Guiness Clone

[StarsNBars8]

Anyone have a good Guiness Clone?

I've tried a couple of stouts in the past, and I've found a few "clone tries," but I'm looking for that same rich, creamy, full finish...

Thanks all!

 

[McSwiggin']

Biermuncher has a tasty guinness clone in the recipe database.

here's a link:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=28239

 

[Hoosierbrewer]

There is one in an older BYO magazine also.

 

[StarsNBars8]

Thanks! This seems to be the latest request and it's been encouraged by others who wonder into the back yard.
I appreciate it.



Primary: Brown Hard Cider
Secondary: Cherry Heff
On Draft: Blue Moon and Honey Apricot Ale

Planning: Guiness Clone, Firestone Double Barrel Clone

 

[Hoosierbrewer]

Guniness is good, but you can brew a great stout yourself. Oatmeal stouts are usually a hit as are coffee stouts.

 

[Funkenjaeger]

I'm looking for that same rich, creamy, full finish...

Not to bash guinness clones by any means, but "rich" and "full" aren't words I'd use to describe guinness, and as far as "creamy", you're not going to really get the full effect there without serving it on nitro. If you're actually trying to get a rich, creamy, full stout you should explore other stout varieties (besides dry stout) - if you haven't tried other commercial stouts to put guinness in perspective, you definitely should. If you want 'creamy', oatmeal stouts are awesome. Sam Smith's oatmeal stout is great, and their imperial stout is so thick and creamy it's like drinking liquid silk.

I've done the guinness 'clone' from the BYO 150 clones issue, and it came out great - smooth, clean, dry, and very drinkable, not thick or very roasty like some stouts.

 

[StarsNBars8]

I'll look at some others, but I've never enjoyed an Oatmeal Stout. There are a couple of microbreweries around, and I always sample their Heff, Ale, and Stout... so I've had a handful.
As far as the Nitro goes - I've been thinking about putting in my keg, and replacing the CO2 for a while - I know in Portland many places have different types of beer on Nitro and they're great.

 

[Austinhomebrew]

Here is a trick. Take a stainless aeration stone and attach 2 feet of 1/4" hose to it. Connect it to the short gas diptube in your corny keg. Carbonate this way. The reason the nitrogen makes a creamy longer lasting head is because it has very tiny bubbles. Co2 has large bubbles and if you force Co2 through the stone it will produce small Co2 bubbles and simulate a
Co2/Nitrogen carbonation.

Great for stouts or any thing you want to be creamier.

Forrest

 

[Awfers]

Murphy's Irish Stout is considered "better" among some beer lovers (rounder, smoother, creamier).

But that all comes down to personal preference as well (the Coke is better than Pepsi argument)

I prefer Murphy's, when I can get it, and am keen to try brewing one..

As far as a recipe, there seem to be tons online, none of which I have tried I must admit...

 

[Funkenjaeger]

Here is a trick. Take a stainless aeration stone and attach 2 feet of 1/4" hose to it. Connect it to the short gas diptube in your corny keg. Carbonate this way. The reason the nitrogen makes a creamy longer lasting head is because it has very tiny bubbles. Co2 has large bubbles and if you force Co2 through the stone it will produce small Co2 bubbles and simulate a
Co2/Nitrogen carbonation.

That doesn't make any sense. CO2 is not stored in the keg as bubbles, it's stored as dissolved gas (and carbonic acid). While a stone would produce fine bubbles when carbonating, they'll just be dissolving. The head doesn't form until the beer exits the faucet and enters your glass, where the pressure is released, in which case the original method by which the carbonation got in there will not make any difference. The only way I can see this making a difference is if you were injecting a stream of micro CO2 bubbles into the beer AS you were dispensing it, so you'd basically be shooting some foam right down the beer line - which would require that the stone be either in-line with the out tube, or at least RIGHT next to its inlet.

 

[Awfers]

That doesn't make any sense. CO2 is not stored in the keg as bubbles, it's stored as dissolved gas (and carbonic acid). While a stone would produce fine bubbles when carbonating, they'll just be dissolving. The head doesn't form until the beer exits the faucet and enters your glass, where the pressure is released, in which case the original method by which the carbonation got in there will not make any difference. The only way I can see this making a difference is if you were injecting a stream of micro CO2 bubbles into the beer AS you were dispensing it, so you'd basically be shooting some foam right down the beer line - which would require that the stone be either in-line with the out tube, or at least RIGHT next to its inlet.

Most likely the reason he says to use the carb stone is that nitrogen does not easily dissolve into beer, hence the need to use the stone to get it into suspension (tiny bubbles dissolve more easily than simply putting a head of pressure in the keg) so that when it is poured, it escapes and forms that nice head. (Method: put a head pressure on the beer, then turn on the carb stone, Nitrogen is "forced" to dissolve in the beer)

In the brewery I worked for, we used the carb stone in the bright beer tank to carbonate the beer as it was much, much quicker than simply putting a head pressure on, and also gave smaller bubbles (maybe).

Pushing the beer with a CO2/Nitrogen mix can help, but the characteristics are not going to be the same as when you have at least some dissolved nitrogen.

You could also get a beer engine, and just use air (which is +/- 78% nitrogen) to create the head (similar to your idea of "in-lie" stone)

Cheers,
Awfers

 

[Funkenjaeger]

Most likely the reason he says to use the carb stone is that nitrogen does not easily dissolve into beer, hence the need to use the stone to get it into suspension (tiny bubbles dissolve more easily than simply putting a head of pressure in the keg) so that when it is poured, it escapes and forms that nice head..

But he wasn't talking about using any nitrogen, he was talking about using only CO2 and saying that the stone would 'imitate' the characteristics of serving on beer gas. Were he referring to nitrogen/beer gas, then I agree that the stone could potentially be useful for the reason you just described.

 

[Awfers]

But he wasn't talking about using any nitrogen, he was talking about using only CO2 and saying that the stone would 'imitate' the characteristics of serving on beer gas. Were he referring to nitrogen/beer gas, then I agree that the stone could potentially be useful for the reason you just described.

Hmm.. I read his post too quickly...

My memory is pretty foggy on this practice in particular, but I seem to recall a carb stone giving beer finer bubbles than carbonation from a head pressure, but don't quote me on that. I'll do some research..

 

[Funkenjaeger]

If it's possible, great, I just don't believe it without further evidence since it doesn't make sense at face value, so I'll be interested if you can turn anything up.

You would really have to do a good side-by-side test to find out. I only use CO2, but I've had beers come out with a creamy head a lot like what you get on nitro, without any special treatment. I also had a split batch (where the only difference between the two halves was the yeast, and the amount of cold break in the fermenter) where the head on each was drastically different. So, a side-by-side would have to be done carefully to really prove anything.

 

[eschatz]

i wonder if that would really work. i'm not seeing it as being a possibility. when i shake my corny dont i just disperse the bubbles in small amounts anyway? i've also seen faucets that have a some kind of air "thingy" that makes beer "smoother". i wonder if this is what you're talking about as being "in-line"?

 

[Funkenjaeger]

i've also seen faucets that have a some kind of air "thingy" that makes beer "smoother". i wonder if this is what you're talking about as being "in-line"?

I assume you're talking about "creamer" faucets, which allow you to "whip" air into the beer to produce a creamy head after you've finished filling the pint. That would be a pretty similar idea to using a stone in-line, just a little different way of accomplishing it.

Personally, I don't really see the point of artificially creating a head on the beer when using CO2 alone - it won't ever be the same as a true nitro head, and it doesn't accomplish any of the other characteristics you get with nitro (surge and settle, low carbonation but still long-lasting head, and the taste - ever tried the same beer side-by-side with CO2 on one and nitro on the other?). If the pseudo-nitro head is only for the sake of appearance when first poured, then that doesn't really interest me, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Awfers]

Personally, I don't really see the point of artificially creating a head on the beer when using CO2 alone - it won't ever be the same as a true nitro head, and it doesn't accomplish any of the other characteristics you get with nitro (surge and settle, low carbonation but still long-lasting head, and the taste - ever tried the same beer side-by-side with CO2 on one and nitro on the other?). If the pseudo-nitro head is only for the sake of appearance when first poured, then that doesn't really interest me, but that's just my opinion.

+1 to your thoughts on that

Some people like aesthetics. Nitrogen requires another tank, gauge etc.. or a CO2/N2 mix. My local pub runs this for all the English / Irish ales it serves.

Then again, "traditional" English ales are mostly flat beer that are pulled through a beer engine that partially aerates it (a sparkler will increase the aeration) creating a similar effect (not as pronounced or long lasting though in my experience)...

 

[McSwiggin']

F.Y.I. - Creamer faucets don't whip air into beer, they seperate air from the beer. The beer looses carbonation but saves it's head. The idea is remove metalic after tastes that are created from being saturated with gas.

The beer mix gas is used so that the beer doesn't over carbonate from the higher dispensing temps it requires to force through the restrictor plate.

CO2 does saturate into the liquid and the bubble size is generally determined by the vols of CO2 that are absorbed into the beer as well as the body of the liquid they are absorbed in. The aggression at which the CO2 arrives is a factor as well. Look at champagne, very carbonated yet can have small bubbles. Champagne yeast slowly releases small bubbles into wine as it ferments. Negative pressure is only half the battle. Saturation rate and aggression are also determining factors. Using a stone should produce a smaller bubble if the introduction rate is slower with less psi.

Nitrogen does generally absorb and release in tiny bubbles. The head is created by a combination of these bubbles staying together longer and the cavitation cread from the restictor plate.

I think Forrest's trick will help some in producing smaller bubbles but it definitely won't replace beer mix and a restrictor faucet. But then again, I don't think he was saying that either, just offering a cheaper alternative.

 

[mew]

In bottles, I've noticed that green beer tends to have larger bubbles than well-aged beer. So if you're bottling or just don't have beergas, the best approximation may just be to let it sit an extra few weeks.

 

[McSwiggin']

Well, this thread got me thinking so after my last post, I decided to pull out the text books from when I was in the draft business and happened to find some interesting stuff. I figured since we already hijacked the thread, I would share my findings:

As usual, my original statements on carbonating were only half right. CO2 can only form in bubbles larger than 0.4 microns. The theory used to be that bubbles formed in imperfections in the glass and escaped to the air when pressure was relieved. Turns out, tiny impurities (usually cells of cellulose acting as balloons) in the liquid cause the bubbles to form. This is greatly determined by the make up of the liquid and explains why club soda will loose it's gas faster than beer and beer losses it's gas faster than champagne.

I actually have an old Guinness manual on beer mix systems, and it clearly states that Guinness has a very low volume of CO2 in carbonation and the nitrogen is used to create more (and smaller) bubbles to be able to hold a head. The head itself is an entirely different animal produced by solids grabbing ahold of each other around the bubbles and trapping them, or holding there shape after the bubble is released (head formation and head retention respectively). These two factors are determined by whats in your grain bill.

That being said, If Forrest's "trick" is performed with lower amounts of CO2 for shorter periods, it may have some merrit on producing what appears to be "smaller" bubbles due to a lower carbonation since there is less pressure to fill the "balloons of cellulose" up. The stone at the bottom of the corny would alloe the CO2 to dissolve in the beer a lot easier at the right temperature. Typically when force carbing without a longer dip tube and diffuser, it requires higher pressure or longer periods of time to infiltrate the beer (an example would be the set it and forget it method versus the 35 psi for 36 hours method).

That being said, it would still be possible but would require lower pressure for longer periods of time at the correct temperature for your desired saturation. This will in no way duplicate the low carbonated/high head retention of a beer mix/creamer faucet combination, nor would it create a smaller bubble in the finished product. It would Make a closer simulation than your standard carbing practices for most other beers.

The amount of gas (any gas) will definitely change the flavor profile of the beer along with the mouthfeel. Use an online CO2 vol chart to determine your desired carbonation.

 

[McSwiggin']

Now i'm neck deep in bubble study. I got to researching bubble size and bubble production and most of the info I could find was relating to the quest for smaller bubbles in Champagne. There is a ton of great info on bubble and foam dynamics.

Here is some good reading on the quest for smaller bubbles and exactly what a bubble is:

http://www.europhysicsnews.com/full/13/article3/article3.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031216075207.htm

Both of these links offer great insight to saturation, bubble formation and production rates along with chemical reasons for bubble size.

If you have nothing better to do than read dry, scientific data on something most of us never think about, then have at it.

 

[StarsNBars8]

Hell... I've spent the money on multiple kegs, with dual taps, and a cooler large enough to hold three 1/2 barrels - I might as well just go get a nitro system and run it when I finish my stouts, huh?

I appreciate all of the input (and homework) on this one. Bottoms up!

 

[farmbrewernw]

Hmm, I didn't really feel like reading this whole thread as it seems like it became an argument over nitro. To the OP try Ode to Arthur Irish Stout it is a very good clone and the flaked barley gives you a creamyness without nitro. Just look in the Stout category in the recipe section.

 

[McSwiggin']

Hmm, I didn't really feel like reading this whole thread as it seems like it became an argument over nitro. To the OP try Ode to Arthur Irish Stout it is a very good clone and the flaked barley gives you a creamyness without nitro. Just look in the Stout category in the recipe section.

Nobody is arguing over anything. This is a discussion which is what occurs on a forum. The OP was given a link to "Ode to Arthur" in the first reply made. The thread was hijacked, however how can you attempt to clone something if you don't try to duplicate every aspect of it. In my opinion, the discussion was in-line with the thread and Funkenjaeger did the OP justice by kicking off the nitro discussion.

 

[StarsNBars8]

I'd have to agree with you (McSwiggin'), and it's my posting...
Not only did I get info on a good clone, but I've already gone out and picked up a Nitro mix to hook up.
Thanks Guys.

 

[ben the brewman]

i have a guiness clone and a murphys clone out of the clone brews book if any body wants them let me know and i will post them

 

[McSwiggin']

i have a guiness clone and a murphys clone out of the clone brews book if any body wants them let me know and i will post them

Sounds good, post them in the recipe database so everyone can find them.

 

[farmbrewernw]

Sorry to get on anyone, didn't mean to ruffle anyone's feathers, mostly what I wanted to say was that you don't need to spend the money on a nitro setup if you don't want to, but if you have the money by all means go for it, I would if I could. And yes after reading more of the thread I saw the link to Ode to Arthur, I guess I just wanted to enforce that it is really a good clone even when served with plain CO2.

 

[McSwiggin']

No worries, no ruffled feathers here.

 

[the_bird]

I just brewed a beer very similar to BM's, but without the acid malt. Guiness clones are very simple; 65% based malt, 25% flaked barley, 10% roasted barley. Mine was closer to 12% roasted barley, so it needed a little bit more time to "settle out." The flaked barley is key - it lets the beer be simultanously dry and smooth. Drink it a little warm and lesser-carbed, that helps out as well.