Breiss Carapils Dextrin Malt - every batch?

[jhubert]

Is there any reason NOT to use some in every recipe? I am just learning about what these different malts do and when I read that this one adds body, foam retention and beer stability without changing the color or flavor I don't understand why I see so many recipes that don't include it. Am I missing something? Thanks..
Jason

 

[ArcaneXor]

Many people choose to use other methods to achieve similar goals without having to use another crystal malt in their grain bill. I control mouthfeel with my mash temperature and adding a little bit of wheat to the grist, for example. Others like flaked grains for the same purpose.

 

[Clann]

I used it a few times when I first started brewing butjust stoped. Patience will give you foam retention and stability (along ith a good beer clean glass) and to me homebrew beer has plenty of body anyway if you are not using alot of corn or rice in your brews so I just quit using it.
But if you like it then use it.

 

[badhabit]

It won't hurt but it may not help. I use no carapils or other dex in my APA's and IPA's at this point, I feel like they just didn't need them. Also any flaked addition would do a great deal for mouth feel and some for head retntion

 

[KYB]

I don't use it in any of my recipes. I feel like damn near every recipe on here uses it. I don't see the need for it. Frees up money and space for other grains to store.

My IPA:

 

[wildwest450]

Brewing crutch.


_

 

[dirty_martini]

Brewing crutch.

_

I don't see it as a brewing crutch when some of the best pro brewers use it. If it's good enough for Vinnie Cilurzo, it's good enough for me.

Also, while it's technically a crystal malt, given that it doesn't add color or flavor, I don't really treat it as such. I use it in recipes where I mash lower and don't have any flaked grains or wheat for body. It doesn't hurt that's for sure.

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

jhubert, the posts itt should tell you exactly why many people don't use it. Many see it as a crutch and since everybody is a master brewer in their own mind, they don't want to use something that is 'a crutch for amateurs'.

+1 dirty martini. Some top-notch brewers use it but even on the probrewers forum there are some that still think it's a crutch.

Not for every brew though (badhabit posted great examples where it's probably better without imo).

 

[samc]

I have no problem using it. One of my favorite IPA's, Rogue I2PA uses 2 row only and hops/yeast but beyond that recipe I have no hesitation being a wuss.

Everything beyond growing your own grain and malting it can be deemed a "crutch". What kind of weak kneed brewer uses an electric element or propane burner instead of an open campfire and a hollowed out log brewing vessel. The LHBS is filled with grains that have been modified, toasted/kilned to all levels of degree that make the majority of them crutchy. You mean people actually buy yeast in packets or vials instead of wild ferments?

 

[permo]

Is there any reason NOT to use some in every recipe? I am just learning about what these different malts do and when I read that this one adds body, foam retention and beer stability without changing the color or flavor I don't understand why I see so many recipes that don't include it. Am I missing something? Thanks..
Jason

The better question would be "is there a reason to use it ever?" If you want head retention and more body to the beer there are many other ways to accomplish this without adding more crystal malt to your grist. I have never used it and I likely never will.

If I want a little head retention, toss in a little wheat

If I want a little more body, I mash a little higher and/or adjust my fermentation temperature down so the beer doesn't finish as dry.

 

[ArcaneXor]

I think the point is that there are many ways to brew a great beer. Carapils, adjusting mash temperatures, wheat and flaked wheat/barley can all be used, alone or in combination, to boost mouthfeel and head retention (although they are certainly not equivalent to each other). Use what you like and what works for you, but be willing to experiment with the other methods as well, and you may be pleasantly surprised. The most obvious difference is the impact Carapils has on the FG of the beer.

 

[Irrenarzt]

I rarely use it as I prefer a fully attenuated brew.

 

[TheBrewinator]

I will generally use half a lb of carapils in my ales and have not noticed any attenuation issues. Having said that, how is carapils any more of a crutch than tossing in some wheat to up the head retention? Both are adding something you normally wouldn't to achieve a desired effect. Calling it a crutch is a bit of a holier than thou attitude IMO.

 

[Yooper]

I rarely use it. I usually have enough other grains that aid body and head retention in my recipe already, so I skip it most of the time.

I find that it's great to use in a pilsner (all pilsner malt with 5% carapils), a triple, or maybe a cream ale. But for my IPAs and APAs, ambers, stouts, etc, I just don't need it.

 

[permo]

how is carapils any more of a crutch than tossing in some wheat to up the head retention?

It is pretty much the same thing. I don't have any head retention or body issues in my brews, but if I were to try and increase head retention I would use a little wheat before I would reach for carapils.

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

IMO, the claim that Carapils aids head retention has probably done it a disservice. People seem to get fixated on that particular claim and it's mostly just marketing speak. If you can get it out of your head that it aids head retention (and that it's a crutch for that) and just think of it as another specialty malt that has a purpose (and head retention ain't it) then you might see it a bit differently.

Also FWIW, Carapils is made differently than crystal malt. It's best to not think of it as a crystal malt when thinking of proportions. In other words, if you have 5% Carapils and 5% C40, you have 5% total crystal malt, not 10%. It's not crystal malt.

 

[permo]

IMO, the claim that Carapils aids head retention has probably done it a disservice. People seem to get fixated on that particular claim and it's mostly just marketing speak. If you can get it out of your head that it aids head retention (and that it's a crutch for that) and just think of it as another specialty malt that has a purpose (and head retention ain't it) then you might see it a bit differently.

Also FWIW, Carapils is made differently than crystal malt. It's best to not think of it as a crystal malt when thinking of proportions. In other words, if you have 5% Carapils and 5% C40, you have 5% total crystal malt, not 10%. It's not crystal malt.

According to this article carapils is a crystal malt. That is why it starts with "cara".

http://***********/stories/wizard/a...arapils-and-what-are-those-other-qcaraq-malts

"Carapils is produced by Briess in Chilton, Wisconsin and is a very pale crystal malt. Other maltsters make similar products and sometimes use names like dextrin, dextrin or cara-pils to describe their products"

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

According to Briess, it is not made the same as crystal/caramel malt. It is a proprietary process that renders a higher proportion of something very similar to 'resistant starches'. Resistant starches are pretty much just what they sound like they are, they are resistant to enzymatic reduction to simpler sugars. The 'resistant sugars' in Carapils are resistant to further breakdown by enzymes. I e-mailed Briess about this very topic a while back and this is essentially what they said. I posted their exact response in another thread on Carapils here but don't have it saved on my phone so I don't have it right now (edit: found it, see below).

EDIT: and note that mashing higher yields something different. Mashing higher prevents complex sugars from being reduced to fermentable sugars, but those complex sugars could have been reduced had you mashed lower. Not the case with the 'resistant sugars' from Carapils.

I don't use it that much either, but I could say that about almost any particular specialty/crystal malt. I rarely use Special B...or Honey malt...or Aromatic, but I do use them all occasionally.

Here's that Briess response I posted in another thread:

Response from Briess Representative Dan Bies
Carapils contain a large amount of soluble enzyme-resistant-dextrin, similar to resistant starch. You should have no problem finding literature on the science behind resistant starch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistant_starch). These dextrins are not formed in the mash, they are formed in the kernel as a result of the production process. The process of making caramel malt is different from that of carapils. Caramel malt production involves developing sugars in the kernel which result in the formation of color and flavor upon drying. Aside from this I can tell you that it is a natural process involving no chemical additives, more specific details are proprietary.

 

[permo]

According to Briess, it is not made the same as crystal/caramel malt. It is a proprietary process that renders a higher proportion of something very similar to 'resistant starches'. Resistant starches are pretty much just what they sound like they are, they are resistant to enzymatic reduction to simpler sugars. The 'resistant sugars' in Carapils are resistant to further breakdown by enzymes. I e-mailed Briess about this very topic a while back and this is essentially what they said. I posted their exact response in another thread on Carapils here but don't have it saved on my phone so I don't have it right now (edit: found it, see below).

EDIT: and note that mashing higher yields something different. Mashing higher prevents complex sugars from being reduced to fermentable sugars, but those complex sugars could have been reduced had you mashed lower. Not the case with the 'resistant sugars' from Carapils.

I don't use it that much either, but I could say that about almost any particular specialty/crystal malt. I rarely use Special B...or Honey malt...or Aromatic, but I do use them all occasionally.

Here's that Briess response I posted in another thread:

That's awesome information. I sit corrected...somewhat

 

[DannPM]

I don't see it as a brewing crutch when some of the best pro brewers use it. If it's good enough for Vinnie Cilurzo, it's good enough for me.

Pros, like Vinnie, use it because it's cheaper to replace some of the base malt grain with this to achieve a higher dextrin content vs using the gas/electric energy to heat their mash a degree or two upward.

 

[wildwest450]

Brewing crutch.


_

I may have not chosen the best words, it CAN be a crutch. I just used it yesterday in a pliny clone, why, because the recipe called for it. Do I throw it in every recipe, no. I think it tends to be over used, just check 80% of the IPA recipes floating around here.


_

 

[jkarp]

I just used it yesterday in a pliny clone, why, because the recipe called for it. Do I throw it in every recipe, no. I think it tends to be over used, just check 80% of the IPA recipes floating around here.

That's some rather circular logic, dontcha think?

Not sure where all this carapils hate is coming from. If a recipe calls for it, I use it, of not, I don't. What's the big deal?

Someone earlier in the thread said it doesn't add taste - that's not true either. Pop a few grains in your mouth next time you're at the HBS. There's more going on there than simple dextrin supplement.

 

[bh10]

Am the only one who think it doesnt work that well, at least Briess carapils? Ive done two THA IPA's both with 12oz of Dextrin malt one batch was w/ Briess Carapils and one with Weyermann's carafoam and the one with Weyermann came out with more body and much better head retention. Both were mashed at same temp and kegged (w/ clean lines). Ive noticed this with other beers Ive brew with Briess's Carapils, so Ive started using nothing, but carafoam in those beers, and results have been much more promising.

 

[wildwest450]

That's some rather circular logic, dontcha think?

If you call using it in a proven recipe circular, I guess so. I'm talking about all the typical IPA recipes that call for a pound of c40, and a pound of carapils. Not necessary.

 

[jkarp]

If you call using it in a proven recipe circular, I guess so. I'm talking about all the typical IPA recipes that call for a pound of c40, and a pound of carapils. Not necessary.

Fair point there.

 

[samc]

If you call using it in a proven recipe circular, I guess so. I'm talking about all the typical IPA recipes that call for a pound of c40, and a pound of carapils. Not necessary.

I think it is because many people learn by taking proven recipes and tweaking them as opposed to learning the ins/outs of every grain/hop/yeast. I find myself guilty of that sometimes - but I'm getting better!

 

[dirty_martini]

If you call using it in a proven recipe circular, I guess so. I'm talking about all the typical IPA recipes that call for a pound of c40, and a pound of carapils. Not necessary.

I do use it in my IPAs/APAs, but that's because I don't use any of the more traditional crystal malts. I tend to use it in conjunction with melanoidin to get the extra body and malt punch since I'm not using any crystal. However, I am playing around with adding a percentage of wheat to my IPAs now so I may be able to drop the carapils in the future.

 

[Montanaandy]

That's some rather circular logic, dontcha think?

Not sure where all this carapils hate is coming from. If a recipe calls for it, I use it, of not, I don't. What's the big deal?

Someone earlier in the thread said it doesn't add taste - that's not true either. Pop a few grains in your mouth next time you're at the HBS. There's more going on there than simple dextrin supplement.

Agree that if the recipe calls for it or if I am formulating a comparable recipe I will likely use it. If the ingredient ends up producing a better tasting beer for what I am trying to produce then I use it.