Batch VS Fly What is The Big Diff.

[slnies]

So her it is. My next batch I will Batch Sparge. However I have never tried it before now. So I did some research on the forum here, and I came up with some pros and cons. They are:
Batch: 1. Faster
2. easier to attain eff.
3. More fiddling with adding batches of water.
4. requires HLT.

Fly: 1. Easy one step process
2. requires HLT
3. Takes longer.
4. more difficult to zero in.
So, does this sound right so far?
Now that is out of the way What am I missing and what are the supporting arguments either way? Thank you all for your time and considerate thoughts.

S.

 

[Yuri_Rage]

I have to disagree with one statement each:

Batch: 2. easier to attain eff.
Perhaps it's easier to achieve a consistent efficiency if you batch sparge, but sparge method alone does not impact efficiency as much as other factors such as mash thickness, pH, temperature, and grain crush.

Fly: 1. Easy one step process
No way. It's really easy to screw up a fly sparge - channeling, run-off rate, grain bed condition, sparge water introduction method, and some others I'm sure I'm forgetting can present some pretty big hurdles to overcome.

 

[slnies]

I have to disagree with one statement each:

Batch: 2. easier to attain eff.
Perhaps it's easier to achieve a consistent efficiency if you batch sparge, but sparge method alone does not impact efficiency as much as other factors such as mash thickness, pH, temperature, and grain crush.

Fly: 1. Easy one step process
No way. It's really easy to screw up a fly sparge - channeling, run-off rate, grain bed condition, sparge water introduction method, and some others I'm sure I'm forgetting can present some pretty big hurdles to overcome.

alright I can see your point, but since there are so many variables in flying would this not make obtaining efficiency easier in a batch.
I should have said that flying is a easy one step process in that you start your sparge once and when the water runs out it is done. You are correct that there are a lot of variables that contribute to both and that those variables effect eff. This is good stuff, this is why I put it to the Forum. I don't know a lot about the subject, but I want to. So thank you very much. S.

 

[Kevin Dean]

My general understanding is that, done right, fly sparging vs batch will extract more sugars from the total mash yeilding a higher possible effeciency.

Note that I said "Possible". In reality, batch sparging is as "good" as fly sparging and odds are other parts of your equipment/procedure will matter more, as Yuri said.

I personally prefer batch sparging because it's much simpler and easier.

 

[billtzk]

You listed "requires HLT" in both lists. Why not strike it since it is a constant? I mean, both methods require grain and water too.

Additional con for batch sparging: must vorlauf before each running.

Fly sparging only requires one vorlauf at most, and if you recirculate your wort (e.g., HERMS or direct recirculation), vorlaufing may be taken care of by that process depending on how you are doing it. For batch sparging, you will usually have to vorlauf two times.

 

[eddie]

It's true that you have to vorlauf at the beginning of each run but it's only a quart or less each time with batch sparging. When I fly sparged, I had to take close to a gallon. Also, batch sparging is faster and easier than fly sparging IMO. I don't have to monitor Ph during the sparge or frig with the flow rates to get them balanced and I haven't seen any negative impact on my eff at all.

 

[Bobby_M]

Actually, when comparing the two in regard to an HLT, it's a matter of how the water flows out. In fly, you have to dial the flow in rather precisely. In batch you can litereally dump the water into the MLT. I'd suggest going batch first. If you feel like you're missing something, then buy yourself a false bottom and sparge arm.

 

[budbo]

I don't have to monitor Ph during the sparge

Neither do I, Once the Fly water is set the Ph isn't going to change appreciably, plus at that point does it even matter? Once you start the sparge you are done mashing, all you are doing is rinsing the sugars, keeping the enzymes happy is irrelevant at that point.

My set up is marked, unless I get a stuck sparge, I set the valves to the marks and walk away once you have tweaked your flow rate it isn't hard and to me, no more work than batch sparging. But that's just me

Really isn't a better, both work it's about personal preference.

 

[Orfy]

Take a look here.

The facts without opinion.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/wiki/index.php/Sparging

 

[Bobby_M]

I think it's important to note that when we're debating which is "better" that we're both making beer. Keeping that in mind will help you realize that we're splitting hairs in friendly debate because we love talking about brewing.

I also want to suggest that if you're a major proponent of one method over the other, your opinion should hold more water if you've tried both methods and made up your mind that way. I think a good majority of folks picked a method, found that it works (of course) and had no reason to change. In my case, I started with batch and never saw an efficiency lower than 76% (the average is now 90%). You can imagine why I stick with it and suggest it. However, I've never tried fly sparging. Maybe it would eek me out another 5% but it's not worth the thought and money.

 

[ebeer]

Both batch and fly are great ways to sparge. I've done both extensively, and have come to the conclusion that the 'best' method should be defined by your equipment and brew process. The are no absolutes. Most people will agree that fly sparge has the potential to get better efficiency from your mash (but as soon as you say this someone will comment about their efficiency gains after converting to batch from fly).

In my experience, and with my equipment, fly sparging is easier and takes the same amount of time. I've found this after much experimentation over 50 brew sessions or more. Experiment some, note your brew times, the ease of process, your efficiency, and the profiles of your beers...then choose your sparge method based on your own experience and results.

This topic usually turns into a holy war.

 

[Beer Snob]

You know there is one thing missing from this thread....What is the Big Difference? That's what you wanted to know right? What is the big difference? I was explained this at one time. So, I'll try to explain it here but I'm sure there will be someone who might make it sound better because as I have experience in both it is by no means extensive. So here it goes...

Perhaps we should start by saying in the end result for us there really is not much of any difference. For us. So lets say we are a real big brewer. Lets say we are Sam Adams Personal favororite of mine Ok, we're brewing. How much a year? WOW! Thousands of gallons! Thousands! (Think I'm going to have a great dream tonight!). In this case, we are using a huge fly setup. Why.... well we'll get to that real soon.

Lets do a quick change here. We are now not Sam Adam's but we are ourself. In our kitchen. In a small apartment no less (chose this setting cause it is where many feel this can't be done... dont fool yourself in thinking this way). We are not brewing thousands of gallons here. Its MUCH less. Today we are brewing an incredible Stout. This Stout is going to have an aromas so incredible that the entire building is gonig to wonder what in the hell is going on in our small apartment. Are we going to batch or fly today? Well today we are going to batch. Why? If we Fly we would get much more efficiency? If we Fly we would not have to use as much grain to make the same incredible Stout? Ok... ALL TRUE. Yep... all true. So let's take out our little hand calculator here. What are we dealing with..... If you go over to Northern you would see that the average grain runs ... eh... between $1.50 and $1.90. Lets say for our modest calculation grain runs $1.70. So in order to get a Batch to the same efficientcy of a Fly... that is in order to get a Batch to taste like a Fly setup was used we need to add some more grain. Why.... as we said it's not as efficient. So lets add 2 more pounds. That comes to what.... $3.40. So for roughly $3.40 you get the same beer.... it's done MUCH MUCH faster, you dont have any problem with Ph, and you can basicly just let er rip and there is not really much of anything for you to have to keep track of.

Wow.... well if it is all so good and dandy why didn't we do this when we were Sam Adam's? Because my friend... as this is probably very obvious now. When we were Sam Adam's we were dealing not with our small batch in our humble kitchen, but huge batches..... 1,000s of pounds of grain. I have absolutly no clue as to how much moer they would need, but lets say they woudl need 1,000 more pounds of grain to get the same efficiency. Now we are not talking about $3.40. Now we are talking about $1,700! And that money is bottom line here you know. They are in the business to make more that cost less. We could not care a less in our little kitchen.

And that is why many of us Batch rather then Fly :rockin:

 

[slnies]

Wow! this is all very good stuff. I wanted to get some different perspectives because I also want to get some starting points to research the subject more. I currently fly sparge. I am sure my method has something to be desired but I do hit my numbers and i do get about a 84% eff. on the other hand i have only done two all grain bathes, so I will mark my success up to beginners luck. On the other hand I want to explore the different methods of the process. I like to think of brewing as an adventure into science, and social interaction. The community that it creates makes it fun for me. So thank you all for valuable input. S.

 

[Bobby_M]

I really wonder what the big guys do hit in efficiency. Actually, I also wonder this about a lot of fly sparging home brewers. I'd say 70% of the home brew club I'm in are fly sparging and none of them answered when I asked. I can accept that you don't care "anymore" once you get consistent numbers but you'd still want to know what that number is upfront.

Many fly spargers will use higher efficiency as a reason or benefit for fly, but on the whole you'll see numbers all over the map for both methods. Beer snob's response is true but it assumes that all brewers CAN get higher efficiency with fly. If you get even partial channeling, it blows the whole thing.

 

[slnies]

I really wonder what the big guys do hit in efficiency. Actually, I also wonder this about a lot of fly sparging home brewers. I'd say 70% of the home brew club I'm in are fly sparging and none of them answered when I asked. I can accept that you don't care "anymore" once you get consistent numbers but you'd still want to know what that number is upfront.

Many fly spargers will use higher efficiency as a reason or benefit for fly, but on the whole you'll see numbers all over the map for both methods. Beer snob's response is true but it assumes that all brewers CAN get higher efficiency with fly. If you get even partial channeling, it blows the whole thing.

Yup, that would be my assumption. I will be honest though. My recipes were designed for 75% eff. and because of the eff. I have attained I dilute my wort to hit my OG. before the boil. However I really pay attention to the details. That being said, I am human and I will make a mistake. I think that you are right about the channeling. It sounds like any miss step could cause some issues in that respect though. I have found that the secret to a great grain bed, is a slow run off. If I let the sweet wort out slow and easy, the grain bed seems to settle and compact evenly into a filter bed. i also add a gallon of sparge water for the varlaufe ( I am certain i did not spell that right). I then recirculate until I have a clear wort. I don't think that the process is difficult, but I do see were I could screw it up in a hurry. On the bright side a guy could still save it by turning it into a batch sparge. I am not certain if that would be the correct thing to do, but that is what i would do. What is the worse that will happen? You get poor eff. or less than optimal wort for your brew. That is my take on it. Like I said earlier, my next batch I will be batching because I want the experience. I will take notes, and then do another and so on until I have enough data... and then I will do the one I enjoy most no matter what the numbers say. They will only apply to my set up anywho's. S.

 

[kappclark]

I bet Sam Adama doesn't pay $1.70/lb for grain !

But the concept is still true abt cost of ingredients ... and there would probably be greater labor costs if Sam Admas batch sparged ..

Let's also remember the cost of a bad batch to Sam Adams (or one which is not consistent with eh others) ..

It is frightening to imagine the risks the professional might face vs the ones the homebrewer has.

I batch sparge becaus it is so easy, and am finally seeing what adjustments are needed to get to the target gravity.