effect of lower gravity

[kappclark]

I have been missing the boil volume mark, and wind up with a tad (1/2 gal) too much...my gravity is lower than it should be...(target 1070, measured 1048)

Besides alcohol strength, what is the down-side of lower gravity as far as taste etc...I just wonder if I am forgetting rdwhahb and worrying too much abt hitting target gravity.

For mental health, maybe I can calculate/extrapolate what the gravity SHOULD be if it were an actual 5 gal batch.

I batch sparge, and I am sure the efficiency is not exactly like a swiss clock !

 

[hjherbenson]

It should still be a tasty session beer, the big downfall is the cost waste. I always figure all my math so I know preboil vol and gravity so I can adjust accordingly.

 

[kappclark]

I now fear it will be too hoppy (1 oz each of cascade, Goldings and Mt Hood)...

Extract brewing is calling me back...

 

[Brewsmith]

If your gravity was supposed to be 1.070 at 5 gallons then you should have had a gravity of...

70 x 5 = 350

350 / 5.5 = 63.6

1.0636 or 1.064 for 5 gallons

I think the extra half gallon is the least of your worries

 

[FreakinA]

Yeah if you are aiming for 1.070 and getting 1.048 something is very wrong. Brewsmith showed what the extra half gallon does for you. You are wayyyy off. Can you write out your process very detailed including amounts, times, and temps?

 

[kappclark]

Thanks -

This as my second AG batch today. First was Ed Wort's HPA which went OK - no surprises there.

The second was an AG version of an extract beer I made last year. Hampshire Special Ale. It was superb, and my notes show I hit 1064. The Clone Brews book had an all grain method to replace the extract recipe, which I thought I wld try.

I use a 10g rubbermaid cooler with a braid

8 lbs 2 row
1.25 lbs crystal 60
.25 lb chocolate

4 gal strike water @ 164 gave mash temp of 152. mixed. rechecked temp 10 min..149-150.. rested 1 hour

Vorlauf 2 qt.



Sparged with 4 gal @ 190 (this was book's instr)(now 8 gal in cooler .. flow was restricted, probably due to the additional pressure from the 4 gallons..so I agitated grain bed...better flow) Probably should have added a few qts of hot sparge water, drained, then put in the 4 gals.


Would up with close to 7 gal in the 8 gal boil pot. Book called for a 90 min boil which I did .. Hops at beginning, then Goldings at the end. I would up with maybe 5.5 gal in fermenter, a qt or so left in the boil pot. Measured gravity at 68 deg.

Maybe I should have done a 2 hour boil ? I know I should get a better handle on boil volumes, but I fear the mash/spargeprocess itself in very inefficient.

 

[Yooper]

I'm trying to be clear here- you adding your sparge water to the MLT along with the mash water, after the mash? Did you add additional sparge water after draining any runnings?

 

[kappclark]

I confess - I added the sparge water into the mash.

 

[JesseRC]

I dont know where you got 1070 for OG, but I doubt 9.5#'s of grain is going to get you that 1070. I didnt plug the numbers in , but maybe you should , I'll bet you're right where you should be at.

 

[Yooper]

I confess - I added the sparge water into the mash.

That's fine! But it means you did a no-sparge brew. That can explain why your efficiency was surprisingly low. I'm not sure what the effiencieny % averages are with no-sparge (I've never done it) but I would guess it's lower than some other sparging techniques.

You'll end up this time with a more bitter, lower ABV beer.

For next time, I suggest planning out your sparging technique. If you want to do no-sparge, you will probably need to increase your grain bill. If you want to do a batch sparge, you will probably get in the 70-75% range.

 

[FreakinA]

I dont think you ever calculated what your OG should be with your grains. But it isn't even close to get to 1.070. Closer to what you actually got.

 

[hjherbenson]

Yea with that malt grist your looking around 1.050 so 48 aint so bad.

 

[Yooper]

Yea with that malt grist your looking around 1.050 so 48 aint so bad.

Well, yes, that's correct. I never thought about it. With only 8 pounds of base malt, I'd be shocked if you got above 1.055. I didn't even look at that! At 80% efficiency, with 5.5 gallons, the OG would be 1.048- so it looks at your efficiency was 80%.

That doesn't seem to make sense either, with a no-sparge technique, but it's certainly possible! The recipe, with an OG of 1.070, however, is just not possible.

 

[JesseRC]

Well, yes, that's correct. I never thought about it. With only 8 pounds of base malt, I'd be shocked if you got above 1.055. I didn't even look at that! At 80% efficiency, with 5.5 gallons, the OG would be 1.048- so it looks at your efficiency was 80%.

That doesn't seem to make sense either, with a no-sparge technique, but it's certainly possible! The recipe, with an OG of 1.070, however, is just not possible.

what am I , chopped liver?

 

[Yooper]

what am I , chopped liver?

Heck, no- you just got lost in the typing! Good point, Jesse.

There- feel better?

As they said, your OG is right where it should be based on the recipe, even with a no-sparge. The recipe seems to be lacking some fermentables, to get an OG of 1.070.

 

[z987k]

I show you're right at 76% efficiency for a 5.5gallon batch. You did fine.
To go to 1.070 you need roughly 4.25lbs more grain.

Consider getting some software. Some costs, some is open source.

 

[kappclark]

Thnks for the replies, one and all.

I think the 1070 number came from original extract/partial mash recipe. I did get 1064 last year using this...

Here is the original recipe's fermentables. (which they converted, apparently incorrectly, to all grain)

From the book "North American Clone Brews" by Scott R Russell

pg 52 "Hampshire Special Ale"

2.5 lb pale malt
1.25 crystal 50
4 oz chocolate malt

5.5 lbs DME


I used to have Beersmith, but the computer crashed. Not on my laptop. I am sure I need an upgrade, anyway.

Yes = I hear you all --measure twice, cut once !

OH Yes - finally , I did a starter Friday of the Wyeast 1098, and the fermentation from yesterday's batch is still very strong and it was quick. I guess the beasties are *still* happy.