Effects of thinner mash???

[Uintafly]

I'm brewing a 2.5 gallon batch of oatmeal stout later today and in order to keep the PH where I want it, I need to have a 1.75 qt/lb grit ratio. What effects can I expect from the change from my normal 1.3-1.5 range?

Thanks for any input!

 

[ram5ey]

It won't be a problem. I regularly do full volume biab with a ratio in the 2-2.3 range with great results...

 

[Shred]

Anywhere from 1-2 quarts/lb is considered safe. If you start going a lot thinner you run the risk of extracting tannins and getting an overly-dry finish to your beer.

 

[Yooper]

It should be easier to stir and run off.

Otherwise, it should be the same exactly. Hitting your mash pH is crucial; a difference between 1.25 quarts/pound to 1.75 quarts/pound is meaningless.

 

[Uintafly]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

 

[ram5ey]

Anywhere from 1-2 quarts/lb is considered safe. If you start going a lot thinner you run the risk of extracting tannins and getting an overly-dry finish to your beer.

Um...no.

 

[Malticulous]

I always strike with the grain absorption plus half the boil volume and then sparge the other half. Most brews are over 2qt/lb. I hate to stir 1.3-1.5 mash. With my process that would be a huge beer.

 

[Denny]

I'm brewing a 2.5 gallon batch of oatmeal stout later today and in order to keep the PH where I want it, I need to have a 1.75 qt/lb grit ratio. What effects can I expect from the change from my normal 1.3-1.5 range?

Thanks for any input!

Nothing you'll ever notice. Maybe better efficiency.

 

[Uintafly]

Nothing you'll ever notice. Maybe better efficiency.

Interestingly enough, my efficiency did increase by about an additional 8%. But I also purchased my grain from a different LHBS, so I am not sure if it was the thinner mash or a different grain crush setting.


I also found keeping a steady mash temp was more difficult with the smaller volume in my 10 gal cooler.

 

[ram5ey]

I've been working on a spreadsheet of my mash efficiency in relation to mash thickness. I noticed about a year ago that my efficiency was mainly related to the thickness more than any other factor in my process (and in my system i just can't be a thin on some higher gravity beers). For instance I commonly hit 83% on 1.055 worts that are in the 2.6 range but that drops to about 73% on a 1.067 wort that was closed to 2 qt/lb (those might seem a little arbitrary but those are 2 beer gravities that I commonly brew). Check out BrauKaiser's website for some interesting experiment he did with mash thicknesses. This has worked well for my as a full volume BIABer on the high end all the way down to a Scottish 60 that came in at 1.034 that recently scored a 43 witch a really thin mash and no tannins...