How is this grain mill?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

BlueSunshine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
354
Reaction score
3
Location
Pittsburgh
I bought this grain mill last week:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000PCDTNI/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

Do you think this is adequate to crush grain? I tested it out and it looked a bit too fine.

Then again, I used a rolling pin on my last batch and I thought it was too fine (lots of stuff left behind, but then again I'm not sure if this is normal or not). Any opinions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've seen them but am not sure if anyone uses them for brewing...although it is of a similar style to the corona/victoria/philmill the many of us use.

The thing is though that we use spacers to open the gap in the grinding plate to adjust the crush, and I don't know, with that design, if you can adjust it.

Take a look at my thread to see what I am talking about.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f51/my-ugly-junk-corona-mill-station-90849/
 
I've seen them but am not sure if anyone uses them for brewing...although it is of a similar style to the corona/victoria/philmill the many of us use.

The thing is though that we use spacers to open the gap in the grinding plate to adjust the crush, and I don't know, with that design, if you can adjust it.

Take a look at my thread to see what I am talking about.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f51/my-ugly-junk-corona-mill-station-90849/

I was actually going to create that one in your thread before I bought this, but my electric drill isn't working. :(

I'm going to take a picture of the results of the grain mill and post it for better clarification.
 
photo2.jpg


photo.jpg


Seems a bit too fine, but I'm not sure.
 
I agree with doc...and since it looks like a sealed box it doesn't appear that there's a way to offset the gap better.

BUT!!!

There are some folks, like the hosts of the australian podcast Craftbrewer radio who claim that you get better efficiency by pulverizing...the only way to really tell is to brew something.

Make up a recipe on software like beersmith, maybe for a 2.5 gallon Smash....set the brewhouse efficiency for 75%, gring your grain and make the batch and see if you end up hitting your gravities....Check both the preboil and the original gravity to see how it turned out.
 
Depends on your mashtun...with my SS braid I'm pretty sure that powder sugar wouldn't pass through there...But your mileage may vary.

My last batch was a partial mash and I used a muslin bag and there was alot of crap that ended up in the wort. I shouldn't be too worried about this right?

Anyway, I took off a washer on my grain mill and its cracking the grains much better:

photo3.jpg


The picture quality it kinda crappy, but the ones that look like whole grains are cracked slightly. Does it look better?
 
That crush is on the opposite end of the spectrum. It appears barely adequate (though a better picture would help).

You absolutely will get better efficiency with a finer crush. Maltsters determine the potential yield of their grain by mashing very, very finely crushed samples under precisely controlled conditions. However, you risk tannin extraction and stuck sparges if you try to brew with something that looks like powder.
 
I think the grain in the first set of pix looks too fine, and I agree with "Yuri Rage" that the crush in the second pic appears insufficient....but it's hard to tell from that pic. If that pic isn't done with a cell phone, maybe your camera has a "macro" setting that will enable closer focusing on that grain......

I am a proud member of the "Ugly Junk" brigade, and I had to spend some time "dialing in" my crush before I started to get the efficiencies I wanted. All good now, though.......
 
I think the grain in the first set of pix looks too fine, and I agree with "Yuri Rage" that the crush in the second pic appears insufficient....but it's hard to tell from that pic. If that pic isn't done with a cell phone, maybe your camera has a "macro" setting that will enable closer focusing on that grain......

I think I'm going to take another picture when I get home.

I've read in some places that all you want to do is crack the grain a bit, and other places say you should break it up pretty well (got this from the wiki here). Is it more of a personal preference between the two?
 
THere are pictures of good grain crushes in the ugly junk thread. Some folks believe a good crush is 1/3 flour, 1/3 broken open husk, 1/3 shreaded. But I think it's all a matter of how dialed in your system is. Like I said the aussies on craftbrewer radio have systems that they have tweaked and tuned for 20-30 years worth of brewing and know their system and know how fine a crush they can get away with, and they talk about having filterbeds of rice hulls, and stuff, so if they can brew with "flour" and get great efficiency, it does't necessarily mean we can..
 
If you replaced the washer you removed with a thinner washer, I am wondering if you will see a result kind of in between the before and after picture.

Then again, how easy would it be to locate a thinner washer?
 
If you replaced the washer you removed with a thinner washer, I am wondering if you will see a result kind of in between the before and after picture.

Then again, how easy would it be to locate a thinner washer?

That might work, however I've looked online people can't find any washer at all. Maybe I can sand it down or something.
 
The ideal crush would involve splitting the husk into two and removing the starch (endosperm) intact. This is nearly impossible to do at a homebrew level (and the big breweries employ complex machinery, going as far as mixing water in as it is crushed -smooth rollers squirt out the endosperm and it is pretty amazing to see) so your best bet is crushed as well as possible to remove everything from inside the husk without the husk pieces being too small or fragmented.
 
Back
Top