Pilsner Malt Help

[ScrubJayBrewery]

I have a recipe that contains 9.5 lbs of Rahr Premium Pilsner and calls for a 60 minute boil. My question is, sjould I follow the recipie as written or adjust to a 90 minute boil to deal with the DMS issue of Pilsner malts? This is for an Australian Sparkling Ale. (Similar to a Burton Ale).

 

[TexasDroughtBrewery]

Ive always been told that you do a 90 min boil with that malt...

 

[Brian77095]

yeah I would do 90 if you can. You might be ok with 60 but why risk it if you can.

 

[biestie]

There's nothing wrong with doing a 90 minute boil, but neither I, nor anyone that drinks my beer, has picked up DMS in my Pilsner heavy beers boiled for 60 minutes. I used to do 90 minutes, because it seems like everyone says you have to with Pilsner malts, but I read somewhere, maybe here, that modern Pilsner malts don't require it. I tried it, and my experience since then backs that up.

 

[helibrewer]

I have a recipe that contains 9.5 lbs of Rahr Premium Pilsner and calls for a 60 minute boil. My question is, sjould I follow the recipie as written or adjust to a 90 minute boil to deal with the DMS issue of Pilsner malts? This is for an Australian Sparkling Ale. (Similar to a Burton Ale).

You wouldn't change the recipe if you want to boil longer, you would adjust your pre-boil volume for the additional 30 minutes of boil-off. Most software will do this automatically if you change the boil time.

I do boil pilsner for 90 minutes.

 

[ScrubJayBrewery]

Thanks everyone for your help. It looks like the consensus is for a 90 min boil. I am sure it can't hurt and I have the time. I will adjust for the extra 30 minutes of boil-off. This is the first pilsner heavy grain bill I have brewed. Looking forward to brewing this beer style.

 

[bdogg171]

I would bet you'd be fine with a 60 min boil, I personally have never had an issue with DMS and a 60.

 

[Indian_villager]

I think this entire thing depends on how much heat you can drive into the kettle. If you can boil off 1gal/hour or more I think you'd be fine with 60mins. If you boil off less, work towards 90mins.

 

[MerlinWerks]

FWIW, I use pils for "two-row" in about 70% of my batches with a 60 minute boil and have never experienced any DMS off-flavors or aroma...

 

[chuckstout]

I think this entire thing depends on how much heat you can drive into the kettle. If you can boil off 1gal/hour or more I think you'd be fine with 60mins. If you boil off less, work towards 90mins.

I believe this is a solid answer, you would be advised to have a ripping boil, so you insure your time is not wasted. DMS is not pleasant. I would steer towards 90.

 

[chuckstout]

I think this entire thing depends on how much heat you can drive into the kettle. If you can boil off 1gal/hour or more I think you'd be fine with 60mins. If you boil off less, work towards 90mins.

Good answer, you should have a ripping boil or I would steer toward a 90 minute boil

 

[chuckstout]

Yeah, if you can get a ripping boil you could chance it, otherwise I would stick with the tried and tried 90 min boil

 

[chuckstout]

Man that looks silly

 

[biestie]

I think you all are being paranoid.

 

[chuckstout]

I think you all are being paranoid.

Probably, but I have had DMS when having a weak boil. That felt like much more waste of time then 30min, but on the other hand I just listened to the brewing network were a test was done and tested proving you can do it in 30 minutes and remove DMS. Mind Blown!

 

[Yooper]

I generally go with a 90 minute boil when I use mostly pilsner malt.

It may not be strictly necessary each time, but it certainly doesn't cause any issues for me to boil an additional 30 minutes. It's one of those "can't hurt, might help" things.

 

[biestie]

Probably, but I have had DMS when having a weak boil. That felt like much more waste of time then 30min, but on the other hand I just listened to the brewing network were a test was done and tested proving you can do it in 30 minutes and remove DMS. Mind Blown!

Yeah, I listened to that yesterday too. I doubt I'll ever do 30 minute boils, but it kinda reaffirms for me that a 90 minute boil isn't really necessary either. I'll likely stick with 60. The REALLY interesting one that they did for me was the w34/70 at 70F. I see a lot of Czech pilsners in my future if I have the same success.

 

[brewcat]

I'm planning on doing a 60 today with a maibock. I boil off around 1.5 gallons an hour so it should be fine. Technically I'm probably closer to 70 or so after waiting for hot break before the first hop addition.

 

[TxBigHops]

Thanks everyone for your help. It looks like the consensus is for a 90 min boil. I am sure it can't hurt and I have the time. I will adjust for the extra 30 minutes of boil-off. This is the first pilsner heavy grain bill I have brewed. Looking forward to brewing this beer style.

You may want to read about this Exbeeriment by the Brulosophy guys.

http://brulosophy.com/2015/09/14/boil-length-pt-2-pilsner-malt-exbeeriment-results/

 

[biestie]

Yeah, that's what we were eluding to above when we mentioned a podcast. One of the guys from brulosophy was on. What's not noted in the blog, but he said in the podcast, was that later on, he had someone offer to analyze his sample at a lab. Both beers, a 90 minute boil, and a 30 minute boil had exactly zero DMS in them.

 

[stevehaun]

When I brew pilseners, I boil for 120 min. Pilsner Urquell boils for 120 min and I figured they knew a little bit about pilseners. Who was I to argue? If I have significant amounts of vienna or munich malt in the grain bill, I boil 90 min.
Perhaps it is not just DMS that you are affecting by a longer boil?

 

[biestie]

For sure. I'm really not advocating, just stating that I read awhile go, that modern Pilsner malts don't need a long boil to get rid of DMS. My experience has shown that to be true. Now it looks like the brulosophy folks have taken it to the extreme by showing that a 30 minute boil is sufficient to get rid of DMS, at least in the one beer they tried it with.

There are certainly other kettle reactions to be aware of as you mention. I might submit though, that Pilsner Urquell has been around for over 170 years, and at least some of that recipe could be legacy practices, that really aren't necessary anymore.

All I'm saying, is that if the only thing making you do a 90 minute boil is DMS... There's a good chance you could trim a few minutes off of your brew day.

 

[stevehaun]

When first thinking about it, I thought that Pilsner Urquell probably does it that way because they always did it that way. But, further thought tells me that big breweries are in the business to make money. After infrastructure, ingredients, labor and energy are the big costs. If you can cut the boil in half, you save significant amounts of both labor and energy costs. I doubt that tradition trumps cash but maybe I am wrong...

 

[slym2none]

I dunno, man... those old European breweries are all about tradition.