WLP 090 first use, possible issues

[DaWhip]

I use 001 a lot, but wanted to try out 090. I bought it for a beer, but haven't had time to brew it yet and ended up pitching it into a cider today.

I made a starter with apple juice. When I opened the yeast packet, it seemed very different than any other WLP packets I have used. No swelling at all after room temp for hours. When I pitched it into the started it did not have the thick globs of yeast that I am used to. It looked more like thin cloudy wort. Manufactured date was Sept 2016.

The starter never looked like it was doing anything, no visible krausen or anything, but after 24 hours it had gone from 1.050 to ~1.020. Usually 001 does better and has noticeable activity, but at least it was doing something.

Any of y'all with 090 experience tell me if this is normal or did I get a bad packet? Either way I'll let it ride and keep a close eye on the cider, but I want info to decide between going to get another packet of 090 or just pitching some of the 001 slurries I have in the fridge if things aren't going fast enough. Also want to decide between saving yeast from this cider or getting a new pack when I get to the beer.

 

[RM-MN]

Cider does not produce a krausen because it lacks the proteins that wort has. Each yeast works differently (otherwise why not just have one yeast for everything?) so when you change yeasts (and media, cider is not beer) you should expect things to work differently.

 

[khillian]

I brewed a beer with Sept 15 2016 White labs 090. The packet was thin and not clumpy like yours, and my dry malt extract starter had very little krausen but I use fermcap. The beer I pitched it into is now 48 hours in and fermenting well enough. Think you have nothing to worry about.

 

[DaWhip]

Thanks. I understand different yeasts doing different things, but this was different enough from the variety of WL yeasts I have used that it warranted asking. I have read enough good things about 090 that I have confidence in it, mostly just wanted to be sure I didn't get a bad pack. I'm pretty new to the cider game, so that is another variable I'm not real familiar with, but previous cider starters have shown more activity than this one. I'm 24 hours in now and have no visible signs of fermentation, but I'll give it another 24 before I check gravity. I'm sure it is fine.

Thanks Khillian, I think that was same date as mine, so gives me some more confidence.

 

[tjmac5071]

090 is the yeast I use for 90% of my beers. It is great. Took it to about 12 generations (lost track) off one pack and worked great each time. Never made a starter with Apple juice, always dme or if i was out a mini 2 row biab stove starter. I usually brew 5-6% beers, prefer them dry and never had anything above 1.012 or below 1.009. if fact just did a side by side with 036 and have 090 at 1.010 and 036 stuck at 1.020. do not worry about it at all, it will make a great beer

 

[catdaddy66]

I love 090 and have used it several times now. I notice that its activity is understated and rarely produces airlock activity. It always produces great results for me.

 

[DaWhip]

Perfect. Thanks for the replies y'all. I see it compared to 001 so often I was expecting similar fermentation visuals. I have some slight airlock activity now, so I'll just let it ride and trust that it's going to town under there. I'll check gravity in 3 more days, but I'm sure its doing its thing now.