Are we working too hard?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Piratwolf

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
2,118
Reaction score
135
Location
Va Beach
So I'm listening to CYBI on process cloning, only to hear the remarkable information that Tasty McDole always uses a 9 gallon strike when he's brewing his standard 12 gal batch. No matter what grain bill--session pale ale or RIS--this master of cloning and creator of Janet's Brown never changes the volume. Then Jamil & the others jump in saying that mash thickness appears to be irrelevant to efficiency and that the key is a good grind and a slow sparge. Tasty's standard runoff is 45 mins.

I don't know about you, but I wish I'd heard this last fall when I started AG... Woulda saved me a lotta math! I'm gonna try this approach next week on 12 gal of my Imperial Red.
 
I don't know about you, but I wish I'd heard this last fall when I started AG... Woulda saved me a lotta math! I'm gonna try this approach next week on 12 gal of my Imperial Red.

Meh. You use what works for you.

On my system I never pre-calc strike volumes. I heat my HLT to strike temp, infuse til I see 2" of water over top of the mash, heat as needed to get back to rest temp, kick on the pump and the RIMS and walk away for an hour.

When it's time for the sparge I note how much I took out of the hlt and sparge with the balance after that. Sometimes it's 1 gallon, sometimes it's 3.

As long as my target numbers hit I don't stress on volumes.
 
I don't really calculate my volumes.

I brew 10 gallons, I buy 14-15 gallons of water, mash with enough to cover the grain by a few inches, sparge with the remainder until I end up with about 11-13gallons pre boil, boil down to about 10.5 gallons. Through transfers, grain absorption, dead space, spills, and small inefficiencies in my brew day I lose the few extra gallons.

This is how I do most of my batches as long as the grain bill isn't too small. I like my process and I think I make pretty darn good beer.
 
I just multiply my grain # by 1.25 or 1.5 to get quarts. To me that's not a lot of math.
 
@ Gila & H-ost-- both of your ending comments are exactly why I posted this thread. It seems like you both have a straightforward, practical, and effective process.

I always feel like I'm re-calculating, especially because I like to do double batch days sometimes. The idea of a no-fuss approach takes a lot of stress out my brew days and makes me like it even more!

Thanks for posting your processes & experience!
 
I usually just round to a nice, easy to remember and easy to measure amount. Usually BS sets the strike amount and I round it up and round down on the sparge.
 
I used to eyeball everything but recently started calculating strike and sparge volumes and I do find that it saves some time. Less water to heat equals less time and less gas.
 
I usually just round to a nice, easy to remember and easy to measure amount. Usually BS sets the strike amount and I round it up and round down on the sparge.

I also do this. What I don't get is why a slow sparge is needed? I get ~80% eff with double batch sparge and that doesn't take me anywhere near 45 min.
 
I use a spreadsheet I found online (maybe here) that calculates water volumes. I give it the grain weight, boil time, boil off amount and desired post-boil volume and it tells me mash and sparge volumes.
 
I just fill my tun up as far as I feel comfortable, then measure my volume in the brew kettle and sparge with the difference it takes to get to my preboil volume. Works well for almost all of my normal gravity brews. If I am going very light or very heavy grain bill I will pay a bit more attention to mash volumes, but not much more attention.
 
samc said:
OP should be honored to get a reply from Tasty, a rarity on HBT it seems !:rockin:

HA! That makes me feel better. I don't get star struck by pro athletes or movie stars, but I gotta admit that when I saw Tasty had posted to me, I felt like the beer gods were smiling on me! Maybe I'll print it out and try to get him to sign one day....

Thanks for making my day, Tasty! I dunno if I brew strong, but I do take your advice & brew often!
 
RDWHAHB said:
I think we can all agree a response from me is coveted as well...
:D

Well, at the very least I have to admit that I see your initials a LOT on these interwebs!
 
Yooper said:
Wow- I'm jealous. You got Tasty and Denny both in your thread today.

That's cool.

Wonder what Jamil is up to today? :D

You know what's funny? I was about to write, "Now all I need is Yooper to drop in.".

Maybe I should mention Jamil, too, for the final crown jewel? And then go buy a lottery ticket! :)
 
You know what's funny? I was about to write, "Now all I need is Yooper to drop in.".

Maybe I should mention Jamil, too, for the final crown jewel? And then go buy a lottery ticket! :)

Dude, if you get the Trifecta of Tasty, Denny, and Jamil, you can die a happy man.

As it is, you can die 2/3 happy as a man. :mug:
 
I don't really calculate my volumes.

I brew 10 gallons, I buy 14-15 gallons of water, mash with enough to cover the grain by a few inches, sparge with the remainder until I end up with about 11-13gallons pre boil, boil down to about 10.5 gallons. Through transfers, grain absorption, dead space, spills, and small inefficiencies in my brew day I lose the few extra gallons.

This is how I do most of my batches as long as the grain bill isn't too small. I like my process and I think I make pretty darn good beer.

We do the same - we buy 3, 5 gallon jugs of water. Mash in with 8 gallons and sparge with 7 gallons. We just ensure that we have a couple of inches of water above the grain bed when sparging. We end up with 11.5 or so gallons of pre-boil. It has worked for us so far.
And since I am an English Lit teacher I have learned that math is best to be avoided whenever possible.
 
I think quoting Garrison Keillor might take you out of middle age category regardless of how many years you have been around. :)
 
As of next Tues., I hit 60...as Garrison Keillor says, that's "extreme middle age"!

Holy cow! You're old enough to be my older brother!!!!!!

I love thinking of it as "extreme middle age". I mean, really, if you live to be 120, 60 IS middle age. I only have to live to be 96 to be "middle aged" for me at my current age.

Oh, and happy birthday if I don't "see" you again before Tuesday, Denny!
 
Back
Top