Bottle early?

I've been brewing for almost a year now and this "speed brewing" thread caught my attention:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f13/aging-beer-facts-myths-discussion-84005/

After reading it I gathered that if it tastes good and is done fermenting then go ahead and bottle. I typically let a beer ferment 3 or 4 weeks.

However, I brewed a Guiness clone from AHS Saturday. I was making a starter last night for this weekend, so while I had the sanitizer out I decided to sample and take a gravity reading of the guiness clone. It tasted fantastic...and it's only been 4 days. The gravity was at what it's supposed to be as well. Assuming the gravity stays constant till Sunday, would anyone else bottle it then? Like I said, it tastes great. I'm considering this very much right now, even though it goes against my 3-4 week fermentation norm.

I know most people say leave it and it will be better, I say this to everyone else lol. But in the end I usually see many brewers saying to taste it as well and when it tastes good bottle it. What are your thoughts?

Sounds like bottling time. Guiness is a relatively low ABV beer and being a stout, clearing isn't than big a deal. You will have a lot of crud in the bottles, though.

So it makes sense then? If gravity is done and it tastes great, no off flavors...bottle away?

I can crash cool it, that should get some crud out. Grain to bottle in 7 days sounds fun, and to glass maybe 14 days...

I've done "speed brews", most notably Bonnevile Flats from BYO. Even though the beer was done fermenting in 3 days, I got diacetyl on day 8 (it was already kegged.

I had to de-pressurize the keg and add more yeast to get it to clean up after itself...another week at room temp.

I was re-reading that recipe just this morning and while this is doable, I believe the intent is to drink it all in one sitting/party soon after kegging so it doean't have a chance to turn. I may be wrong, but that's what I came away with.

As stated earlier, a stout is a bit different, but I've known them to change flavors too.

With that said, I usually give even speed brews enough time to clean up after themselves. You really can't rush a natural process.

hmm...I'm torn...half of me wants to try it just to see how it turns out. The other half wants to follow my normal procedure and let it sit another two weeks. If it gets diacetyl I'll have learned my lesson. However, that thread on speed brews has many people that say their beer turns out great doing just what I'm debating on....

why don't you just bottle half the batch and leave the rest to settle and age. You can also then compare to see if it was there is a difference between the two.

I've never done anything like that, does it work just that simple? Just siphon off half of it and use half the priming sugar? I like the idea of comparing though. Might be worthwhile.

Come to think about it, it's not much different of a process than siphoning for a secondary.

homebrewer_99 said:

I've done "speed brews", most notably Bonnevile Flats from BYO. Even though the beer was done fermenting in 3 days, I got diacetyl on day 8 (it was already kegged.

I had to de-pressurize the keg and add more yeast to get it to clean up after itself...another week at room temp.

I was re-reading that recipe just this morning and while this is doable, I believe the intent is to drink it all in one sitting/party soon after kegging so it doean't have a chance to turn. I may be wrong, but that's what I came away with.

As stated earlier, a stout is a bit different, but I've known them to change flavors too.

With that said, I usually give even speed brews enough time to clean up after themselves. You really can't rush a natural process.

Click to expand...

Can you please clarify what relevance your statement has in regards to "I got diacetyl"? I am very interested, as I have bottled early on occasion, and it sounds like you are saying that doing so causes Diacetyl. Is this correct?