Rack to secondary or leave in primary for Brewer's Best IPA?

[ledzeppelin295]

I know that the pros and cons have been debated furiously about whether to rack or not to rack into a secondary. I've tried to research on these forums, The Complete Joy of Home Brewing, and several homebrewing stores in the area, and I've gotten lots of different answers.

I think I understand most of the benefits and detriments of using a secondary fermenter - I was mostly wondering if it is recommended to use for an IPA? Specifically, a Brewer's Best IPA. If it matters, my OG was 1.60 and the FG (per BB) should be 1.014-1.017.

Thanks!

 

[DocScott]

Same argument applies. My advice, leave it in primary. Not worth risk of oxidation or infection and no risk of autolysis.

 

[freisste]

My first answer to that question is always that it is Brewer's choice. I'm not sure of a reason (extended aging aside) that one would eve NEED to secondary.

However, I haven't heard a real reason why it is such a bad idea if the brewer is looking for the benefits. I personally think that if you take standard precautions for infections and you siphon as carefully as you ever would, the risks of infection and oxidation are low.

The final answer is that an IPA is not different enough from other brews to change the reasons for or against secondary. If you normally do a secondary, have at it. If you normally don't, there is no reason to. Do what you want. Good luck.