotta go ahead and try it! What else can happen!

ajf

Recipes 

It has been my experience that when using English malts to produce English Bitters, there is a tremendous difference between using a mash thickness of 1 qt / lb and 1.25 qt / lb.
The thicker mash (which is traditional for English Bitters) produced a very malty beer, while the thinner mash produced a beer that was much less malty.
I repeated the experiment several times, and got the same result each time. In each case, the OG was not affected by the mash thickness, but I didn;t take note of the FG.

-a.

__________________
There are only 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and those that don't.