 |
02-07-2012, 10:55 AM
|
#1
|
|
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Midlothian, Virginia
Posts: 28
|
Using Primary as Secondary also
|
|
Hi,
I'm looking at brewing a beer and I've been told it is definitely better if it is racked to a secondary fermenter. I don't have one of those but I was thinking I could rack it to a bottling bucket then clean and re-sanitize the primary fermenter and rack it back in. Is that a good idea or am I missing the purpose of a secondary fermenter in the first place?
Thank you
|
|
|
02-07-2012, 11:00 AM
|
#2
|
|
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Davisburg, Mi
Posts: 170
Liked 6 Times on 6 Posts Likes Given: 7
|
Just leave it in the primary. Secondary is not necessary. I think its only good to secondary to add fruit or long term aging.
|
|
|
02-07-2012, 11:13 AM
|
#3
|
|
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Independence, Missouri
Posts: 1,073
Liked 17 Times on 15 Posts Likes Given: 32
|
There are a TON of threads that pertain whether or not to secondary. I only use them if I am looking to flavor my beer with fruit (by placing the fruit into the secondary and then racking my beer onto the fruit) or if I am working on a beer that I want to be crystal clear, usually by dissolving gelatin, placing it into the secondary and racking my beer onto it. Truthfully, I don't bother with trying to clear my beer much anymore. Brew it, bottle it, drink it...
As far as using your bottling bucket as you described, I wouldn't. In my opinion, you're just exposing your beer to a lot of unnecessary steps that could do more harm then good.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by passedpawn
I also HATE that attitude that I NEED TO BE MONITORED. Don't Tread on Me MF.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigeb
It's my God-given right to be as stupid as I want to be. How dare the government get in the way.
|
Go Beer!
|
|
|
02-07-2012, 11:25 AM
|
#4
|
|
Feedback Score: 2 reviews
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago, IL - Illinois
Posts: 1,686
Liked 48 Times on 44 Posts Likes Given: 18
|
Yeah, I would leave it alone. The less I touch it the better.
|
|
|
02-07-2012, 11:27 AM
|
#5
|
|
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: "Detroitish" Michigan
Posts: 40,707
Liked 2426 Times on 1495 Posts Likes Given: 3310
|
I suggest you read THIS thread, it's become the "uber discussion" on this topic thread.
To Secondary or Not? John Palmer, Jamil Zainasheff, and all of us Weigh In .
Pretty much every question has been answered in there, there are podcasts and articles and other citations, and that's where the discussion is ongoing.

__________________
Like my snazzy new avatar? Get Sons of Zymurgy swag, here, and brew with the best.
Revvy's one of the cool reverends. He has a Harley and a t-shirt that says on the back "If you can read this, the bitch was Raptured. - Madman
I gotta tell ya, just between us girls, that Revvy is HOT. Very tall, gorgeous grey hair and a terrific smile. He's very good looking in person, with a charismatic personality... he drives like a ****ing maniac! - YooperBrew
|
|
|
02-09-2012, 12:41 AM
|
#6
|
|
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Midlothian, Virginia
Posts: 28
|
Awesome, thank you for the replies everyone. The main reason I ask is because I'm thinking of doing a peanut butter porter and the extract recipe I have calls for adding dry peanut butter and cacao into the secondary fermenter. It seems like I might be able to get away with just putting it in the primary?
On a side note, I was directed to PB2 dry peanut butter and they have a version where it is dry peanut butter and chocolate mixed together. Would that be ok to use?
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
|
|
|