Which 80-100 quart (20-25 gallon) pots ?

OK, so summer is coming to an end and I need to start getting ready for the winter brewing season.

First thing I need to do is build a brewstand and it will be sized around 12 or 16 gallon batches. I thus need an 80 to 100 quart pot.

I see many, many aluminum and SS pots of that size, but most are short and fat. I would like a pot that is taller and thinner. Does anyone know of a tall thin 20 to 25 gallon pot ?

Thanks

cut the top off a sanke and the bottom off of another and have them welded together

Is this an aesthetic preference? Or is there a basis?

Generally, the more compact pot will have less surface area. This means better heat retention, less heat loss. I think that's why they are shaped that way. Don't know what your intentions are, but I thought I'd throw it out there....

Anyway, why not just use a keggle? That's the size you're looking for...

I don't know the gauge of the stainless used here, but they might fill your needs.

Stock pots

jas0420 used the 62 qt in his brewflex rig and thought they were decent.

Short Drive said:

I don't know the gauge of the stainless used here, but they might fill your needs.

Stock pots

jas0420 used the 62 qt in his brewflex rig and thought they were decent.

Click to expand...

I have the 34 and 82qt from them and both work great. I only wish I would have gone with the 82 and larger. the 34 is ok but I could use more for larger batches (I use it for a HLT)

Short and fat = more surface area = greater evaporation rate, which may or may not be an important consideration for you. Personally, I'd rather have a great evaporation rate, all things being equal. Might make sense to have a taller pot for an MLT, shorter and flatter for the boil kettle.

Sankes are 15.5 gallons or 62 quarts. Allowing head room, they are good for a maximum batch size of 12 gallons. I want something a lot larger than that.

Welding two Sanke's together would work, but I doubt it would be cost effective. I don't have a TIG and kegs aren't cheap where I am.

I'd like taller and thinner for aesthetic reasons as well as more headroom during the boil. 25% of a 16 inch tall pot is 4 inches. 25% of a 20 inch pot is 5 inches.

I am considering this pot, although it is very expensive
http://www.instawares.com/lincoln-wear-ever-professional.12-0099.0.7.htm

and this one:
http://www.instawares.com/atlas-aluminum-stock-pot.paa-80.0.7.htm?LID=GRBR

This guy has a nice tall 80Quart pot, but I can't reach him to find out where he got it from. Is it a Bayou ? I don't think so because it doesn't have the ring around it 3/4 way up.
http://www.chrisoverbeek.com/homebrew/BrewDay.html

Maybe I should weld two Sankes together. But I also need a HLT pot. That would require 4 Sankes.

one other thing to think about.. The smaller dia pot means less surface contact with the flame and more water away from the flame. My guess is that it would take you a good 10 minutes longer to bring to a boil. Not a lot but 6 brews = an extra hour of wasted time and gas.

If we are really worried about heating efficiency, we should be using aluminum pots and welding heat exchange plates on them to give more contact with the flame and hot air around the pot.

I got this one http://shoppinglouisiana.com/Mercha...&Product_Code=BC-1182&Category_Code=10250-100 and like you I am getting ready to go big for the winter.

My two stainless 100 quart kettles are 21" round and 21" tall. Bought them at a local chef supply house. The bottom is aluminum clad for even heat transfer. I found them a few dollars cheaper online, but shipping was going to be $70/ea.

Here is an 82qt SS pot for what the alum ones are going for and it is a Bayou Classic.

http://www.divine-mercantile.com/Bayou-Classic-82-Quart-Stainless-Steel-Stockpot_p_24-671.html

Cheers

I like the vented lid and the fact its SS.

"This pot measures approximately 18.75" diameter x 17" high and weighs approximately 17 lbs."

I don't think the pot in the picture is the pot they are selling. The pot they are selling is shorter than it is wide. Judging from you guys, I guess that doesn't matter.

brewman ! said:

I don't think the pot in the picture is the pot they are selling. The pot they are selling is shorter than it is wide. Judging from you guys, I guess that doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

I would think that it is something you want to take into consideration though. If you have a shorter, fatter kettle, then you will loose more to evaporation at a quicker rate, because of the increased surface area. You would have to compensate for that when calculating Sparge run-off. here is another kettle that is a bit bigger and it is tall and skinny:

http://www.divine-mercantile.com/Ba...rgical-Stainless-Steel-Stockpot_p_24-157.html

82qt version:
http://www.divine-mercantile.com/Ba...rgical-Stainless-Steel-Stockpot_p_24-156.html

Cheers

Once again, I bet that picture is misleading.

The specs state "Pot, 19 11/16" x 21.5"". I bet its 19 11/16" high and 21.5" in diameter.

The 120Q pot is 23" Wide by 20" high, short and wide.
http://www.divine-mercantile.com/Bayou-Classic-120-Qt-Stockpot_p_24-175.html