60 or 90 Minute Boil?

OK, I do some recipes that require 60 and 90 minute boils and I just want to know what is the advantage of a 90 minute boil over 60? All things equal...what does the final product have to offer on the taste buds being a 90 minute boil over a 60?

Between the mash and sparge time, that extra 1/2 hour must be worth it or what? I have never tried boiling my own recipes for 90, but what can I expect?

Here's an older thread in the topic..…https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/90-minute-boil-new-60-minute-boil-118287/

Better hop utilization, for one. Also it breaks down some enzymes or protiens or something, good in lite lagers and such.

90 minute boils are not better or worse than 60 minute boils....If you see a 90 minute boil more than likely there's pilsner malt in the grainbill. 90 minute boils are usually only done with pilsner malt to drive off DMS precursors, which can lead to a cooked corn taste.

It a normal situation a 60 minute boil is all you really need to do.

OK guys...I get the message. Thanks, I never knew about the DMS with pilsner malt.

Revvy said:

90 minute boils are usually only done with pilsner malt to drive off DMS precursors, which can lead to a cooked corn taste.

It a normal situation a 60 minute boil is all you really need to do.

Click to expand...

It is matter of personal choice.. IMO
I"ve always boiled pilsner for 60 minutes and I didnt noticed significant DMS taste.

I did a quad that I boiled for 90 min b/c I wanted to have a more caramelized wort...

A pro brewer friend of mine encourages a 90 min boil.

Mongrel said:

A pro brewer friend of mine encourages a 90 min boil.

Click to expand...

For each malt or just pilsner?

diS said:

For each malt or just pilsner?

Click to expand...

All brews.

I have done a 30m boil on a basic (2-row/crystal) recipe and didn't have any DMS or off flavors. A lot depends on your boiloff rate, hot-break, cold-break, and good, vigorous fermentation.

You will rarely ever see, especially as a homebrew high level of dms from 2-row, basically never. Couple reasons people would suggest a 90min boil, DMS, Hop Utilization, sterilization, wort concentration, color can be effected, PH and various compound effects. Here is a nice summary or points towards boiling below. There are too many factors on what you are trying to achieve to give you an idea on what your proper boil time should be for each beer but 99% homebrewers are fine at 60min as long as they avoid large amounts of malt with S-Methyl Methionine (produces DMS) and are getting proper sterilization.

Killing spoilage micro-organisms.
• Reducing the amount of coagulable
nitrogen thus promoting colloidal stability.
• Extracting the desirable principles of hops
to give beer its characteristic aroma and
flavor.
• Reducing undesirable volatile compounds
through evaporation

I always do 90 minute boils now. Reasons (as some have posted):

Drive off more oxygen
More coagulation
Lower PH
More maillard reactions (though maybe undesirable in certain styles)
Finally...more time to get other aspects of brewing done (transfers, getting ready for bottling, etc) Since I do late hop additions, I get 70 minutes to get things done

Is it necessary? Probably not, but I like it.