fragged
Well-Known Member
Thought I'd add a photo. This one definitely gets better at the 4 week mark. Clears quick too, as advertised.
View attachment 1499904458922.jpg
View attachment 1499904458922.jpg
Mine has turned out a little thin/watery - it is carbonated btw and the OG/FG were fine.
Any suggestions? (FYI I mashed at 152)
I have thought my batch was a little thin at various times of its keg life, but right now, probably 6wks in the keg, I am reallllllly enjoying it. Not over the top in any sense, just a really nice drinker.Thanks!!!
Well after reading the first 71 pages of this thread last week, I was in the neighborhood of my local home brew store so I stopped by and picked up the stuff to brew this. Not sure when I'll get around to it as I'll be at the ranch all week for Thanksgiving, but sometime soon hopefully. Thanks, Ed. Looking forward to it.
**Oh, and I got all the stuff 100% per the recipe. Not gonna make any changes without seeing how the original comes out.
I've done the same with this beer, but at 5 gallons each. I used cascade at day 3 of fermentation. Think I used 2 ounces.I usually follow directions/recipes to the letter the first time I brew or cook them, but I got to thinking that I've got two spare 3 gallon fermenters sitting around not doing anything right now. What if I leave half the recipe as is in one and in the second one dry hop it and end up with two similar but different beers? What would you dry hop it with? I'm assuming more Cascade. And how much would you dry hop a 2.5 gallon recipe? And when? I've brewed about 40 recipes so far, but have never dry hopped any of them. Thanks in advance.
Thanks. Using MO and Munich would make a different beer. The munich malt would make it much more heavier and maltier. It would also make a darker beer going from 4L to 10L in color.
The MO would not make much of a difference other than increasing the price of the batch.
My goal in devising this recipe was to make a beer that was very drinkable, easy to make, while using the fewest, yet most cost effective ingredients; hence dry yeast, only one hop type, mostly 2 row Pale, etc.
I'm sure you would make a good beer, but it would be darker & maltier with the Munich.
Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. To me, they are extremely similiar, especially after this one has sat in a keg for a few weeks. Earlier than that you get much more hop smell. I love it, but some won't like it at that stage (typically those who've only had something like an IPA a couple times). They'd probably perceive it as bitter, associated with the hop smell rather than the actual flavor.Can someone describe the flavor of this? I am interested in a beer that's approachable to most people and not bitter. I don't like bitter beers. Thanks!
Probably the cheapest, easiest recipe on here, short of a smash.I can actually distinguish between the smell and the flavor. As long as it doesn't have the bitter aftertaste I'm good. I've actually had some beers that had a high hop Aroma but will not happy or bitter at all. And that was kind of a cool experience.
I know this calls for Nottingham dry, but I have a Nottingham slurry from a batch of cream ale I did recently - anything adverse gonna happen if I use the slurry instead of dry yeast?
Awesome, thank you.It’s common to save yeast and pitch slurry. I actually use 001 for this recipe and it turns out great.
I agree, Nickaus. The recipe stands as-is on its own, and a dry hop would subtract from its goodness. This is a favorite at my house as well.This has mellowed beautifully! At first I thought it needed dry hopping but after a few weeks conditioning it really doesn't ...Nice work Ed!!
Enter your email address to join: