Is this hydrometer......wrong?

[giuzep89]

What you're seeing in the picture is a reading taken with tap water. Does the reading look off to you? My impression is that the long line that should be indicating 1.000 is too low compared to the surface of the water. But then again, I don't trust how I'm looking at this, and I'd rather defer judgement to you. Opinions?

 

[mashdar]

That's a very confusing hydrometer marking.

But yes, it appears to be out of calibration. I guess the line under 1.000 is the 1.000 line, but those are some odd color coding and line choices.

edit: reading is typically at the bottom of the meniscus, or ~0.999 in this case. So you can add 0.001 to all readings and be pretty accurate.

 

[Rish]

What you're seeing in the picture is a reading taken with tap water. Does the reading look off to you? My impression is that the long line that should be indicating 1.000 is too low compared to the surface of the water. But then again, I don't trust how I'm looking at this, and I'd rather defer judgement to you. Opinions?

View attachment 884715

Use distilled water instead of tap and make sure it is a the proper calibration temperature. You should be able to find it on the hydrometer. Likely 68* F.

 

[lumpher]

The way I read it is it's 1.003. It's messed up when experienced brewers read it differently...

 

[worlddivides]

The way I read it is it's 1.003. It's messed up when experienced brewers read it differently...

Right. For me, it'd be 1.003 too.

The placing of the 1.000 is odd, but it seems clear to me that the yellow section is meant to indicate 1.000 to 1.010. But it's so bizarre how the numbers are located. For example, I would normally think that the place where the 10 is is 1.010, but it's not. It's the line ABOVE 10 that's 1.010, and the dash where the 10 is would be 1.012. Otherwise, it'd mean that the start of the dark section would be 1.008.

Yeah, very bizarre design. If the dashes really are located at the point of the number indicated, then the colors (white, yellow, black, etc.) almost seem intended to throw the person measuring the SG off.

 

[mashdar]

The thing that has me thinking it's the line below is spacing to 0.990. Dashes work, too, now that I look. But either way, that makes the background color really bizarre.

In conclusion, I'm at 1.001 now, lol

 

[worlddivides]

The thing that has me thinking it's the line below is spacing to 0.990. Dashes work, too, now that I look. But either way, that makes the background color really bizarre.

In conclusion, I'm at 1.001 now, lol

The fact that we're even having a discussion about what the FG could be shows just how poorly designed it is. With most hydrometers, you might argue between whether it's 1.008 or 1.007, but you wouldn't argue about whether it's 0.999 or 1.003.

 

[hottpeper13]

That's something Northern Brewer would sell. Ask me how I know!

 

[Zadkiel]

looks like .999 to me.

The only line that seems clearly defined is the .990 one, the 1.000 and 1.010 markings are unclear which line they pertain to. but if you take the .990 line and make the reasonable assumption that each smaller division is .002, and thus there are 5 of those between each .010 division, then that places the 1.000 line as the thin line beneath the 1.000 writing, which then lines up with the 1.010 line being the one beneath the '10'. If that's correct then that places the sample reading at 0.999

As someone else said, I'd check this with distilled water at the calibration temperature to confirm it's really slightly out.

 

[Zadkiel]

double post sorry

 

[bailey mountain brewer]

I agree with @mashdar and get 1.001 which is fairly close to 1.000 for water assuming the temp of the sample is correct. However the fact that we are getting responses all over the board is concerning, but hey, Im sure once you get used to it, it becomes easier to read... does the rest of the hydrometer have weird colored markings like that or just right around 1.000? Obviously most beers won't finish that low so it may be a moot point for measuring the gravity of your beer. Of course thats assuming the reading is 1.001 and you're OK with that accuracy.

 

[giuzep89]

I agree with @mashdar and get 1.001 which is fairly close to 1.000 for water assuming the temp of the sample is correct. However the fact that we are getting responses all over the board is concerning, but hey, Im sure once you get used to it, it becomes easier to read... does the rest of the hydrometer have weird colored markings like that or just right around 1.000? Obviously most beers won't finish that low so it may be a moot point for measuring the gravity of your beer. Of course thats assuming the reading is 1.001 and you're OK with that accuracy.

The colored bits are yellow for "bottling", red for "start beer" and blue for "start wine". So utter nonsense hahah and don't really help anything

 

[bailey mountain brewer]

Haha, gotcha.. yeah I've had a colored one when I first started, it came in my beginners beer kit and used it for several years. I still have it but haven't used it in quite some time. I eventually got ones that are just black and white with simple to read clear markings. But to answer your original question, I wouldn't say its wrong. Maybe .001 off but thats easy enough to just add .001 to your measurements, also as mentioned above, distilled water would be the correct sample to check it with.

 

[worlddivides]

The colored bits are yellow for "bottling", red for "start beer" and blue for "start wine". So utter nonsense hahah and don't really help anything

WOW. If that's the case, then that is so misleading. Who would think that a color from 1.098 to 1.008 is "bottling"? And for that matter, why is 1.010 and 1.012 not included in "bottling"? While most lagers might fall in that range, you'll find most ales do not fall below 1.008. In fact, I think the most common FG for ales is around 1.010. But that's in the middle of the black colored range. Which is what? "DANGER!"?

I'm also unaware of any beer other than sours that have been fermenting from a long time that is going to be bottled at 1.098. And if we're talking wine, you're probably not going to be bottling a wine with an FG of 1.008.

I've owned a lot of hydrometers with color on them, but they're almost always from a 0 to a 10, like 1.000 to 1.010, 1.010 to 1.020, 1.030 to 1.040, and so on. From 1.098 to 1.008, then 1.008 to 1.012, then 1.012 to 1.022 (or wherever that one ends) is just bizarre.

 

[IslandLizard]

In conclusion, I'm at 1.001 now, lol

I'd say the bottom of the water meniscus is a tad lower than midway between 1.000 and the next division of 1.002. So that makes it a tad lower than 1.001.

 

[marc1]

Also check the instructions that came with your hydrometer. (maybe on the stem of the hydrometer itself or its holding tube). It should give you the temp to read and may advise about the meniscus (mine is calibrated to read from the top of the meniscus, which isn't normal) .

 

[wsmith1625]

If the water temp is correct for the calibration temp, then your hydrometer is under by .001.

 

[Bobby_M]

The pink lines are the whole values .990, 1.00, and 1.010. The smaller tick marks are .002 increments. The blue/green line I drew is the bottom of the meniscus so it's reading .999 or .001 lower than water should be. This is close enough to accurate without knowing the temperature of the water sample and without knowing the calibration temperature of the device.

 

[giuzep89]

I can confirm that the temp is correct (20°C), and it's also what's mentioned on the hydrometer itself. I guess I can just add 1p to all my readings? Just to keep things easy?