Double IPA Recipe Critique

Trying to finalize the recipe for one last brew this year, what I guess would be on the lower end of the double IPA spectrum. The grain bill was based on the Pliny one found here http://bit.ly/tpBdZq The hops are a couple of my favorite varieties in Nelson Sauvin and Galaxy, as well as some leftover Mount Hood to kick the IBUs up.

Grain Bill
12.5lbs 2 row Pale Ale
.5lbs Carapils
.5lbs C40
.5lbs Table Sugar

Hop Schedule
1oz Mount Hood (6.1% AA) @60 minutes
.25oz Galaxy (12.4%AA) @60 minutes
.25oz Nelson Sauvin (12.4%AA) @60 minutes
1.25oz Galaxy (12.4%AA) @20 minutes
1.25oz Nelson Sauvin (12.4%AA) @20 minutes

2.25oz each Galaxy and Nelson Sauvin @flameout
2.25oz each Galaxy and Nelson Sauvin @dryhop

Yeast: Wyeast 1272 American Ale II

Mash at 152 degrees for an hour and boil for 60 minutes

OG: 1.074 (70% efficiency)
ABV: 8%
IBU: 97.2 (Tinseth)

I don't mean to question the wisdom of Vinnie, or the success of Pliny, but sugar and Carapils are sort of at odds. The dextrin contribution could just as easily come from a higher mash temp.

In my experience, table sugar does not work well. I'm actually wondering what the purpose of the sugar is in that amount anyways?

As far as the use of sugar and some light crystal malts... yes it does seem a bit odd to me (on my own I would guess to dial in the flavor from the crystal malts and then adjust the mash temperature to get the body in line), but I have no real experience with brewing IPAs, and I figure there are worse jumping off points than a Pliny recipe from Vinnie.

ajbram said:

In my experience, table sugar does not work well. I'm actually wondering what the purpose of the sugar is in that amount anyways?

Click to expand...

I've made about half my batches so far (translating to roughly 80 gallons this year) IPAs, and have used table or corn sugar often without any problems.

I believe the idea is that table sugar is 100% fermentable, so it ups the OG without raising the FG-->higher ABV. Someone please correct me if that's wrong.

As for mashing higher to get more body, a higher mash temp produces more long-chain sugars that don't break down as much (hence the greater "body") with the result being a higher FG and therefore a relatively lower ABV.

I like a little sugar in Imperials. The yeast need a little something to munch on right off the bat. With all that malt a little sugar will up the gravity and dry it up a bit and possibly derail any cloying sweetness. CaraPils has no purpose in an Imperial. At 1.074 you will have enough mouthfeel from the malt alone.

I agree, simple sugars =higher ABV and less sweetness in the finished product, and mashing hotter will get you the opposite. I'm just saying doing both is counter productive. I would either mash lower to get more fermentables and add some crystal to round out the body, or avoid the crystal, mash high and add sugar to bump up the ABV. I'm just saying in my experience, simple table sugar has not been as good as corn sugar or cane sugar.

For most of my higher gravity beers I find that adding the sugar after fermentation has begun to ramp down is a good time, you can get a good idea as to how dry you want the beer and how much sugar you should add. It also helps cut down on fusel production.

the one draw back to that method is that the malt profile will be slightly less than if you had added it at the begining.

iamatuna said:

For most of my higher gravity beers I find that adding the sugar after fermentation has begun to ramp down is a good time, you can get a good idea as to how dry you want the beer and how much sugar you should add. It also helps cut down on fusel production.

the one draw back to that method is that the malt profile will be slightly less than if you had added it at the begining.

Click to expand...

I frequently do this late in primary if my samples are tasting maltier than I would like. Not only does adding sugars dry the beer out, but it also strips out some flavour.

Where in Ontario are you Tuna?

ajbram said:

I'm just saying in my experience, simple table sugar has not been as good as corn sugar or cane sugar.

Click to expand...

I believe that table sugar IS cane sugar in most cases.

Piratwolf said:

I believe that table sugar IS cane sugar in most cases.

Click to expand...

Made from cane sugar, yes, but not always. Table sugar is essentially sucrose, which is a 2 base polymer of glucose and fructose. It can be derived from sugar cane or from sugar beets. If you are using the bleached, heavily processed table sugar, it doesn't make a difference whether it is sourced from cane or beets, since it essentially reduced to its purest form...it's all fermentable sugar. If you want to simply dry out a drink, that's perfect. In the raw form, beet and cane sugar are slightly different. Beet sugar is more unreliable and can produce off flavours in brewing and baking. Cane sugar typically leaves a bit of a molasses note and a more syrupy mouth feel since it contains more unfermentbles in its raw form... that's why I prefer using it to table sugar.

Good to know, ajbram! Thank you.