Lagunitas IPA Clone

[DrNuBingTon]

All-Grain - Lagunitas IPA Clone

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recipe Type: All Grain
Yeast: Wyeast 1968
Batch Size (Gallons): 6
Original Gravity: 1.060
Final Gravity: 1.018-1.020
IBU: 46.8
Boiling Time (Minutes): 60
Color: 9srm
Primary Fermentation (# of Days & Temp): 5-6 days depending on temp
Secondary Fermentation (# of Days & Temp): 4 days dry hop
Tasting Notes: Delicious IPA

I was searching for a clone for Lil Sumpin Wild and came across this podcast staring headbrewer of Lagunitas Jeremy where he discusses how they make their Lagunitas IPA. Here are the brief notes I had taken during listening to this podcast. I plan on brewing it next year in a 10 gallon batch.

Lagunitas IPA

Gal. batch
OG: 14.82Plato (1.061SG)
FG: 4.5Plato (1.018SG)
SRM: 9
IBU: 46.8

75% American Two Row
9% Crystal C15 (Crisp)
5.7% Munich 10L
6% Wheat Malt
3.8% Crystal 60L

.05g/Liter Summit 18.5% @ 60min
.3g/Liter Horizon 12% @ 60min
1g/Liter Willamette 4.75% @ 30min
.5g/Liter Centennial 10% @ 30min
1.50/Liter Cascade 5.75% @ 1min
.25Lbs/BBL Cascade 5.75% @ Dry Hop @68F
.25Lbs/BBL Centennial 9% @ Dry Hop @68F

Mash Temp: 160F, Boil Time 60min

100PPM Calcium Sulfate in mash

English yeast : WY1968
Ferment Temp: 66F (Slowly raise to 70F, during a period of 5-6days)

 

[Tiber_Brew]

Did Jeremy mention his mash temps? 160F seems a bit high to me. I just had a Lagunitas IPA today, and I would guess a mash temp of around 154 or so, based on the sweet/dry balance.

TB

 

[DrNuBingTon]

Yes he did, he said currently they use a step mash but before they had that capability they were doing a single infusion with a mash temp of "believe it or not" 160F. There is a back and forth about the advantages of a higher mash temp and the reactions of the enzymes at 160F.

 

[broadbill]

strike temp or mash temp of 160? There is a difference.

 

[DrNuBingTon]

strike temp or mash temp of 160? There is a difference.

Mash temp, thanks broadbill they were shooting for a mash temp of 160F.

 

[Revvy]

So this hasn't actually been brewed yet??? THen It doesn't belong in here. It belongs in recipe/ingredients. The databse is actually for "tried and true" recipes that have been brewed.

When working with untested recipes, we put them in the recipe/ingredients section. In fact the mods are talking about doing another purge of unbrewed/untried recipes from the database.

Mant folks go by a three brew rule, brewing and tweaking the recipe three times before posting it in this section.

There's a good thread discussing it here. https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/how-many-times-do-you-have-brew-beer-125458/

Or here. https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f12/when-do-you-post-your-recipe-113848/

We kinda hope that people on here would just police themselves, and not add to the database unbrewed recipes..Not to at least post the recipe til they are drinking the beer...not the day before they brew it...and put that in the other section...but most new people don't know the distinction...

Especially since this is a clone, it is really going to take a few iterations of the recipe til you can actually get away with calling it that.

I'm going to let the mods know, and see if they will ove this thread to the other area. And if I miss-read forgive me i haven't had my coffee yet.

 

[Tiber_Brew]

Yes he did, he said currently they use a step mash but before they had that capability they were doing a single infusion with a mash temp of "believe it or not" 160F. There is a back and forth about the advantages of a higher mash temp and the reactions of the enzymes at 160F.

That's in the alpha-amylase range, which, without any prior beta rest, will give you a sweeter beer, with very high concentration of unfermentable sugar. I did not get that from the Lagunitas IPA that I had this week. I'm thinking that since he mentioned he does a step mash now, that he does adequate beta rests before hanging out in the 160's F.

TB

(Oh, Revvy's right, so don't be surprised if the mods move this thread.)

 

[remilard]

That's in the alpha-amylase range, which, without any prior beta rest, will give you a sweeter beer, with very high concentration of unfermentable sugar.

No it won't.

 

[Tiber_Brew]

No it won't.

Your arguments are compelling.

Care to expand on that? Can you somehow prove that alpha amylase don't produce unfermentable sugars?

In my 6 years of all grain experience, and in every book I've read, and every brewer I've talked to, mashing low yields drier beer, mashing higher yields sweeter beer. It's a balance of alpha and beta amylase and the products of their activity.

From the homebrew wiki:

Because these enzymes operate at different temperatures, by adjusting the temperature to favor one enzyme over another the brewer can adjust the fermentability of the sugars in the wort.

TB

 

[Tiber_Brew]

OR

That's in the alpha-amylase range, which, without any prior beta rest, will give you a sweeter beer, with very high concentration of unfermentable sugar.

No it won't.

Would you have agreed if I had said "sweeter beer, with higher concentration of unfermentable sugar." ?

Your dissent is puzzling me (if you can't tell).

 

[calpyro]

I think that I will try the recipe and see if works

 

[Tiber_Brew]

This beer hides its sweetness very well, must be the hop balance.

It's a good beer, worth cloning.

TB

 

[Revvy]

I've always found that lagunitas beers have a unique caramally sweetness that I really like in their beers. That's one of the reasons I gravitated to this thread to begin with. It's a house flavor that I find in all their offerings. Is it the yeast?

 

[beeboy]

Revvy, I too have wondered what gives Lagunitas brews their distinctive taste, there is a common thread amongst almost all of their brews. I too would like to pinpoint it.

 

[Sparky]

Well, that's all well and said, but has anyone come back - post brewing and testing the above recipes - and done a comparison????? Revvy, this goes back to your other post about "testing and posting the validity of recipes."

No bashing, just looking for valid post-mortem on recipes - good or bad.

 

[calpyro]

Nice

 

[kanzimonson]

Just because you mash higher and produce a more dextrinous wort, that doesn't mean that it's sweeter. Yes it will have a higher final gravity, but again, this does not mean it will taste sweeter. Unfermentable sugars don't taste sweet.

 

[Tiber_Brew]

Just because you mash higher and produce a more dextrinous wort, that doesn't mean that it's sweeter. Yes it will have a higher final gravity, but again, this does not mean it will taste sweeter. Unfermentable sugars don't taste sweet.

There is some debate about this, but in my experience, it will vary with malts and with hops usage. Some unfermentable sugars add more body but not as much sweetness, some add both. To say that no unfermentable sugars ever taste sweet is an incorrect generalization. Whether mashing high in itself will impart sweetness will depend. Sometimes the extra body is perceived as "sweet" by the person.

TB

 

[calpyro]

Well, that's all well and said, but has anyone come back - post brewing and testing the above recipes - and done a comparison????? Revvy, this goes back to your other post about "testing and posting the validity of recipes."

No bashing, just looking for valid post-mortem on recipes - good or bad.

Really?

 

[Tiber_Brew]

Regardless, I'm going to give this recipe a shot.

Anyone tried their Pils?

 

[munklunk]

Really?
Jamil Zainasheff made this home-brew scale recipe on the Brewing Network’s Can You Brew It show. Jeremy the head brewer at Lagunitas gave every detail on how this beer is made. The ingredients, the processes and it has been compared side-by-side with the commercial Lagunitas IPA. The consensus of this clone attempt was that the beer was cloned.
How much proof does the HBT need? Jamil Zainasheff and his show deserves a little bit of credibility here in my opinion. If he says that a beer recipe is cloned, will you believe it? Who else is a better brewer that needs to brew it? Does Lagunitas need to brew it and report back on the recipe?

Calm down there, Sparky. The proof tends come when other members make the same recipe and report back with their results. That is the point of an interactive recipe database. Everyone knows when Jamil and co. clone something then it is assumed to be done right, but no one here has tried it yet, especially with something as different as a 160 mash temp.

 

[Revvy]

Really?
Jamil Zainasheff made this home-brew scale recipe on the Brewing Network’s Can You Brew It show. Jeremy the head brewer at Lagunitas gave every detail on how this beer is made. The ingredients, the processes and it has been compared side-by-side with the commercial Lagunitas IPA. The consensus of this clone attempt was that the beer was cloned.
How much proof does the HBT need? Jamil Zainasheff and his show deserves a little bit of credibility here in my opinion. If he says that a beer recipe is cloned, will you believe it? Who else is a better brewer that needs to brew it? Does Lagunitas need to brew it and report back on the recipe?

Calm down there, Sparky. The proof tends come when other members make the same recipe and report back with their results. That is the point of an interactive recipe database. Everyone knows when Jamil and co. clone something then it is assumed to be done right, but no one here has tried it yet, especially with something as different as a 160 mash temp.

The difference is that the recipe database isn't meant to be interactive. It is mean to be a collection of proven and brewed recipes that anybody can trust. That any new brewer with little experiences can CONFIDENTLY go into and pull ANY recipe and trust that it already has been brewed, hopefully more than once, and isn't just someone's experiment or some first time recipe creator's attempt at coming up with something.

The RECIPE/INGREDIENT section IS an interactive area where people can tweak a recipe, ask for help on a recipe, or discuss the process of a recipe whether it has been brewed or not.

Most of us are very protected of the databse, because we want folks to have faith in the recipes. A lot of us may work on a recipe for years before committing it to the databse...

Me personally, I have probably 50-60 recipes and experimental things in the forum section, but I only have, iirc 3 currently in the database. I don't put a recipe in there until I've got to the point where I don't need to change anything (unless I want to experiment) where brewing it as is, will make a great tasting recipe....

The database to a lot of us, is where we believe we can stand behind our recipe, where we put our reputations on the line. If someone brews one of my database recipes, I want to feel confident in knowing that that recipe has been vetted...

In fact back when I started you couldn't post comments on the recipes in the database, it was locked. But they decided to open it up, not for discussions like we're having but just so folks can say "hey I brewed it" so that coming, looking at the recipe can say, oh 50 people brewed it and said it was great."

But not what we're doing here, now that the thread was moved, where we are asking questions and pointing out discrepencies in it. SO HOPEFULLY the OP can brew a great recipe, and many of us perhaps will too, THEN it can go into the database.....

think of the database as HBT's "canon" or bible, it is one of the ways we represent ourselves to the outside world.

 

[Sparky]

Calm down there, Sparky. The proof tends come when other members make the same recipe and report back with their results. That is the point of an interactive recipe database.

Munklunk & Revvy. Thanks for your feedback. My venting was more towards going to the general recipe site and viewing a plethora of recipes with following comments of:
- I wanna brew it
- I'm gonna brew it
- I'm gonna brew it with the fill-in-the-blank changes
then....
nothing
No feedback, no pos/neg, no nothing.

However, both of you are correct. The good ones eventually DO get bubbled up with more replies and stickies. However, it would be good to see some feedback on those that didn't turn out so well, sort of on-going-tweek of the recipe - until (perceived) perfection.

 

[DrNuBingTon]

Regardless, I'm going to give this recipe a shot.

Anyone tried their Pils?

Last week I had the pleasure of drinking some at a local eatery. So far I've enjoyed every Lagunitas beer I've drank; Lil Sumpin Wild (my first), Lil Sumpin Sumpin, IPA, and Pils. I have a bottle of Hop Stoopid in my cellar that I'm sure I will enjoy!

There are so many recipes I'd like to try and not enough time to brew them so I can't get to making this until next year But getting the recipe from the brewer sounds good to me and I would love to hear feedback from anyone that has brewed this before I get a chance to.

 

[Revvy]

Munklunk & Revvy. Thanks for your feedback. My venting was more towards going to the general recipe site and viewing a plethora of recipes with following comments of:
- I wanna brew it
- I'm gonna brew it
- I'm gonna brew it with the fill-in-the-blank changes
then....
nothing
No feedback, no pos/neg, no nothing.

Well that's what we try to prevent on HBT, in the Database, and that is why the mods moved this thread to recipes/ingredients section.

 

[calpyro]

I wanna brew it

 

[DrNuBingTon]

I wanna brew it

Try brewing this yet?

 

[Schwind]

Not sure if this is relevant anymore but I met the owner of Lagunitas at Savor last year and got a chance to ask him about the residual sweetness that almost all if their beers have. I love that brewery and the owner is a really nice guy.
He said they do mash around 160 and they have an incredible yeast strain that can chew through anything. That was all he said and I told him I was surprised that the temp was so high. that's when he mentioned the yeast.

 

[kanzimonson]

They use some version of the English ale yeast - Wyeast 1968 or WLP002. This is a malty yeast with a sweeter finish. I love their beers and I love how they use this yeast. It's my preferred house yeast as well.

 

[LarryC]

So I'll ask the question that the Dr. asked above - anybody brew this yet?

Inquiring minds want to know...

 

[maager]

So I'll ask the question that the Dr. asked above - anybody brew this yet?

Inquiring minds want to know...

It is in primary as we speak. I too got the recipe off of the Can You Brew It Show. Here is what I used for a 6 gallon batch:

Recipe Specifications
--------------------------
Batch Size: 6.00 gal
Boil Size: 7.97 gal
Estimated OG: 1.060 SG
Estimated Color: 9.4 SRM
Estimated IBU: 49.7 IBU
Brewhouse Efficiency: 60.00 %
Boil Time: 60 Minutes

Amount Item
12.54 lb Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM)
1.50 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM)
1.00 lb Wheat Malt, Ger (2.0 SRM)
0.94 lb Munich Malt (9.0 SRM)
0.63 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 60L (60.0 SRM)

0.60 oz Columbus (Tomahawk) [14.00 %] (60 min)
0.40 oz Centennial [10.00 %] (30 min) Hops 7.5 IBU
0.81 oz Williamette [4.75 %] (30 min) Hops 7.2 IBU
1.20 oz Cascade [5.50 %] (1 min) Hops 4.0 IBU
0.74 oz Cascade [5.50 %] (Dry Hop 5 days)
0.74 oz Centennial [10.00 %] (Dry Hop 5 days) Hops -


Single Infusion, Light Body, Batch Sparge
Step Time Name Description Step Temp
75 min Mash In Add 5.20 gal of water at 171.6 F 160.0 F


Wyeast 1968 was used with a 2-litre starter. Just brewed it yesterday, so I'll update the thread in about 4-5 weeks with the result.

 

[bmock79]

It is in primary as we speak. I too got the recipe off of the Can You Brew It Show. Here is what I used for a 6 gallon batch:

Recipe Specifications
--------------------------
Batch Size: 6.00 gal
Boil Size: 7.97 gal
Estimated OG: 1.060 SG
Estimated Color: 9.4 SRM
Estimated IBU: 49.7 IBU
Brewhouse Efficiency: 60.00 %
Boil Time: 60 Minutes

Amount Item
12.54 lb Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM)
1.50 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM)
1.00 lb Wheat Malt, Ger (2.0 SRM)
0.94 lb Munich Malt (9.0 SRM)
0.63 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 60L (60.0 SRM)

0.60 oz Columbus (Tomahawk) [14.00 %] (60 min)
0.40 oz Centennial [10.00 %] (30 min) Hops 7.5 IBU
0.81 oz Williamette [4.75 %] (30 min) Hops 7.2 IBU
1.20 oz Cascade [5.50 %] (1 min) Hops 4.0 IBU
0.74 oz Cascade [5.50 %] (Dry Hop 5 days)
0.74 oz Centennial [10.00 %] (Dry Hop 5 days) Hops -


Single Infusion, Light Body, Batch Sparge
Step Time Name Description Step Temp
75 min Mash In Add 5.20 gal of water at 171.6 F 160.0 F


Wyeast 1968 was used with a 2-litre starter. Just brewed it yesterday, so I'll update the thread in about 4-5 weeks with the result.

So how did it turn out???

 

[maager]

So how did it turn out???

It turned out really well, just low ABV compared to the real beer. Upped the grain in the second attempt and that is in primary now.

Having issues getting 1968 to ferment below 1.021 on the higher ABV version. Even pitched a 3L starter, ferment took off right away and fermented it at 68F, bumping to 70F after a couple days. The yeast just likes to give up early.

 

[bmock79]

It turned out really well, just low ABV compared to the real beer. Upped the grain in the second attempt and that is in primary now.

Having issues getting 1968 to ferment below 1.021 on the higher ABV version. Even pitched a 3L starter, ferment took off right away and fermented it at 68F, bumping to 70F after a couple days. The yeast just likes to give up early.

I just recently used the 1968 on a brown ale with an og of 1064 and it got down to 1018/1019ish for around 69-70% attenuation.

That was with a liter and a half starter.

I have read lots of threads about this yeast being tough tough to finish. And then I have also read lots of people exceeding 75% with this yeast.

 

[maager]

I just recently used the 1968 on a brown ale with an og of 1064 and it got down to 1018/1019ish for around 69-70% attenuation.

That was with a liter and a half starter.

I have read lots of threads about this yeast being tough tough to finish. And then I have also read lots of people exceeding 75% with this yeast.

Agreed. I have used 1968 in a few beers as it is a yeast I wash and have on hand more than most. I think with this beer it is stalling because the mash temp is so high (160F), and I am guessing 1968 quits early because it is not good at eating the slightly less ferment-able sugars that are present. No science to back that up, but just a guess.

Shaking seems to help, large starters (3L) seem to help and ramping the temp at the end of fermentation seems to help. Shaking seems to help get you that last point or so at the end, not much more.

I have another beer that had an OG of 1.058 and 1968, that is mashed at 149F and 1968 got it down to 1.015 no problems.

Right now the second attempt at this Lagunitas IPA is sitting in primary, and has been for two weeks. OG was 1.069 (I upped the grain the second time), and the FG is sitting right around 1.023-1.024, too high for my tastes.

 

[bmock79]

Agreed. I have used 1968 in a few beers as it is a yeast I wash and have on hand more than most. I think with this beer it is stalling because the mash temp is so high (160F), and I am guessing 1968 quits early because it is not good at eating the slightly less ferment-able sugars that are present. No science to back that up, but just a guess.

Shaking seems to help, large starters (3L) seem to help and ramping the temp at the end of fermentation seems to help. Shaking seems to help get you that last point or so at the end, not much more.

I have another beer that had an OG of 1.058 and 1968, that is mashed at 149F and 1968 got it down to 1.015 no problems.

Right now the second attempt at this Lagunitas IPA is sitting in primary, and has been for two weeks. OG was 1.069 (I upped the grain the second time), and the FG is sitting right around 1.023-1.024, too high for my tastes.

Damn, thats a bit high for my tastes as well.

I am looking to brew this but will probably not be able to get to it until after the new year, I will def post my mash schedule and results when I get to it.

Cheers

 

[insp79]

We brewed the Lagunita's IPA this past weekend. It was our first beer to brew on the new brew stand. Thank you for sharing the recipe. It is currently percolating in the fermenter. I will let you know how it turns out.

 

[bwible]

Arise, zombie thread!

Hey, I was just looking for a clone of this beer and found this thread. Couple things:

I see where people are saying they brewed this with 1968, but why on earth would you choose that yeast for an American IPA? That is an English yeast for bitters and milds. Some old timers still believe it is Fuller’s yeast. My first thought would have been 1332, which is supposedly used by Northwestern US breweries and also supposedly is English in origin.

Not sure if this is relevant anymore but I met the owner of Lagunitas...
He said they do mash around 160 and they have an incredible yeast strain that can chew through anything.

This comment stood out to me, because I wonder if he was trying to tell you in a roundabout way “Pacman” yeast? Just a thought.

I was really wondering about the hops and whether this is the old Centennial and Cascade combinations or if they are using newer hops like Mosaic or something? Not much ingredient info given on their site.