Courage Russian Imperial Stout (Clone Brews)

[HibsMax]

I tried this in the Recipes / Ingredients forum but I don't think that gets nearly as much traffic as this forum does, so I deleted it and re-posted it here. Hoping for a little better luck.



I have a batch of this Imperial Stout on the go and I have a question about the process (the book is a little lacking in some regards).

Ferment - Ferment in the primary fermenter 7 days, or until fermentation slows, then siphon into the secondary fermenter. Add oak chips.

Prime and Bottle - Three days before bottling, prime the beer in the 2nd stage with another dose of the same strain of fresh yeast. Bottle when fermentation is complete.

I racked to the secondary after 6 days. Fermentation had slowed down and the SG was 1025 (target is 1022-1024). It's been in the secondary for 8 days now. My question is why do I need to pitch more yeast? DO I need to pitch more yeast? To me it seems that my fermentation was almost done and I feel sure that it is now (although I haven't taken multiple readings yet, I'm just guessing (for now) based on the last reading and the time since I took it). This beer requires 8 months of conditioning after carbonation, so I guess about 9 months in total.

I have another question about conditioning bigger beers. I know that to carbonate I want my beer to be above 70* F. Does that rule still apply to conditioning or can I move my bottles to the basement after carbonation? I'm running out of closet space.

Cheers!

 

[DrummerBoySeth]

Some people like to re-pitch fresh yeast at bottling time on big beers like a RIS. For beers that are above 10% alcohol, or beers that have been in the fermenter for more than 6 weeks it is sort of like "cheap insurance" High alcohol content stresses out the yeast, and makes them less healthy. Long fermentations allow the majority of the yeast to fall out of suspension and settle on the bottom of the fermenter. Either of these conditions can result in insufficient yeast for carbonation. re-pitching simply guarantees there are enough healthy yeasts to complete the carbonation process.

As for bottle conditioning, it is absolutely fine to move the beer to the cellar after it carbonates. I would give it 3 weeks to a month at room temperature to finish carbonating, then move it downstairs after that.

 

[mrbowenz]

Good advice by DrummerboySeth, at a FG of 1.025 , you are probably done, rack to a conditioning tank/carboy that is very clean and well sanitized and let this ale sit for 9 months, then add your priming yeast or sugar and bottle , the beer will be remarkable, but be patient ! repeat this process as often as you can afford.

 

[HibsMax]

Some people like to re-pitch fresh yeast at bottling time on big beers like a RIS. For beers that are above 10% alcohol, or beers that have been in the fermenter for more than 6 weeks it is sort of like "cheap insurance" High alcohol content stresses out the yeast, and makes them less healthy. Long fermentations allow the majority of the yeast to fall out of suspension and settle on the bottom of the fermenter. Either of these conditions can result in insufficient yeast for carbonation. re-pitching simply guarantees there are enough healthy yeasts to complete the carbonation process.

As for bottle conditioning, it is absolutely fine to move the beer to the cellar after it carbonates. I would give it 3 weeks to a month at room temperature to finish carbonating, then move it downstairs after that.

Thanks, now I understand, it's a safety measure for the most part.

Good advice by DrummerboySeth, at a FG of 1.025 , you are probably done, rack to a conditioning tank/carboy that is very clean and well sanitized and let this ale sit for 9 months, then add your priming yeast or sugar and bottle , the beer will be remarkable, but be patient ! repeat this process as often as you can afford.

Can you tell me why you would do it that way? I am not disagreeing with your suggestion, it's just that it differs from the recipe I have. The recipes says to carbonate then condition for 8 months. You're suggesting I leave it in the tertiary (it's already in the secondary) for 9 months.

EDIT : I definitely know I have to be patient. I am not going to try and rush this beer. I have plenty in the pipeline right now, I just wanted a couple of bigger beers to be chugging along in the background.

 

[mrbowenz]

Thanks, now I understand, it's a safety measure for the most part.


Can you tell me why you would do it that way? I am not disagreeing with your suggestion, it's just that it differs from the recipe I have. The recipes says to carbonate then condition for 8 months. You're suggesting I leave it in the tertiary (it's already in the secondary) for 9 months.

EDIT : I definitely know I have to be patient. I am not going to try and rush this beer. I have plenty in the pipeline right now, I just wanted a couple of bigger beers to be chugging along in the background.

It's not really a component of the recipe, more of a procedural process I and several others use, called bulk aging or bright tank lagering. If you have any additional fermentation going to take place, probably best done in a bulk aging tank, rather than adding additional priming sugar or yeast for bottle conditioning now. When your certain it's completed fermenting, then you have no worries of selecting the right Co2 levels by priming. Just a different school of thought.

 

[HibsMax]

Is there any difference between bulk aging before carbonation vs. conditioning post-carbonation? If not then I would probably take the bulk aging approach and save myself 53 bottles for now. The assumption is that fermentation has indeed quit.

 

[mrbowenz]

Is there any difference between bulk aging before carbonation vs. conditioning post-carbonation? If not then I would probably take the bulk aging approach and save myself 53 bottles for now. The assumption is that fermentation has indeed quit.

If it is truly done fermenting, then either approach would be fine, not sure if there is a VS school of thought here, others may disagree( probably so ) , but for aging IMO, bulk works well and since the whole batch is one liquid body,and probably more consistent. Your experience and others maybe be different, but this works well for me.

 

[HibsMax]

Well the fact that this works well for you is good enough for me at this point in time. I'll only know if it works for me in about 10 months time. All a newbie can do is climb on the shoulders of the giants who have gone before them, and that's what I am doing.

I'm coming back to flame you in February next year if you're wrong!!!

Q. If I was to rack to a tertiary, would you recommend taking the oak chips with it? Or just the beer?

EDIT : SG measured today was 1024, so 1 point down in 9 days.

 

[mrbowenz]

Well the fact that this works well for you is good enough for me at this point in time. I'll only know if it works for me in about 10 months time. All a newbie can do is climb on the shoulders of the giants who have gone before them, and that's what I am doing.

I'm coming back to flame you in February next year if you're wrong!!!

Q. If I was to rack to a tertiary, would you recommend taking the oak chips with it? Or just the beer?

Hah, what could I possibly know !

It depends on the type of oak chips you are using, if you are looking to recreate a Courage IRS pre WWI , then the types of barrels they used was a Russian oak called Memel Oak. Native English grown oak was scarce during both WW1 and 2 , and it's is not directly known if British brewers had lined their barrels with pitch to prevent oaked flavors. If you have French oak, then that should impart a different and more subtle flavor, if you are using American oak, then I would definitely not add them to your long term aging process, they will add a pronounced "Oaked" flavor.

Mark and Tess's books are a good starting point, but only from a grist bill and generalized recipe formulation. To really create clones, you need to cast a wider net and search out all the aspects of what made the beers unique and taste the way they do. Also all beers and ales are a moving target through time, many ales look totally different today then they did during different times in history, because of economics, supply and demand, war, and tariffs or political regimes.

 

[HibsMax]

Hah, what could I possibly know !

It depends on the type of oak chips you are using, if you are looking to recreate a Courage IRS pre WWI , then the types of barrels they used was a Russian oak called Memel Oak. Native English grown oak was scarce during both WW1 and 2 , and it's is not directly known if British brewers had lined their barrels with pitch to prevent oaked flavors. If you have French oak, then that should impart a different and more subtle flavor, if you are using American oak, then I would definitely not add them to your long term aging process, they will add a pronounced "Oaked" flavor.

Mark and Tess's books are a good starting point, but only from a grist bill and generalized recipe formulation. To really create clones, you need to cast a wider net and search out all the aspects of what made the beers unique and taste the way they do. Also all beers and ales are a moving target through time, many ales look totally different today then they did during different times in history, because of economics, supply and demand, war, and tariffs or political regimes.

OK. I'm going to remove the oak chips when I rack to the tertiary, I would rather err on the side of caution. I can't imagine me saying, "Mmmmm, nice but not oaky enough", but I can imagine the opposite happening. When I measured the SG today I tasted the sample and it didn't have a pronounced oakiness, but I am sure that will / could all change after another 8 months.

Thanks for your help.