Only now noticed mash water / grain ratio, after 2.2qt/lb norm

[zonkman]

So, I made an ESB with the BIAB method, thinking that a larger mash volume = better efficiency. Instead of going with the prescribed 1.25qt/lb, I went with 2.2qt/lb, also because it fills my kettle more and loses less heat during the mash.

1st Q: to what "extent* will this affect an ESB? I used wy1318, which is supposed to finish slightly sweet. Should I be expecting a much lighter beer, or will the residual sweetness also add body?

2nd Q: the higher volume / grain ratio causes a thinner mash. A lower mash temp causes a thinner mash. Are they thinner in the same way? I.e. is there a way to compensate for volume when doing a no sparge BIAB? Or is it always better - when doing, say, maltier English Ales - to go 1/1.25qt/lb and sparge with the rest?

Here's the best explanation I found (by Palmer):

The grist/water ratio is another factor influencing the performance of the mash. A thinner mash of >2 quarts of water per pound of grain dilutes the relative concentration of the enzymes, slowing the conversion, but ultimately leads to a more fermentable mash because the enzymes are not inhibited by a high concentration of sugars. A stiff mash of <1.25 quarts of water per pound is better for protein breakdown, and results in a faster overall starch conversion, but the resultant sugars are less fermentable and will result in a sweeter, maltier beer. A thicker mash is more gentle to the enzymes because of the lower heat capacity of grain compared to water. A thick mash is better for multirest mashes because the enzymes are not denatured as quickly by a rise in temperature.

 

[RM-MN]

The mash thickness has little effect on the body of the beer. Palmer was wrong about the thinner mash slowing the conversion as the thin mashes convert as fast or faster than the thick mashes.

The mash temperature affects the body of the beer, not the thinness of the mash. With higher temperature you favor the alpha amylase over the beta amylase so you get more dextrines instead of the more fermentable sugars.

 

[balrog]

Best example for me, of whether I needed to worry about mash thickness, was simply that folks BIAB. All over. All the time. That means the magic mash ratio of 1.25 qt/lb is now something more like 2.7 qt/lb. And it works. Just fine. Maybe you should think about your pH, as well as your temp, but ratio is not a problem.

 

[SanPancho]

Thickness of the mash isnt related to body of wort /beer, all other things being equal. This is assuming you fully convert starches, mash pH is good, decent crush, etc.

Sweetness/residual sugars are determined by mash temp, so if you have a yeast that finishes sweet, you lower mash temp to dry out the wort to compensate. Or vice versa if you have an aggressive yeast. Its also good idea to extend the time of mash as you go lower in temp as that gives beta enzymes more time to work on creating a drier more fermentable wort.

In short, if you want dry beer you go low and slow with your mash. Sweeter beer can be higher and faster.

 

[Oginme]

The idea of a thinner mash leading to slower conversion is based upon the thinking that the dilution of the enzyme concentration leads to longer times for the enzymes finding the soluble starches in order to act upon them. This *may* be true with base malts which are low in diastatic power, but most of the base malts today have plenty of enzymes to convert even high adjunct grists at a fairly quick rate, regardless of concentration.

 

[JohnSand]

In other words: Don't Worry.

 

[zonkman]

Awesome, thanks all!