Conical recommendation for smaller batches ~3gals

[SanPancho]

in ideal world i could get a manufacturer to take a few inches off the top and bring it to like 5gal total capacity. Perfect for 3gal batch. But i doubt it, as id also like it to hold pressure for spunding. They’d probably shy away from that on pressure rated gear id assume. (Or maybe not?)

Any real difference between the brands or just marketing? The design pretty much all the same, dump port, racking/sample/carb, prv/cip/etc.

 

[Blazinlow86]

in ideal world i could get a manufacturer to take a few inches off the top and bring it to like 5gal total capacity. Perfect for 3gal batch. But i doubt it, as id also like it to hold pressure for spunding. They’d probably shy away from that on pressure rated gear id assume. (Or maybe not?)

Any real difference between the brands or just marketing? The design pretty much all the same, dump port, racking/sample/carb, prv/cip/etc.

The only difference really is conical vs unitank imho. A regular conical is just a bucket with a fancy yeast collection method. A unitank is a much bigger upgrade that allows you to do much more. My advise is don't waste your money on a conical. Get the cf5. Cheers

 

[SanPancho]

If you read the post I noted a dump valve- for trub/hops/yeast. So not talking about any bucket type gear. Specifically want to dump below and add hops/gas on top.

The CF5 does seem like the most likely candidate, but I'm wondering if anyone has experience doing smaller batches. In a jacketed CCV doing small/half batches can be problematic due to the glycol jacketing. As these are all single wall that's not an issue. But there still can be problems doing only smaller batches, like excessive process loss due to racking arm location, bottom arm to fitting at 2"(!!!) which seems insane to me, etc. etc. Maybe its not an issue. Maybe it is. Thats why im asking.

 

[Blazinlow86]

If you read the post I noted a dump valve- for trub/hops/yeast. So not talking about any bucket type gear. Specifically want to dump below and add hops/gas on top.

The CF5 does seem like the most likely candidate, but I'm wondering if anyone has experience doing smaller batches. In a jacketed CCV doing small/half batches can be problematic due to the glycol jacketing. As these are all single wall that's not an issue. But there still can be problems doing only smaller batches, like excessive process loss due to racking arm location, bottom arm to fitting at 2"(!!!) which seems insane to me, etc. etc. Maybe its not an issue. Maybe it is. Thats why im asking.

If you read the post I made I pointed out that a "conical" is basically a bucket with a fancy way to collect or dump yeast/trub. Good luck in your search

 

[SanPancho]

Not sure why we are discussing conical vs unitank, which is a kind of conical. Or buckets, which are neither.

So back to my actual question- Id like to against ask for reports from folks who’ve actually used conicals to brew smaller sizes. Big differences between spike/ss brewtech/grainfather? Anyone used a williams brewing keg?

No issues doing 2-3-4 gals in a “5” gallon/7total volume conical from any of these brands?

 

[matt_m]

I was looking into the viability of using a 3.5 gal brew bucket for 1.5 gal batches which is a somewhat similar ratio of headspace. Doing some reading it sounds like headspace does in fact matter to some extent. But I also read a suggestion to "remove" some headspace by sanitizing a plastic bag filled with air and putting that in the fermenter.

A bigger issue is going to be the cooling coils if you will be using them. For example, even at 5.5 gallons, a 7 gallon SS Brewtech BME Chronical has a couple coils out of the beer and the bottom coil comes into the side roughly about the 2.75 - 3 gallon point (only marked to 4 gallons but estimated.)

 

[jekeane]

Grainfathers "jacket" is more of a sweater vest. It doesnt cover the full area making it not great at dealing with smaller volumes

SS brewtech uni had short coils that werent great for 3g batches. They were reportedly fixing this issue but im not sure it they have so I would contact them.

ssbrewtech chronical that I have has optional extender arms for the coil available. but in my opinion if you are going to spend $400 on a conical you may as well spend more on a unitank. I always chose my brewbucket over my ss conical. Now that I have pressure holding unitanks they are about all I use.

Spikes Coil reaches down into the cone and they advertise this as a bonus for small batches. I own several spikes but haven't done a small batch in them yet. I generally use cornies with trimmed diptubes for that.
As for losses in the spike I use a 2" tc with a 5/8" nipple to dump my yeast/trub. The butterfly valve and the nipple allow me to slow the dump if necessary. In general with conicals you will lose .33-.5 gallon dumping the cone.

Unless you are limited by your equipment it may be that to get the most out of one of the conicals you should consider putting 3.75 - 4 gallons in the conical to have 3 gallons after losses.

 

[Blazinlow86]

Not sure why we are discussing conical vs unitank, which is a kind of conical. Or buckets, which are neither.

So back to my actual question- Id like to against ask for reports from folks who’ve actually used conicals to brew smaller sizes. Big differences between spike/ss brewtech/grainfather? Anyone used a williams brewing keg?

No issues doing 2-3-4 gals in a “5” gallon/7total volume conical from any of these brands?

Because you specifically said you wanted the ability to spund which requires a unitank..... Additionally because the spike cf5 unitank doesn't come with a cooling coil by default it's a great choice for smaller batches as it can be cooled in a fridge and therefore batch size doesn't matter so I suggested it. Good luck in your search for a 3 gallon pressurizable non unitank or whatever it is your trying to figure out

 

[SanPancho]

Because you specifically said you wanted the ability to spund which requires a unitank..... Additionally because the spike cf5 unitank doesn't come with a cooling coil by default it's a great choice for smaller batches as it can be cooled in a fridge and therefore batch size doesn't matter so I suggested it. Good luck in your search for a 3 gallon pressurizable non unitank or whatever it is your trying to figure out

Thanks man!!!!!!!!

 

[SanPancho]

I don't really want to deal with glycol and cooling coils, so wouldn't be using them. Its a bit of a pain, a good deal more cash, and I don't have the extra room to set that up, nor the desire to monitor the system.

So aside from that, I guess it just sounds like normal equipment losses. A bit higher than a typical carboy or corny but nothing too dramatic. At this small size I think single wall in a freezer with good fan for circulation should be fine. As long as I can get 1bar of pressure that should be enough to make a difference vs force carbing.

I did hear about a friend of friend who had what we think is the Williams keg, which can dump and spund, so might give that one more look. My buddy is gonna ask about the gear and get back to me, although a quick google says that the Williams stuff isn't really much cheaper. We shall see.

I wish I could just use corny kegs like I've been doing, but some of these recipes really work best when you can do a full dump of the trub and the yeast. And there's always the risk of clogged poppets, etc. etc.

 

[augiedoggy]

The only difference really is conical vs unitank imho. A regular conical is just a bucket with a fancy yeast collection method. A unitank is a much bigger upgrade that allows you to do much more. My advise is don't waste your money on a conical. Get the cf5. Cheers

kinda disagree here... A conical is a decent upgrade for all the reasons I just mentioned in the other thread focused on this debate. A unitanks real advantage is being able to carbonate in the fermenter, something many home brewers have no need for. It also slows the brewing pipeline down. (theres also the lodo thing which requires a lot more equipment most homebrewers dont have to drive and keep oxygen away through the whole brewing process.) I carbonate in my kegs after cold crashing and removing yeast with dump port and kegging through the lower side valve which many shallow bottom slight conical bottom buckets lack.

at 3 gallon size a temp controlled fridge makes more sense than the chiller/glycol route.
I have used many different brand conicals myself and My suggestion is to get one thats actually sanitary and not one where you have to disassemble every weldless or threaded fitting each time to ensure no infection.
that said Ive been told the disassembly doesnt actually need to be done between each batch depending on how you use it and keep it between uses (full of sanitizer for example).

I also find the coils in the fermenter to be a step backwards and a pain in the ass and prefer jackets like the DIY discharge hose wrap or velcro cooling jacket from cool zone. Again this is not needed with a single smaller conical.

 

[augiedoggy]

Grainfathers "jacket" is more of a sweater vest. It doesnt cover the full area making it not great at dealing with smaller volumes

FYI thats how most "jacketed" conicals are made... some have dual jackets, one for heated liquid and one for cooled but even with 3 gallons in the grainfather conical theres enough contact area to control temps fine.

honestly if it were me Id just get one of the 7 gallon conicals... the headspace will be converted to co2 and actually be a bonus in the initial stages of fermentation but if you really dont want it just give the conical a shot of co2... no need for bags of air and such mentioned above, really.

btw I have kegged under low co2 pressure with my regular conicals...

 

[jekeane]

I have seen a handful of complaints about the grainfather conical not working well for small batches in the grainfather users group on FB. I have a GF I use for small batches but not their conical so I'm just speaking from what I have read.

FYI thats how most "jacketed" conicals are made... some have dual jackets, one for heated liquid and one for cooled but even with 3 gallons in the grainfather conical theres enough contact area to control temps fine.

honestly if it were me Id just get one of the 7 gallon conicals... the headspace will be converted to co2 and actually be a bonus in the initial stages of fermentation but if you really dont want it just give the conical a shot of co2... no need for bags of air and such mentioned above, really.

btw I have kegged under low co2 pressure with my regular conicals...

 

[SanPancho]

yeah, it seems im just overthinking it. the headspace isnt a concern. but as i dont want to use glycol or coils, its really just an issue of losses in a conical vs regular type fermenter. but while i'd be happy using my corny kegs, im too busy to catch things at precise time to natural spund. it'd be sitting on yeast and hops longer than id like. (and transfers always seem to clog) at least with conical i can dump that all and then spund, even if its a few days "late".

my main theory im looking at is whether the natural spund helps retain more hop character than force carb, especially with a stone. so i kinda need the full 1bar capability as opposed to just being able to hold a few psi for a transfer. dont need/dont want the stone to be honest. just more crap to clean.

 

[augiedoggy]

Fair enough..I had not heard about that until now but it makes sense.
Edit I meant to quote the above grainfather comment