Raw Ale / No Boil

So I've been reading a bit on raw ales, which just do a mash, and a mash out over 160, but do not boil. I'm going to try one this week (3% hoppy ale) and would love to hear from anyone who has ACTUALLY TRIED THIS, and get any advice you may have. I'd specifically be interested in any flavor character a un boiled beer has, and the stability of it.

BIAB half batch
3.5gal starting water
1.75 Maris
1.75 Golden Promise
153F mash for 20m, 162 mash out
5oz Citra/Centennial mix @ 160 for 60m
OG 1.030
No chill
US-05 at 63F rehydrated
2oz Dry hop Mosaic/Chinook mix (4 days)
FG 1.009

Thanks in advance!

You could do the Brulosopher proud and split your batch, boiling half.

I think really your problem is that your hop utilisation will be very low.

Mer-man said:

You could do the Brulosopher proud and split your batch, boiling half.

I think really your problem is that your hop utilisation will be very low.

Click to expand...

That's a really good idea actually... Also since it's only a 1.030 beer, i just need enough bitterness to balance that out, about 30 IBU max. Higher gravity and it would definitely need different attention, maybe a hop tea.

I just noticed that your recipe calls for FIVE ounces in 3.5gal. My concern is lack of isomerization at 160. Could you hold it at 175 for that hour?

Reference: https://byo.com/mead/item/2808-hop-stands

Instead of no boil, I'd maybe run the mash off, boil for 10 minutes or something or at least raise it to 180 or 185 for a bit to pasteurize and add hops, then let it cool down naturally. That way, you'd get some isomerization, which begins happening in the 185 range.
Otherwise, I think not boiling will likely give you a sour (read: infected) beer because the lactobacillus hasn't had a chance to be killed in the boil. So if you like sours, GO FOR IT.

Hello, actually lacto is killed around 140, and will definitely be gone at 160 (flash pasteurization temp).

I did everything short of what you are proposing with the exception was trying to make a berliner instead of a hoppy little session ale.

50/50 wheat/2row was mashed out and held at 175f in my boil kettle. I mash hopped with a handful of burntout hop cones I have on my hops plants here. I dropped it to 120f and added 2 handfuls of uncrushed two row and waited 30 minutes (I read somewhere that 30 minutes would be enough, I don't think it was). I transferred to 2 kegs and purged with CO2 and placed those kegs in a 120f water bath.

After two days I pulled a sample of the wort but noticed zero tanginess. I panicked and just decided to pitch the 644 starter I had waiting for it. Not all is lost, however.

While the berliner weisse didn't come to fuition, I ended up with a nice little session beer with great body and mouthfeel. No DMS or undesirable characteristics. That got me think about doing what you are suggesting in regards to a hoppy session beer. I was fixing on about 4 oz of steeped hops after the lauter at 170-175f and dropping the wort temp down to pitching temp, fermenting and carbing in the keg with my spunding valve.

Ok so the first beer was somewhat of a success. It is definitely clean and free of infection. It's totally opaque, and has great hop aroma and mouthfeel. However it is super bitter and harsh, which I am blaming on a combo of no chill and the way the proteins likely kept a lot of unpleasant hop compounds suspended. After a couple weeks in the bottle, it started to taste better.

So i just brewed another no boil beer yesterday. Same recipe except throwing in a small amount of Victory, US-05, chilling it after the hopstand, and putting in some Whirlfloc in at flameout. Since I do a 20m mash, this beer only took me 65 minutes to brew, including setup and cleanup, and I pitch the next day (today). So far, the Whirlfloc has made a giant difference in what is in the fermenter, which looks like a normal, boiled beer. More as it happens.

So I'm kind of addicted to this process. Have already gone through the failed berliner weisse and am drinking on the hop steeped only beer. I went with 7oz in the 170f range. It's plenty bitter so I wouldn't worry about isomerization if you overcompensate with bulk. It, like OP already noted on his beer, is quite cloudy and full bodied.

I'm going to give a dry stout a swing using this method + the add dark grains at the end of the mash. It'll be interesting to see how the roast character presents itself sans boil.

Nice! Let me know how it turns out! I can say that after adding Whirlfloc, the wort is as clear as any boiled beer i have done, si I'm very curious to see the results.

squaremile said:

Nice! Let me know how it turns out! I can say that after adding Whirlfloc, the wort is as clear as any boiled beer i have done, si I'm very curious to see the results.

Click to expand...

So, for you, Whirfloc was effective at sub-boiling temperatures?

Definitely find another way to get the hop bitterness into the beer, like boiling a small portion with hops separately. Be prepared for higher than expected attenuation. Don't fight the haze. Rather, work with it to create a presentable beer. Keep the overall fermentation time on the shorter side, and store the beer on the colder side - closer to 30degF than 40degF. Drink faster and don't wait for miracles from extended ageing. Consider sanitizing your hot side brewing hardware like the mt and even the hlt, even by simmering the mash/sparge water a bit. Artificial sourness can help, either from lactic malt or direct lactic addition. This is a stability enhancement. Skip it of course if you're going for a non-sour beer. Avoid exotic yeasts until you have a few batches under yer belt. Non-traditional tweaks to beers like these can work really well, such as exotic grains and even subtle flower, herb, spice, or other vegetable matter additions. Don't judge your product against traditional beers but at the same time don't be tempted to treat unpleasant or biological funk characteristics as par for the course. Again, at the same time, do give your palate time to adjust to a very different product. If given care, these beers can really highlight flavour compounds (in grains especially) that might otherwise have been boiled off.

The WF was 100% effective at 165 degrees, I just broke it up in my hands to make sure it would dissolve easier without the agitation of the boil. The beer is unbelievably clear in the fermenter, the trub was fluffy like when it is boiled, whereas the non WF non-boiled beer always looked like orange juice and had no trub since it all stayed suspended. I was shocked. Basically I am completely rethinking the importance of hot break if WF is used.

3 days into fermentation, right on track.

That's good to hear. I hadn't even attempted it because I assumed that it was a complete waste of money. So my next run will probably be a hoppy session beer w/ whirlflock and a flocculant yeast.

There was an article on here a couple months ago about this method that was pretty good. Clarity was for sure an issue so good to hear the whirfloc works. You could also try clarity-ferm enzyme or a fining agent to aid clarity too. I use biofine.

Hopper5000 said:

There was an article on here a couple months ago about this method that was pretty good.

Click to expand...

Do you remember what the article was called? Would love to read it.

Mer-man said:

You could do the Brulosopher proud and split your batch, boiling half.

I think really your problem is that your hop utilisation will be very low.

Click to expand...

Hop utilization wouldn't necessarily be poor because you would still be extracting all of the oils and aa's. You would not be isomerizing them much if at all though so the bittering value of the hops would be significantly less. That being said 5 oz is a ton of hops.

I'm guessing the IBUs for the hops with no boil in the mash would be similar to what you get from dry hopping. For 5 oz Citra at about 11% aa it would give upwards of 39 IBUs.

Interesting...

I think I found it.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/mash-sparge-hopping-no-boil-beers-of-all-kinds.html

I sampled an unboiled beer at a homebrew meeting.
If i remember right they called it a `gruit` but had used hops as the flower/spice.
Anyways it was ok. Nothing special but not bad.

There's a thread on here regarding midieval ales deals with no boil methods....it's a good read.
Going by memory for people trying to recreate a drink one may have had in the dark/middle ages they suggested smoking the malt with hay (common drying method of the time) some did bring theirs to a boil but did not hold it there for any extended period of time,some just got it very hot but not boiling. These ales were fermented quikly and also drank that way. Something like a 3-4 day ferment and swilled ASAP afterwards.

tsl346 said:

Hop utilization wouldn't necessarily be poor because you would still be extracting all of the oils and aa's. You would not be isomerizing them much if at all though so the bittering value of the hops would be significantly less. That being said 5 oz is a ton of hops.

I'm guessing the IBUs for the hops with no boil in the mash would be similar to what you get from dry hopping. For 5 oz Citra at about 11% aa it would give upwards of 39 IBUs.

Click to expand...

I concede that we are also concerned with extracting oils, but hop utilisation is the amount of AAs that are isomerised and remain in the beer.

Isomerisation only happens above 80C and that is way above mash temp.
Isomerisation therefore cannot happen with dry-hopping.

Mer-man said:

I concede that we are also concerned with extracting oils, but hop utilisation is the amount of AAs that are isomerised and remain in the beer.



Isomerisation only happens above 80C and that is way above mash temp.

Isomerisation therefore cannot happen with dry-hopping.

Click to expand...

I too was wondering where this info was coming from, as I was under the impression that bitterness units referred to the amount of isomerized AAs.

I will say that there is still some perceived bitterness from an extreme dry hop. Some say there is even so tannin extraction going on as well.

I do have to wonder, though. I mean have you ever eaten a hop pellet before? The most bitter thing I've ever tasted, and it just lingers and lingers.

Mer-man said:

I concede that we are also concerned with extracting oils, but hop utilisation is the amount of AAs that are isomerised and remain in the beer.

Isomerisation only happens above 80C and that is way above mash temp.
Isomerisation therefore cannot happen with dry-hopping.

Click to expand...

Good point. I guess I was just thinking that you will still got a lot of "hop essence" even without the full amount of bittering that you would expect.

I also agree that hop pellets taste bitter. I've put one in my mouth. But I think that is just a different bitterness than what gets measured as a result of isomerization of AAs

tsl346 said:

Good point. I guess I was just thinking that you will still got a lot of "hop essence" even without the full amount of bittering that you would expect.

Click to expand...

But hop essence doesn't equate to 39 IBUs. That's passing around disinformation. You will still get some perceived bitterness out of dry-hopping, sure, but nowhere near something that will add 39 IBUs worth of perceived bitterness.

squaremile said:

Do you remember what the article was called? Would love to read it.

Click to expand...

ghohn found the link

joshesmusica said:

But hop essence doesn't equate to 39 IBUs. That's passing around disinformation. You will still get some perceived bitterness out of dry-hopping, sure, but nowhere near something that will add 39 IBUs worth of perceived bitterness.

Click to expand...

Help me out here. I have a calculator (wish I could remember where I found it) that states %aa * Oz hops * time factor, with the dry hop time factor of 0.7.

that gives almost 39 IBUs. What should this be then?

EDIT: using Palmer's equation with about 3% utilization (varied sources saying between 0 and about 5%) gives 24 IBUs. I really can't find any good sources on this one so I'm at a little bit of a loss.

tsl346 said:

I really can't find any good sources on this one so I'm at a little bit of a loss.

Click to expand...

I remember reading awhile back that utilization #s in a non-boil, hop steeped environment were a bit of a crap shoot anyways. Sometimes a fella has just got to roll the dice.

tsl346 said:

Help me out here. I have a calculator (wish I could remember where I found it) that states %aa * Oz hops * time factor, with the dry hop time factor of 0.7.

that gives almost 39 IBUs. What should this be then?

EDIT: using Palmer's equation with about 3% utilization (varied sources saying between 0 and about 5%) gives 24 IBUs. I really can't find any good sources on this one so I'm at a little bit of a loss.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you read, but you don't get any more isomerization of the alpha acids below about 175F. Bitterness, and the hop utilization, is measured by the amount of isomerized alpha acids in the wort/beer.

You will still get some polyphenols from the hops that will bring about some astringency, which will give a bit of perceived bitterness, but you won't get any more IBUs from dry hops, or any hop addition below 175F for that matter.

"you don't get any more isomerization of the alpha acids below about 175F."

I can say for sure that this statement is false. There is definitely a diminishing amount of iso happening, but it happens, and in my original no boil beer, it was way too bitter because of the no chill. I estimate 10% of the iso compared to when boiling, which I read somewhere else.

Ok made my 3rd no boil beer today. Went great, WF did its magic again even with 15% oats. Mash out was in the mid 170s and I did a post-mash hopburst technique where I added hops every 5m of the 20m hopstand. We'll see if that does anything.

squaremile said:

Ok made my 3rd no boil beer today. Went great, WF did its magic again even with 15% oats. Mash out was in the mid 170s and I did a post-mash hopburst technique where I added hops every 5m of the 20m hopstand. We'll see if that does anything.

Click to expand...

I think we are twins separated at birth! I'm making my 5th n boil boil today. Also making a hoppy number but with 20% wheat. Hosteepin' as well.

ghohn said:

I think we are twins separated at birth! I'm making my 5th n boil boil today. Also making a hoppy number but with 20% wheat. Hosteepin' as well.

Click to expand...

NOICE!!! Just checked your blog on these, please keep them up, learning a lot from your process and results. Very encouraging that you have yet to get DMS from this technique. I'm starting to wonder if DMS even exists anymore on a homebrew scale, but that's for another time.

I'm using S-04 on this batch, Chinook and Centennial hopstand (5oz), Mosaic dry hop. OG is 1.033. Golden promise, oats, a touch of Victory for the grain bill, 154 mash temp.

Glad you got some use from my writeup. I'll continue to edit it as a running tally of the no boil beers I make. I've had DMS on a boiled beer before so I know what it tastes like. I think the key is committing to no boil and not breaching that SMM/DMS production threshold. It seems some people need to see an actual boil for a minute. This minute, or the total time between 180f-212f is more the issue so one needs to commit to either no boil or a full boil.

As far as the brew session today, I added some whirfloc with the 7oz hop steep and the difference in wort is night and day. It looks just as good as my boiled beers going from kettle to keg.

Thought I'd add another post here. I have now made 8 no boil beers. All were 3%-ish session IPAs with various grain bills, adjuncts, yeasts, and hop schedules. None have been infected or have off notes. I am so happy with this process that I truly do not think I would ever decide to boil a beer again.

Some myths that people should know that I am extremely confident in now:

1. Substantial bitterness is added at sub-170F temps. I'd estimate I'm getting at least 30 IBU from a 15m hopstand in 3.25 gallons of wort from 4.5oz of hops.

2. Pasteurization temperature is what is important in killing bugs, not boiling. All of my mash-outs have been between 165-175, no issues.

3. Using whirlfloc completely clears the beer, even at 165 degrees.

4. No flavor is imparted at all from no boiling, but I suspect there are some slight benefits to head retention and body, especially for the session IPA style.

5. DMS either does not exist, or it is not produced in perceivable levels at 170.

6. Someday no boil will be the new no chill.

<duplicate post>

squaremile said:

Thought I'd add another post here. I have now made 8 no boil beers. All were 3%-ish session IPAs with various grain bills, adjuncts, yeasts, and hop schedules. None have been infected or have off notes. I am so happy with this process that I truly do not think I would ever decide to boil a beer again.

Some myths that people should know that I am extremely confident in now:

1. Substantial bitterness is added at sub-170F temps. I'd estimate I'm getting at least 30 IBU from a 15m hopstand in 3.25 gallons of wort from 4.5oz of hops.

2. Pasteurization temperature is what is important in killing bugs, not boiling. All of my mash-outs have been between 165-175, no issues.

3. Using whirlfloc completely clears the beer, even at 165 degrees.

4. No flavor is imparted at all from no boiling, but I suspect there are some slight benefits to head retention and body, especially for the session IPA style.

5. DMS either does not exist, or it is not produced in perceivable levels at 170.

6. Someday no boil will be the new no chill.

Click to expand...

You do realize different people have different levels of sensitivity to compounds like DMS? In sensory testing done at OSU we saw a large percentage of individuals with the ability to detect DMS around 10ppm and another large percentage that required several hundred ppm.

With darker base malts you can minimize DMS, but it is still going to be present. It is considered to be good practice to lose at least 3% volume during the boil if you don't have a way of filtering out the DMS (a practice that's really only done commercially). If you have a good filtration system you could theoretically remove DMS to a level that would be hard to detect analytically. Even using a good vigorous boil or going a step further and using a caldera still leaves detectable levels of DMS in the beer. As far as a NO BOIL, there's absolutely DMS in your beer. At what levels I can't say without testing a sample, as I said earlier if you use darker base malts it might not be at outrageous levels. Also remember that perceptible levels of DMS can actually be appropriate in some styles and IMO isn't the necessarily a "beer breaking" off flavor.

As far as the bitterness goes, a lot of that is probably coming from the oxidized beta acids. The hop compounds that are oxidized or isomerized are much more soluble in wort. At 170F you're probably not ismoerizing the alpha acids but the oxidized betas would readily dissolve into the wort.

BOOM!! That just happened!! Very interesting post.

BUT...on the other side, I love it when people attempt to break tradition, or whatever we call the "typical brewing process". "Experts" can tell you what has been done, and usually they will also tell you that certain things that cannot be done. I say, F-em all. Keep pluggin' away and prove that our brew days can be done in 90 minutes with no off flavors or the likes!!

BTW, can I get your Chocolate Oatmeal Stout recipe, please?

Got an iso alpha extract and dry hop only no boil beer coming up, and two no boil no chill beers conditioning. Stay tuned.

What about beers bigger than 3%?