Darwin18

Recipes 

I've been brewing for a while and using the standard 1.25 quarts per lb mash ratio. While my beers have been good there is always a "homebrew" taste to them. I was reading over this months BYO and in one of the articles the author mentions that having the same problems at 1.25 per lb but said that after raising it to around 2.0 quarts per lb that it drastically improved the quality of his beer.

Has anyone gone from 1.25 to 2.0 and noticed any substanial increase in quality of their beer? My last recipe was one of Jamil's American Brown Ales, and after changing the mash ratio from 1.25 to 2.0 in beersmith, the sparge would have been reduced to almost nothing.

The Pol

Recipes 

I use 2.0qt/lb

My eff. jumped several points and think if it this way. Not only COULD you increase your conversion eff., but you are using less sparge water, which will help keep your pH low during the sparge, which will help the quality of your beer.

Try it.

grotus

Recipes 

I had kinda the same problem a while back. After mash & sparge, according to Book, I would've started my boil with like 10 gallons. For a 5 gallon batch. I ended up cutting back the sparge water amount, and started the boil with 7 gallons. Maybe that was wrong, but it seemed like it was way too much.

The Pol

Recipes 

The more you sparge, the greater the poss. of extracting tannins

You should only have to run off 6.5-7 gal. for a 5 gallon batch, you were severely oversparging

jkarp

Recipes 

That quote was from me. The quality claim is more related to no-sparge than the mash thickness, really. Jamil (and many others) have stated that your first runnings are your best quality wort. With that logic in mind, I designed my system so that the full pre-boil volume is recirculated and no traditional sparge is ever done. The whole system heats to 170F and then it's drained to the kettle for boil.

Yes, no-sparge is less efficient, but grain's cheap.

Orfy

Recipes 

I've always used 1.5

__________________
GET THE GOBLIN
Have a beer on me.

david_42

Recipes 

I've never really understood why people make such thick mashes. More water improves efficiency and makes for a more stable temperature. All I can come up with is their mash tun is too small.

__________________
Remember one unassailable statistic, as explained by the late, great George Carlin: "Just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of them are even stupider!"

Stratotankard

Recipes 

Why's it always have to be about size?

That said I've got a 10 gallon cooler to mash in. I've had much better results with thin mashes at 1.75-2.0 qt/lb than with 1.25. The quality of my beer has improved dramatically and efficiency went up from low 70s to low 80s. Oh, and stirring soup is much preferable to stirring oatmeal. I'm happy with thinner mashes.

Terje

__________________
---------------------------------------------
Primary: Burned Mead
Secondary: Bourbon Barrel Porter
Bottled: More Bourbon Barrel Porter, New Pekin Common, Flat Tail Old Ale, Bad Monkey Banana Wine, Flanders Red, Pumpkin Ale
Drinking: Too Much
On deck: Something crazy to use up the 3+ pounds of hops sitting in my freezer

Darwin18

Recipes 

Thanks for the replies guys. The runnings from the mash are much more concentrated than from the sparge. I think for my next beer that I will have to give a thinner mash a try.

The Pol

Recipes 

It was written in a book in the 70's or 80's. I mean, isnt that where people are really getting all of thier knowlege before the explore the wonder of the Interwebz?

Most of the outdated "wisdom" is still perpetuated even on the Interwebz... that is where it comes from, that is why people do it.

People often do things without having any understanding of why. Understanding is the missing key.