Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > Efficiency in US 2-row vs. Euro Pils?
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-30-2013, 04:24 PM   #11
zachattack
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: , MA
Posts: 2,632
Liked 263 Times on 225 Posts
Likes Given: 154

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatschmaltez View Post
All efficiency calls should take into account boil off volume. It's asked on total amount of "points" recovered... That being said, if you aren't measuring your final volume then that may be an issue.
This is true, but that's not the point he was making. Higher boiloff rate = larger preboil volume = more available sparge water = higher efficiency in some cases.

The main reason most people see crappier efficiency with huge beers is because there's less available sparge water per pound of grain, and that's why a commonly used technique is to sparge with extra water and do an extended boil for those beers.


zachattack is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2013, 04:34 PM   #12
greatschmaltez
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 304
Liked 14 Times on 13 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

You're right, I didn't read his post thorough enough. Cool


greatschmaltez is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2013, 04:43 PM   #13
rklinck
Member
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
rklinck's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 675
Liked 66 Times on 55 Posts
Likes Given: 49

Default

Are you pulling the actual data sheets for the malt or simply using Beersmith (or similar software to calculate efficiency)? If you are using software, my guess would be that the software simply has incorrect information about the potential sugar for the specific grains you are using (e.g., assuming that the 2-Row has 40 points per pound per gallon when it actually only has 39). This would make a significant difference and explain the difference.
rklinck is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2013, 04:49 PM   #14
urbanmyth
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Twin Lakes, WI
Posts: 1,006
Liked 59 Times on 47 Posts
Likes Given: 60

Default

I have noticed similar efficiency drops and jumps, too. I have decided to just not use American base malts anymore. At my scale, the extra $2-$3 a batch for superior base malt just makes sense.
__________________
Aurė Entuluva! Day shall come again!

Sheldon: If its a brew day, its a good day

raptorvan: it makes the beer so silky smooth its like drinking a glass of giggling angels.
urbanmyth is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 05:14 PM   #15
nickharbour
Troll
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 157
Liked 10 Times on 8 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rklinck View Post
Are you pulling the actual data sheets for the malt or simply using Beersmith (or similar software to calculate efficiency)? If you are using software, my guess would be that the software simply has incorrect information about the potential sugar for the specific grains you are using (e.g., assuming that the 2-Row has 40 points per pound per gallon when it actually only has 39). This would make a significant difference and explain the difference.
I am relying on the default beersmith numbers. I wouldn't expect the potential discrepancy to account for the >10% difference though. I suppose its possible if 2-row was a few points less than reported and all the pilsners are a few points higher. I always just assumed the US 2-row would probably be the highest yielding grain out there.
nickharbour is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 05:53 PM   #16
rklinck
Member
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
rklinck's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 675
Liked 66 Times on 55 Posts
Likes Given: 49

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickharbour View Post
I am relying on the default beersmith numbers. I wouldn't expect the potential discrepancy to account for the >10% difference though. I suppose its possible if 2-row was a few points less than reported and all the pilsners are a few points higher. I always just assumed the US 2-row would probably be the highest yielding grain out there.
I was just spit-balling on this idea. If the potential were off by a point of two on each type of grain (in opposite directions), it would account for much of the difference. But, looking back at my brewing records, this does not make sense. I use BeerSmith 2 numbers for my brews, and I am not seeing the same effect as you. My go to pale ale (Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt base) and my Kolsch (Weyermann Pilsner Malt base). The brews are similar gravity, and I get nearly identical efficiencies.


rklinck is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Diff between Cara-pils and Caramel pils bigljd Recipes/Ingredients 2 11-10-2011 06:29 PM
DKershner, No Pils Pils question Trollby Gluten Free Brewing 6 06-12-2011 05:22 AM
For what malt can I substitute Euro Pils for the base malt? msheraw All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 5 10-24-2009 07:06 PM
thoughts on a Euro-Pils the_bird Recipes/Ingredients 19 02-06-2008 10:49 PM


Forum Jump

Newest Threads

LATEST SPONSOR DEALS