Full Wort Hopping

[mlager]

I researched this method and was intrigued, but I'm a little confused. The idea is that you had hops prior to filling the boil kettle from the mash tun in an effort to impart hop flavor and aroma to the beer. We obviously add hops at various boil times to control how much the oils are broken down resulting in bitterness or aroma. With full wort hopping, wouldn't the result simply be the same as adding the hops at first boil? Any oils added during the full wort hopping will be boiled for the full duration, so I'm struggling to understand what exactly would be the technical benefits to doing a FWH. The way my mind is processing this, it seems gimmicky, but maybe I'm missing something obvious. Thanks for any clarification!

 

[Yooper]

Try "first wort hopping" when doing a search, as that would give you the result you're looking for.

I FWH all the time. The reason is that for some unknown reason (although theories abound) is that having the hops steep in the wort during the sparge before boiling them provides a smoother bitterness than traditional 60 or 90 minute hop additions, along with some flavor.

I don't notice much flavor, but I will agree to the smoother bitterness and I like that a lot.

 

[Qhrumphf]

It's something I haven't really played with. But I'm going to give it a try soon.

 

[jaydog2314]

Try "first wort hopping" when doing a search, as that would give you the result you're looking for.

I FWH all the time. The reason is that for some unknown reason (although theories abound) is that having the hops steep in the wort during the sparge before boiling them provides a smoother bitterness than traditional 60 or 90 minute hop additions, along with some flavor.

I don't notice much flavor, but I will agree to the smoother bitterness and I like that a lot.

agreed. I have been FWHing all my pales and IPAs since last year and I do feel the bitterness is much smoother than a traditional 60 or 90 min addition. Plus with my next hop addition not being until 20 or later that give me lots of time to relax and enjoy a beer or clean some equipment.

 

[JordanKnudson]

Try "first wort hopping" when doing a search, as that would give you the result you're looking for.

I FWH all the time. The reason is that for some unknown reason (although theories abound) is that having the hops steep in the wort during the sparge before boiling them provides a smoother bitterness than traditional 60 or 90 minute hop additions, along with some flavor.

I don't notice much flavor, but I will agree to the smoother bitterness and I like that a lot.

+1. I use first wort hops quite often and it does give a smoother bitterness. I'm less certain about the flavor contribution, as I usually add other flavor additions and so I can't speak to how much come from those versus the FWH.

 

[jaydog2314]

by the way I recently changed the way I calculate my FWH additions. I used to give them a 60 min addition value but recently switched over to giving them a 20 min addition value

 

[jethro55]

Interesting info here. My current IPA batch is an experiment like this for extract recipes. Instead of following the kit recipe schedule -
I added 4 oz hops to the 20 minute crystal malt steeping period. Sort of like mash hop/FWH. I shortened the boil to 40 minutes (versus recommended 75 minutes) so as to avoid wort scalding and added the second hop addition on schedule. For flameout hops, I added 4 more ounces and let it steep after flameout for 30 minutes. At the end of that, the wort was still at 208 degrees. So I am hoping that the flameout addition might result in something unusual.

It might not work , but it sure was fun to experiment !

 

[Calichusetts]

I don't even care if it really gives you more flavor or aroma, that is what my late hops/dry hops are for. For me, just plain easier. No need to time anything or wait a few extra minutes if your volume is slightly higher than normal, especially with a new recipe. Add hops, add heat, start something else.

 

[DurtyChemist]

I just did first wort hops in a batch and noticed I didn't get the big foam head when I added them directly during a boil. Don't care about smooth right now just doing it because it's easy enough and gives me time to mow the lawn, laundry, clean up grains, etc.

 

[brewski09]

by the way I recently changed the way I calculate my FWH additions. I used to give them a 60 min addition value but recently switched over to giving them a 20 min addition value

I noticed in beersmith it calculates a -80% utilization for FWH and that is completely counterintuitive to me. For reference, leaf hops are 0% or baseline and pellet hops are +10% utilization. Anyone have insight or any theory why this is?



Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

 

[JordanKnudson]

According to Brad Smith, BeerSmith is programmed calculate a FWH as 10% higher utilization than an equal-length boil addition. (i.e. if you add a FWH for a 60 minute boil, it should set utilization at 110% of that of a 60 minute boil addition). Are you sure your inputs are all correct, especially time?

 

[zwiller]

I just did first wort hops in a batch and noticed I didn't get the big foam head when I added them directly during a boil. Don't care about smooth right now just doing it because it's easy enough and gives me time to mow the lawn, laundry, clean up grains, etc.

+1 cuts the surface tension. I guess I am the dissenter; I don't notice anything different between FWH and a 60m addition. Reminds me of the technique to wait to add hops until wort is boiling for 5-10 minutes to coagulate most of the proteins for "cleaner" bitterness...

 

[brewski09]

According to Brad Smith, BeerSmith is programmed calculate a FWH as 10% higher utilization than an equal-length boil addition. (i.e. if you add a FWH for a 60 minute boil, it should set utilization at 110% of that of a 60 minute boil addition). Are you sure your inputs are all correct, especially time?

Very true. To another look at it and it was mash hopping that was -80%. I just didn't look closely enough the first time.

 

[catdaddy66]

This sounds very intriguing but I give my mashed grains to my pet chicken, Ronda! She may not survive the hop addition to the mash.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

 

[Brews]

I am definitely not a scientist but my understanding of FWH is that the alpha and beta acids have a longer time to steep in the wort at a lower temperature resulting in them releasing their volatile oils without removing them initially with a boil therefore saturating the wort with more essential aroma and bittering additions. The alpha acids continue to isomerize at boil (beta acids won't) but you have already retained much more of them in the initial FWH. Of course I could be way off but when you think about it, it does make some sense.

 

[jaydog2314]

This sounds very intriguing but I give my mashed grains to my pet chicken, Ronda! She may not survive the hop addition to the mash.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

first wort hopping is done in the kettle not the mash tun, but I have heard of mash hopping.

 

[wobdee]

first wort hopping is done in the kettle not the mash tun, but I have heard of mash hopping.

I have been experimenting in mash hopping and I'm definitely getting big hop flavor and aroma. I bet if you FWH for an hour before starting the boil you would get similar results as mash hopping or a end of boil hop stand.

 

[TobyG]

first wort hopping is done in the kettle not the mash tun, but I have heard of mash hopping.

I hadn't either until I went to a seminar about it at NHC. My take is that FWH is the way to go. I FWH everything.

 

[zwiller]

Anyone care to add details like size of additions? I simply cannot imagine an ounce or 2 FHW having more impact over a pound of hopburst/late additions/hopstand/dry hops.

 

[wobdee]

My 2.5 gal batch of IPL I used 3 oz Simcoe in the mash and 1/2 oz Columbus at 60 min. Turned out very hoppy, almost too hoppy.

 

[zwiller]

Thanks. Did the simcoe contribute any IBU (110%)? I'd be worried about hitting it too hard. Also, good point about contact time. I think that's not really been discussed much and could be a factor why I don't see the results. I can sparge in like 10-15 minutes...

 

[Ilan34]

almost too hoppy.

Does not compute.

 

[TobyG]

Anyone care to add details like size of additions? I simply cannot imagine an ounce or 2 FHW having more impact over a pound of hopburst/late additions/hopstand/dry hops.

Completely different animals. FWH is to provide some smoothness and complexity to bittering hops. Late hop additions still have their place. I use FWH in place of bittering hops for everything. I still do late hop additions and dry hopping for styles where I want that flavor and aroma. What FWH does for me is eliminate having to time my bittering additions on styles where it's just to offset the malt sweetness (i.e. Scots, Kolsch, etc.). I just sparge and go.

 

[TobyG]

Thanks. Did the simcoe contribute any IBU (110%)? I'd be worried about hitting it too hard. Also, good point about contact time. I think that's not really been discussed much and could be a factor why I don't see the results. I can sparge in like 10-15 minutes...

You have to also consider the time it takes to then bring it to boil. First wort hops are steeping during that time too. I suppose if you bring to boil very quickly and do a 60 minute boil, you might not get that much difference from a 60 minute addition. I batch sparge, so first wort hops are in the first runnings for roughly 20 minutes (drain plus batch) and then in the full wort for ramp up to boil. I also do a 90 minute boil for most styles, so that's a significantly longer contact time than a 60 minute addition.

 

[Orthobrewsky]

I noticed in beersmith it calculates a -80% utilization for FWH and that is completely counterintuitive to me. For reference, leaf hops are 0% or baseline and pellet hops are +10% utilization. Anyone have insight or any theory why this is?



Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

I think that is their utilization fort mash hops, while FWH is +10%.

 

[Transamguy77]

I have started doing FWH with my Ambers, Pales and IPA's, as already stated it has a much smoother bitterness than just a 60 minute addition. As far as oz everything I have read says to use slightly less than a 60 minute addition, I typically make 10 gallon batches so I start with 1.5-1.75oz of hops and since I fly sparge it takes almost an hour and with a 1 hour boil they are in contact for about 2 hours. I feel it adds some more complexity to the beer.

 

[wobdee]

Thanks. Did the simcoe contribute any IBU (110%)? I'd be worried about hitting it too hard. Also, good point about contact time. I think that's not really been discussed much and could be a factor why I don't see the results. I can sparge in like 10-15 minutes...

I'm pretty sure the Simcoe added some bitterness, not sure what percent but according to Promash my IBU's were over 200 since they calculate mash hops similar to FWH. No way was it that high.

I BIAB in a 400 micron stainless steel basket so not much hops get through to the boil, mostly the flavor and aroma oils make it into the wort before I pull the basket after mashing.