Another FWH pale ale question/statement

[MBasile]

So I've been pretty disappointed with the information supplied on FWH. A billion posts say one thing, a billion and 1 posts say the opposite.

I've decided to go with the "Think of it as a 20 minute addition) camp and I've come up with this hop schedule. I'm not really asking a question here, or asking for approval, just kind of want to see the general reaction. It'll be brewed on Monday regardless.

(Basic 2-row grain bill)

All hops Cascade
.75 oz @ FWH
.5 @ 60
.75 @ 20
.75 @ 15
.75 @ 10
.75 @ 5
.75 @ 0

This adds up to 5 ounces of hops (37 IBUs) in a 1.052 brew.

How did I get to this? My previous recipe was creeping up there in late addition hops, so I decided to see what it'd be like if I combined all of the late additions and spread them out of a consistent addition schedule. I also added the use of FWH because even with my additions creeping up I still wasn't getting the hop flavor I wanted! We'll see how this turns out in about a month (green samplings that is).

 

[brewhooligan]

My general reaction: :rockin:

 

[Yooper]

I really see very little about FWH! I use them all the time, though. I don't know that I would consider the flavor like a 20 minute addition, but I do believe I get a smoother bitterness along with the "regular" amount of IBUs.

I use FWH for all of my ambers, IPAs, and APAs. That's most of my brewing! I would say that the FWH do impact the amount of IBUs much as a 75 minute boil would. At least, to my perception of bitterness.

 

[ayoungrad]

I have wondered about FWH as well. I calculate FWH as contributing the same amount of bitterness as a 20 minute addition (although not necessarily the flavor of a 20 minute addition). Even though I do this it doesn't make sense to me. What yooper says re: a 75 minute addition makes more sense. But the majority of opinions seemed to go with a 20 minute equivalent. Who knows?

But your recipe sounds like hopping for a good cascade summer ale.

 

[djt17]

I am currently drinking a FWH'd Amber Ale that I have made in the past with 60, 20 & 5 min hop additions. I wanted to try FWH, so I moved the 20 min addition to FWH. It is more bitter than with the 20 min addition...but very good.

 

[MBasile]

Once I have more fermenting space (currently I can only temp control one carboy at a time) I'll try doing a split batch and judge the difference in bitterness (perceived, not calculated), aroma, and flavor. Until then I'll have to stick with my current philosophy: Just brew it. If it is subpar you'll have to brew again, what a shame!

 

[MBasile]

Well, I entered the pale ale I did with this hop schedule. It got something called "Best of Show" but I'm not sure what that means.

 

[ayoungrad]

Well, I entered the pale ale I did with this hop schedule. It got something called "Best of Show" but I'm not sure what that means.

Ha. Ha.

Congrats.

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

I think FWH technically call for adding 30% of your total bittering hops to the boil pot at the start of the lauter. At least that's what I've read in some brewing books and online.

From what I've read the FWH alpha oil contribution adds to smoother bitterness but the beta oils responsible for aroma are still subject to being boiled off during the remaining 60 minute boil.