Sharing a Citra IPA recipe

Just thought I'd share this recipe. Yooper mentioned it in a thread and I hit her up to get it. I finally managed to brew it last weekend so I figured I'd share with you folks. It's pretty simple but smells amazing in the fermenter!

Specialty Grains
1# Crystal 40L

Hop Schedule
0.75oz US Magnum (14.9%) @ 60
1oz Citra (14.5%) @ 15
1oz Citra (14.5%) @ 5
1oz Citra (14.5%) @ 0
1oz Cascade leaf for dry hop, 7 days before kegging

Fermentables
6# Muntons light DME @ 0 (late addition)

Yeast
Wyeast 1056, 1L starter

Miscellaneous
Fermcap-S @ 60 (6 drops)
1 whirlfloc @ 15

OG was 1.060. Expected FG is 1.012-1.015 for ABV of ~6%. I will let this one sit for 4 weeks, then add in 1oz Cascade leaf dry hop, then keg after 5 weeks total. Force carb and begin serving approximately 1 week later.

Cool, thanks for sharing. Looks like I've got an IPA recipe to try out...

I did something similar for my very first brew.

CitrAmarillo IPA

For a 4 gallon boil / 3 gallon batch:

Hop Schedule (pellets):

0.50 oz Columbus (14.5%) @ 60
0.50 oz Citra (12.4%) @ 10
0.50 oz Amarillo (9.1%) @ 10
0.50 oz Citra (12.4%) @ whirlpool
0.50 oz Amarillo (9.1%) @ whirlpool
0.75 oz Citra (12.4%) @ 10 day dryhop
0.75 oz Amarillo (9.1%) @ 10 day dryhop

Fermentables:

4# Muntons Light DME, split at 60 and 15 minutes
1-1/2# Malteurop 2-row, 149 F mash for 60 minutes with the wheat and C40
8 oz. Rahr Red Wheat
8 oz. Crystal 40L

Yeast:

Wyeast 1056, 1L starter

Miscellaneous:

1 whirlfloc @ 15

OG was about 1.070. 4 weeks in the primary including dryhop, no secondary, mid 60s (F)

Amazing aroma!! If anyone attempts it, I suggest replacing the 8 oz. C40 with 4 oz. C10 or C20. And using Extra Light DME instead of Light. Then, replacing about 10 oz. of the late DME with sugar. Finally, bumping up the 10 and 0 hop additions to another half ounce each to total 5 oz. in the recipe. A little bit of Citra goes a longgggggg way.

I just did one with all Simcoe, and will use the same recipe, might jack up the extract and the hops to make a bigger beer if possible next time.

1 lb 12oz Munich
15 oz 40L Crystal

Mash for 45 minutes or so at 155*. Add burton salts last 10 minutes roughly of mash to water.
Sparge with 2 quarts at 165 or 170*.

Raise water level to 3+ gallons, and boil.

Add 6.6lbs of Golden light LME, might be better with DME though, no idea of the changes that might need to be made.

1oz @ 60
1oz @ 15
.5 oz @ 5
Irish moss @ 15

Dry hop with 1oz or 1 1/2 oz for 2 weeks.

1.060 OG 1.014 FG 6% ABV

I did mine with all Simcoe.. I'm planning on doing another batch, and doing Cascade and Citra. Cascade to bitter, Citra for everything else, and then maybe 1 oz Citra and 1 oz Cascade dry hop.

Wyeast 1056

I cold crashed a few days ago and racked to secondary lastnight. I pulled a taste off of this one and all I can say is WOW! It's bitter but the mango from the citra hops is stellar. Definitely a recipe that I will brew again. I am looking forward to dry hopping this one but I don't want to give up beer volume to the hops, it's just so good!

Finally, bumping up the 10 and 0 hop additions to another half ounce each to total 5 oz. in the recipe. A little bit of Citra goes a longgggggg way.[/QUOTE]

What will the sugar do? Will it just bump the alchol level up or will it impart a flavor? Great recipe though I am brewing it as we speak.

I guess that was supposed to go to me...

The sugar (which replaces some of the base malt or extract) will boost fermentability and aid dryness... both good things in a higher abv, dry hoppy beer.

A common misconception by new brewers (and some not so new) is to "add" sugar to an existing recipe in order to get better fermentability and increased dryness. This is not the case. You'll probably end up with a higher OG and FG if you go this route. The sugar addition must "replace" the base malt.

bobbrews said:

A common misconception by new brewers (and some not so new) is to "add" sugar to an existing recipe in order to get better fermentability and increased dryness. This is not the case. You'll end up with a higher OG and FG if you go this route. The sugar addition must "replace" the base malt.

Click to expand...

I'm not convinced of this. Sure, replacing dries out much more than adding, but adding still dries out the beer. It certainly shouldn't raise FG.

Assuming sugar ferments completely, it finishes lower than 1.000...so adding a sub 1.000 solution to a 1.015 solution will reduce the FG.

At least that's my logic - I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

A 1.060 beer that's all malt is going to have a higher final gravity and will be fuller bodied than a 1.060 beer that's 5% or 10% sugar, but if you simply take a 1.060 beer and add sugar to it you're going to end up with either the same FG, or possibly even a higher FG than you would have before.

bobbrews said:

A 1.060 beer that's all malt is going to have a higher final gravity and will be fuller bodied than a 1.060 beer that's 5% or 10% sugar

Click to expand...

Agree 100%

bobbrews said:

...but if you simply take a 1.060 beer and add sugar to it you're going to end up with either the same FG, or possibly even a higher FG than you would have before.

Click to expand...

This is where I'm not convinced. Lets say your 1060 beer finished at 1010. Then you add sugar, which ferments almost completely...CO2 escapes, leaving only EtOH with an SG of .787. So you're adding a liquid with a lower density, which means the FG must fall. It's just a weighted average...for e.g. 99% x 1.010 + 1% .787 = 1.008. If it's a small amount of sugar, it may not drop your FG much, but I don't see how it'll raise the FG.

Am I missing something?

bobbrews said:

A 1.060 beer that's all malt is going to have a higher final gravity and will be fuller bodied than a 1.060 beer that's 5% or 10% sugar, but if you simply take a 1.060 beer and add sugar to it you're going to end up with either the same FG, or possibly even a higher FG than you would have before.

Click to expand...

even if it only got to the same FG, the 1.060 beer + extra sugar would still be drier due to the extra alcohol.

I'm using "Drying Out" when the FG is lowered by supplementing some of the base malt with simple sugar, but the OG remains the same as the original recipe without simple sugar.

You guys are using "Drying Out" in terms of boosting the beer to obtain more alcohol and a greater OG, while the FG remains the same or greater. That is not Drying Out.

bobbrews said:

...while the FG remains the same or greater...

Click to expand...

This is the part I'm not convinced about. Other things equal, a sugar addition should lower FG, hence "drying out". Not as much as a sugar replacement, still dries it out to some degree. I don't see how a sugar addition could raise FG.

Depending on the amount of sugar you add, and the point at which you add the sugar, the yeast may quit on the rest of the maltose that it would have eaten if you didn't add the sugar. The FG will not always be higher. In most cases it would remain the same. But still... that does not give you a drier beer. It just gives you a beer with more alcohol and the same amount of residual sugars.

The yeast quitting maltose thing is definitely a consideration. I've never had an issue with it, but others have, so I'd agree with that comment.

bobbrews said:

...It just gives you a beer with more alcohol and the same amount of residual sugars.

Click to expand...

But, wouldn't that be a drier beer? If you have the same amount of residual sugar, but more alcohol, the FG would be lower.

Not trying to be a tool, just trying to understand this.

The additional alcohol would be from attaining a higher OG, not a lower FG. Hence, you wouldn't have a drier beer... just one higher in alcohol. Like car price, it really depends on the final price (or the FG in this case)... not about how far you can reduce the monthly payment (or boost the OG). The FG will still remain the same despite the OG boost so you're not getting more dryness. It is an illusion/misconception to add sugar to an existing recipe to get a drier beer.

1.070 down to 1.010 will be mighty dry
1.070 down to 1.020, not so much
1.080 down to 1.020, not so much but higher in alcohol

bobbrews said:

The additional alcohol would be from attaining a higher OG, not a lower FG. Hence, you wouldn't have a drier beer... just one higher in alcohol.

Click to expand...

Ok, so that's where we're missing...

I'm saying that adding sugar would cause a lower FG, and you're saying it wouldn't.

I'm saying adding sugar is essentially just adding alcohol, which would lower FG (assuming no change in maltose fermentation).

It sounds like you're saying more alcohol, but also a commensurate increase in residual sugar, thus leaving FG relatively unchanged?

Either way, I definitely agree with you that the best way to get a drier finish is to replace malt.

EDIT:
So in your example above, 1.070 down to 1.020...I'm saying adding sugar would change it to maybe 1.075 down to 1.017...drier. Obviously not as effective as replacing w/sugar, but still dries out.

In response to your edit... no... Adding sugar will boost the OG beyond 1.070, but keep the FG at 1.020 or even higher in select cases (as previously described).

Imagine each of these examples are recipes with NO simple sugar. Adding simple sugar to these existing recipes will increase OG, but keep FG the same or make it even higher in some cases. The sugar addition will not decrease FG. Again, to lessen FG, you must "substitute" a portion of the malt with simple sugar... not add to it. That is where the dryness will come from as far as sugar is concerned.

1.080 OG / 1.020 FG = 7.88 % abv
1.080 OG / 1.010 FG = 9.19 % abv

1.075 OG / 1.020 FG = 7.22 % abv
1.075 OG / 1.010 FG = 8.53% abv

1.070 OG / 1.020 FG = 6.56 % abv
1.070 OG / 1.010 FG = 7.88 % abv

Notice how the alcohol is greater when comparing the 1.080/1.020 and 1.070/1.020 beers? This is due to a boost in OG, not a lower FG. Both beers have the same level of "actual" dryness at 1.020 FG.

bobbrews said:

...The sugar addition will not decrease FG

Click to expand...

Why not? Do you have data for this? This is what I'm disagreeing with.

I understand that with a higher OG and same FG the dryness will be the same (and with higher alcohol). But I'm saying the FG WON'T be the same, it will be lower.

I don't have enough data to prove/disprove, only my own anecdotal evidence and mental logic.

Here's my logic:
Sugar ferments completely, CO2 escapes, leaving only EtOH which has a lower SG than the stand-alone beer, thus lowering FG.

OP - sorry for the off topic, I guess this should be it's own thread. But I do think it's a valuable discussion to have.

Lol... I don't mind. It's an interesting conversation for sure and I know which side I agree with but I'm waiting on you two to come to an agreement.

How about you both brew this Citra IPA, one of you make a sugar substitution and the other follows the recipe exactly, and then you compare notes at the end?

Again, you would not be making the projected 1.070 / 1.020 beer more "dry" by adding a sugar addition. You would only be boosting the OG and thus the alcohol.

I don't see why that is so dificult to understand.

Adding 1/2 lb. of sugar to a 1.070 / 1.020 recipe will bring it to more like 1.075 OG, but since sugar is fully fermentable, the addition of that sugar will not help you reach lower than 1.020 FG. It will stop at the originally projected 1.020 FG. And in some cases, the version with added sugar may not ferment as well as the version without sugar. The yeast may quit on eating the rest of the maltose, which "may" result in an under-attenuated beer with a "higher" FG.

Strictly discussing the use of sugar, the only way the FG would be lower than the projected target would be if you substituted a portion of the malt for a portion of sugar. Simply adding sugar on top of the original recipe will only increase the OG, not decrease the FG.

The boosting OG is not difficult to understand...that's obvious. Add 1/2lb sugar to a 1070 beer and you'll be at 1075...that we agree on.

Here's where we disagree:

bobbrews said:

...but since sugar is fully fermentable, the addition of that sugar will not help you reach lower than 1.020 FG. It will stop at the originally projected 1.020 FG...

Click to expand...

Why not? If it ferments completely, you've essentially just added alcohol. If you add alcohol to a 1.020 beer, you're "diluting" it with a less-dense liquid.

Let's say we have 5g of beer at 1.020. Plus 8oz sugar, fermented completely yields ~4oz alcohol, with SG of .787

(640 oz x 1.020 + 4 oz x .787) / 644 oz = 1.0186

Thus a (slightly) drier beer. Down to 1.017 with a pound of sugar. Assuming no stuck/incomplete attenuation.

Nice recipe Jaytizzle! I just brewed the Kern River Citra Clone that Tasty brewed on CYBI. It had WAY more Citra then that, but basically a similar beer. Also dryhopped with Amarillo AND Citra in the end. I highly recommend the Amarillo additions, as I found the Citra to be a bit overwhelming, although...it's currently the most popular of my 4 beers on tap, so hey, what do I know? LOL

Also, the KR Citra recipes calls for some sugar to help dry it out some.

;-)

Hey Bob (sorry, the first edit-I misread your screename). Two beers: one has 6lbs of basemalt. The other has 6lbs of basemalt and 5lbs of sugar. Both using 1056. Besides the fact the second one will likely taste like dookie, which one has a lower expected FG?

Answers:

First beer
OG: 1.029
Expected FG: 1.006

Second beer
OG: 1.073
Expected FG: .0996

No basemalt was replaced, only sugar was added, and the the finished beer was considerably drier.

Sugar dries it out. IMHO, I showed my work.

jbaysurfer said:

Nice recipe Jaytizzle! I just brewed the Kern River Citra Clone that Tasty brewed on CYBI. It had WAY more Citra then that, but basically a similar beer. Also dryhopped with Amarillo AND Citra in the end. I highly recommend the Amarillo additions, as I found the Citra to be a bit overwhelming, although...it's currently the most popular of my 4 beers on tap, so hey, what do I know? LOL

Also, the KR Citra recipes calls for some sugar to help dry it out some.

>

Click to expand...

Thanks, Jbay... way to stoke the fire there!

I really want to like these Citra hops. Since i brewed this recipe I've bought another 10oz or so and will certainly make another version of this. I'm actually trying to make single hop brews for now since I'm still very new to brewing and this will let me understand the nuances of each hop individually before I start combining them.

Been working on more recipes today, actually. Working up a recipe each for Falconer's Flight, 7 C's, and HBC 342. It's very hard not to just make IPAs, though. I'm feeling one will be an american pale, one black ipa, and one amber.

jaytizzle said:

Thanks, Jbay... way to stoke the fire there!

I really want to like these Citra hops. Since i brewed this recipe I've bought another 10oz or so and will certainly make another version of this. I'm actually trying to make single hop brews for now since I'm still very new to brewing and this will let me understand the nuances of each hop individually before I start combining them.

Been working on more recipes today, actually. Working up a recipe each for Falconer's Flight, 7 C's, and HBC 342. It's very hard not to just make IPAs, though. I'm feeling one will be an american pale, one black ipa, and one amber.

Click to expand...

Single hop brews is a great way to learn the individual hops' charachter. I've done it with Cascade, Amarillo, Simcoe and I've had a commercial beer that was all citra. Try your commercial beer options first if possible to save the money on batches if possible.

jbaysurfer said:

Sugar dries it out. IMHO, I showed my work.

Click to expand...

This discussion is solely about sugar additions. Mash temps/times, measured gravity, yeast selection, starter size, viability, quantity and quality of other ingredients, etc. all come into play. So you cannot regurgitate findings or expectations about dryness that were not a result of a true scientific study and did not isolate that one factor "the sugar addition". All other factors should be equal to properly gauge sugar's effect on OG/FG.

TyTanium said:

If it ferments completely, you've essentially just added alcohol. If you add alcohol to a 1.020 beer, you're "diluting" it with a less-dense liquid.

Click to expand...

Again, the higher OG (compared to the original recipe) is where the extra alcohol came from... It doesn't have to fall below 1.020 just because you added some sugar. Only the OG goes up.

Scenario 1 ~ 1.070 / 1.020 - Original recipe, no sugar
Scenario 2 ~ 1.075 / 1.020 - Added sugar to original recipe
Scenario 3 ~ 1.070 / 1.015 - Original recipe contained sugar from the very start

Here's an analogy...

You cook a steak without salting it first. Upon taking the first bite, you find that it is severely underseasoned. You cannot go back in time and remedy it since the steak is already cooked.

So the quick fix is to sprinkle a bunch of salt atop the steak. This will not make it taste "as good" as if it would be if you seasoned it correctly the first time (before you cooked it).

If you started with a marinated/dry cured steak, then you would have Scenario 3.

The analogy of that missing flavor is equal to your missing dryness.

bobbrews said:

Scenerio 1 ~ 1.070 / 1.020 - Original recipe, no sugar
Scenerio 2 ~ 1.075 / 1.020 - Added sugar to original recipe
Scenerio 3 ~ 1.070 / 1.015 - Original recipe contained sugar from the very start
.

Click to expand...

scenario 2 is not how it would work. TyTanium pretty clearly explained it. if sugar only fermented to 1.00, then yes your scenario would be correct, but it doesn't

dcp27 said:

scenario 2 is not how it would work. TyTanium pretty clearly explained it. if sugar only fermented to 1.00, then yes your scenario would be correct, but it doesn't

Click to expand...

Even then, I don't think it'd work. Because 1.000 is lower then 1.020

This discussion is solely about sugar additions. Mash temps/times, measured gravity, yeast selection, starter size, viability, quantity and quality of other ingredients, etc. all come into play. So you cannot regurgitate findings or expectations about dryness that were not a result of a true scientific study and did not isolate that one factor "the sugar addition". All other factors should be equal to properly gauge sugar's effect on OG/FG.

Click to expand...

You haven't regurgitate any scientific findings, so why am I held to the same standard? My OG and FG are based on math. Math that has been used in the brewing science for a very long time.

jbaysurfer said:

You haven't regurgitate any scientific findings, so why am I held to the same standard? My OG and FG are based on math. Math that has been used in the brewing science for a very long time.

Click to expand...

Because you didn't actually give us findings... you gave us expectations. And even if they were actual findings, the two beers are not exactly the same (aside from the sugar in the 2nd version).

jbaysurfer said:

First beer
OG: 1.029
Expected FG: 1.006

Second beer
OG: 1.073
Expected FG: .0996

Click to expand...

jbaysurfer said:

Even then, I don't think it'd work. Because 1.000 is lower then 1.020

Click to expand...

70/20 = 71.43% attenuation

70/75*71.43% + 5/75*100 = 73.33%

75*.2667 = 1.0199 - basically 1.02 if you round. im pretty sure this is the way bob is looking at it

Looks like we're at an impasse here.

I realize higher OG is where the extra alcohol comes from. But you're telling me the extra alcohol has no effect on FG?

Let's walk through the math here:

5 gallons of 1.020 beer has 5 x 20 = 100 gravity units of residual sugar.

Let's say we add a gallon of water. What's the SG? 100 / (5+1) = 16.7 = 1.0167 SG...you've just diluted the beer with water, hence gravity falls...nothing fancy here.

So if we add sugar, assuming no change no change in maltose fermentation, the amount of residual sugars remains unchanged. Therefore, the only change is more alcohol.

So those same 100 gravity units of residual sugar / (5 gallons beer + X oz of alcohol) = SG LOWER than 20.

Since alcohol is less dense than the beer, the SG must fall. You're diluting with a less dense liquid, just like adding water.

The sugar itself isn't going to lower your FG, except for the slight impact of alcohol being less dense than water.

If you are not satisfied with that answer and the prior explanations I gave then you should post a basic question in the General Discussions page. I have brewed many identical IPAs with sugar vs. without sugar, so I am satisfied with that answer.

There seems to be two answers to every question nowadays (dryhops can [vs. do not] get grassy after 5 days) or (hop utilization is [vs. is not] affected by wort gravity).

Give it a shot!

bobbrews said:

Because you didn't actually give us findings... you gave us expectations. And even if they were actual findings, the two beers are not exactly the same (aside from the sugar in the 2nd version).

Click to expand...

Sugar and whether it makes a beer drier by replacement, or addition to, base malt was the only variable in question.

Your anectodal evidence is no stronger then my math based evidence.

What's funny is, in the above post you basically admitted that the same thing everyone else here has been arguing is right. "except for the slight impact of alcohol being less dense than water."

Except of course. It's probably not as slight as you'd lead us to believe, so I did some math that proves it.

Regarding being at an impasse Tytanium, I'll quote an old Navajo anecdote:

You can not wake a man who is pretending to be asleep.

Click to expand...

Math also proves that black holes & event horizons can't exist. Yet they do.
Math also predicts that hop utilization decreases as wort gravity increases, yet some brewers think this is false -- I believe Palmer even revised his concept about this blaming break material as the culprit.

Besides, don't try to make this an argument of opinion vs. math... you hardly painted a clear picture with your math.

And it's not funny to admit alcohol is less dense than water. That still doesn't mean that adding sugar (instead of substituting a portion of malt for sugar) will result in a lesser FG than the original beer.... It just results in a higher OG.

Be my guest and post a very general question on the topic in the main forum. See what other's have to say and believe what you want to believe.

bobbrews said:

Math also proves that black holes & event horizons can't exist. Yet they do.
Math also predicts that hop utilization decreases as wort gravity increases, yet some brewers think this is false -- I believe Palmer even revised his concept about this blaming break material as the culprit.

Besides, don't try to make this an argument of opinion vs. math... you hardly painted a clear picture with your math.

And it's not funny to admit alcohol is less dense than water. That still doesn't mean that adding sugar (instead of substituting a portion of malt for sugar) will result in a lesser FG than the original beer.... It just results in a higher OG.

Be my guest and post a very general question on the topic in the main forum. See what other's have to say and believe what you want to believe.

Click to expand...

I know the answer. Sugar ferments out below the FG of malt, so therefore any sugar added to the boil will decrease FG and DRY OUT.

I'm done, but you can post another really long and obfuscating response now. Maybe if you further muddle the original question, it'll serve to discredit your detractors more.

jbaysurfer said:

I know the answer. I'm done.

Click to expand...

Good for you! I'm glad you finally came to a solution that satisfies you Do you feel better?

Jaytizzle, I'm sorry I dedicated 2 full posts to the OT discussion. Didn't mean to distract. Please keep us posted on this brew, my guess is you're dryhopping as we speak!

If it turns out good, and you're interested in a trade, I'll swap you a bottle of my KR Citra DIPA for this. Let me know.

jbaysurfer said:

Jaytizzle, I'm sorry I dedicated 2 full posts to the OT discussion. Didn't mean to distract. Please keep us posted on this brew, my guess is you're dryhopping as we speak!

If it turns out good, and you're interested in a trade, I'll swap you a bottle of my KR Citra DIPA for this. Let me know.

Click to expand...

Hell yeah, I'll gladly make a swap with you.

Not dry hopping yet. I've got a family function at the end of July that I'm saving this one for. I'm letting it bulk age and will begin dry hop on July 13. Then I'll cold crash from 7/20 to 7/23, then keg and carb. I'll make sure to bottle a few and put them aside for a swap. I appreciate the offer!

By this time, this evening, I make no apologies for statements made or comments logged. That said...

Bob, you are missing the boat. You initial premise is right. Replacing malt with sugar will create a drier beer. The problem with this whole discussion is one of semantics. "Drier" is a subjective term used to describe the relative response of an individual to the level of alcohol balanced against the acids, sugars, and other constituants of the beer. This balance is delicate and more complicated that anyone has discussed on this board to m knowledge ov er the last several years. These discussions exist in text book I have read and forgotten, but the matter is beyond technical citation.

Adding pure sugar to beer will "dry" that beer. That is to say that one's opinion of a beer with added sugar (whether added on top of or in replacement) will be that the beer has less residual sweetness (albeit not less residual gravity which is not typically detectable by the palate). That case is closed. The best IPA brewers from Leids to San Diago agree on this point and the science (as reported by Tytanium) backs it up. Stating that the addition of pure sucrose raises the final gravity significantly both flies in the face of conventional wisdom in the craft and in the face of science.

With that out of the way...

Adding sugar, either on top of or in replacement of malt, will change any recipe. In addition to changing the flavor profile, it will add a perceived dryness to the beer above and beyond the all malt beer (assuming a significant amount of sugar).

A very common piece of advice is to add a bit of simple sugar to any IPA recipe. I would eco this advice on many beers, but not all. American IPAs intended to showcase the hops and wherein the malt plays only a supporting role this makes sense to provide a pure hop impact. However, in balanced English style and double IPAs, I feel and all malt grain bill still has a place.

Take what you want from this thread, but I think logic will show you which of the above contributors exhibits logic, and which is trying to push weight around.