no secondary really is great

I now only use a secondary if there is an ingredient addition step... but, that being said... there will be a ton of sediment in your primary vessel and you cannot expect to extract every last drop without pulling it up... you must be careful on your transfer to keg or bottling bucket... Pull your auto-siphon out of your fermentation vessel before it starts dragging crap into your final product...

I just looked at revvys pic and there is a LOT more gunk in his bottling bucket than what is in mine. I have no idea how that relates to what actually gets in bottles, just saying that the bottom of my bucket has nowhere near that much stuff after racking to secondary and cold crashing a couple of days.

crappy pic but there is nothing

I like to use a secondary because it fits better in my mini fridge for cold crashing. Also I have to admit, the transfer cleans things up pretty well. I just bottled a mocha java stout tonight that had been on the primary for 21 days, not all that confortable with the amount of stuff in the bottom and what ended up in the bottling bucket.

We'll see. The beers I've done a secondary with so far, have been really good. In about 3 weeks or so, I see how the primary only batch works out.

lgilmore said:

I like to use a secondary because it fits better in my mini fridge for cold crashing. Also I have to admit, the transfer cleans things up pretty well. I just bottled a mocha java stout tonight that had been on the primary for 21 days, not all that confortable with the amount of stuff in the bottom and what ended up in the bottling bucket.

We'll see. The beers I've done a secondary with so far, have been really good. In about 3 weeks or so, I see how the primary only batch works out.

Click to expand...

thats the reason I secondary also. I like to cold crash and my big carboys wont fit in the fridge.

lgilmore said:

I like to use a secondary because it fits better in my mini fridge for cold crashing. Also I have to admit, the transfer cleans things up pretty well. I just bottled a mocha java stout tonight that had been on the primary for 21 days, not all that confortable with the amount of stuff in the bottom and what ended up in the bottling bucket.

Click to expand...

Odd... my chocolate peppermint stout got 21 days primary, 2 days cold crash, and today the sample I took for the hydrometer was clear enough to read through (the sample was from just above the yeast cake, too.) And that's a beer of 33 SRM. And almost zero sediment after letting it sit for 30 minutes to warm to room temp.

Did you end up moving the fermenter for your mocha java? Because you could have very easily roused up the yeast cake at the bottom.

"Did you end up moving the fermenter for your mocha java? Because you could have very easily roused up the yeast cake at the bottom"

Yea, bottle over the dishwasher, but fermentor sat for a half hour while I did other prep for that reason. Just used to that 1/4 inch on the bottom of the secondary vs. the inch plus in the primary. I don't like to dump beer and the secondary method allows me an opportunity to get every drop of beer goodness I can.

Looking over my test bottles (clear bottles I sample a week, two weeks out) there is a significant amount of stuff on the bottom, compared to others. Now some of this could be the brew (mocha java stout with lactos added at bottling) batch and what it would do normally compared to the others I have put up. The others (Irish red, copper ale, cream stout, hex nut brown) have barely a trace of goodies on the bottom of the bottle. All taste very good, comperable to the brew pubs I've visited. This MJStout seems to have a considerable amount of bottom goodies in comparison.

While "I" know that can't hurt me and may actually be good for me, my guests who are offered it may feel differently.

It is still too early to tell as I just bottled last night. I'm sure it will pour clear and taste good, I may just have to not empty the bottle like I do with the others.

I may go back to using a secondary next batch for no other reason than dealing with the yeast cake at bottling. When I do that initial transfer to a secondary I "know" I'm going to transfer a certain amount of that yeast cake with it. The secondary then allows it to settle out so when I am getting ready to bottle, I'm not as worried about disturbing the yeast cake and kicking up a ton of stuff. So for me, it's probably a comfort zone thing. I'm sure either way the batches will condition just fine. I just feel it is easier to work around a 1/4 inch on the bottom than a 1 1/2 of jello pudding that occupies the primary. So it's comfort zone of the bottler and amount of stuff in the bottle for appearance sake. Neither have anything to do with the quality of the beer, but more to do with the perception of the bottler.

Hope that makes sense to you guys.

Makes complete sense. I'm not bashing your style... everbody does it differently. I was just sharing my experiences

When I first started brewing, in the ancient days (80's), I used a secondary because Charlie said to. I haven't used one in several years. I really believe there are benefits to letting the beer set on the yeast for a couple of weeks -especially if you have some challenges with temp control, or laziness issues like I do...

I didn't think anyone was bashing my style, so no worries.

I think my point was about what's right is working with methods that you are comfortable with. Those methods may or may not improve/infect the beer. I am open to trying just about anything new, but to stick with something new, it has to work and increase my confidence about the process.

I hope that makes sense to readers.

Thinking of doing the house brew in a single stage. I never have used wirlflock in a beer, would this help in the single stage ferment technique?