Refractometer. Better than a hydrometer?

[BrewKnob]

Refractometer.

Better, worse, complicated, imprecise?

Always been a hydrometer man but my tube cracked.

I can't read ph paper to save my life. None of the colors look right. Will this mess me up?

 

[flars]

Hydrometers are more accurate than a refractometer when alcohol is present in the sample. pH papers can be highly inaccurate.

Buy a couple new hydrometers. Never lay a hydrometer on a flat surface because no surfaces are truly flat. The hydrometer will roll.

 

[bleme]

I use a hydrometer. A friend I brew with often uses a refractometer. It seems a lot simpler than a hydrometer as you only need a drop and don't have to wait for it to get to 65F. If I had one, I probably wouldn't skip so many readings.

 

[schematix]

They are distinct tools and you should have both.

Refracts are great for quick measurements during the process such as checking mash gravity for conversion. They are also good for checking pre boil gravity. They don't waste much liquid and you can cool instantly. However, the accurate is spotty... maybe 1 or 2 specific gravity points. Also, they are measuring refraction index, not specific gravity so the instrument will read differently when presented with wort of the same gravity, but different refraction index.

Where i find the hydrometer most useful is getting an extremely accurate pre and post fermentation gravity. Also i'd say throw out the $8 hydrometer and get a pair of precision hydrometers. They are about $30-40 each, but they can measure to better than half a specific gravity point easily. I'd recommend at least a precision final gravity hydrometer, but a set to cover the full brewing range isn't a bad idea either.

 

[dmtaylor]

Refractometer is very easy to use. However it is also less accurate especially in the presence of alcohol. Hydrometer is more of a pain but super accurate.

I use both, but these days I do prefer the refractometer. A key thing to learn is your own adjustment factor using the calculators on Sean Terrill's site. He says the average for many people was 1.04 for the correction factor, but for my gauge I found it is most accurate with a factor of 0.98 as compared with the hydrometer. YMMV. Learn your magic factor and then you too can use the refractometer semi-reliably, i.e., "good enough".

http://seanterrill.com/2012/01/06/refractometer-calculator/

Or, if you have to know the right answer very accurately, then the hydrometer really is the only right answer.

 

[kh54s10]

Answered on you other thread. No. They both have their strengths. The refractometer is fast for use during brew day but is skewed with the presence of alcohol. The hydrometer is better after fermentation has started.

If you want just one get the hydrometer. I have both.

 

[user 246304]

I've used both, but prefer a hydro. The only time I have really wanted a refract is during final runnings, when I could use a quick answer. It's never really been a problem as I taste the final runnings and feel the quality on my palate as well; by the time the sample has cooled closely enough, the s.g. indication is close enough to confirm or let me know I can keep going for a bit.

Everything else, for me, I really do prefer a hydro.

 

[schematix]

A key thing to learn is your own adjustment factor using the calculators on Sean Terrill's site. He says the average for many people was 1.04 for the correction factor, but for my gauge I found it is most accurate with a factor of 0.98 as compared with the hydrometer. YMMV. Learn your magic factor and then you too can use the refractometer semi-reliably, i.e., "good enough".

Correction factor is key... but in my experience it varies by wort. When I've confirmed it with the precision hydrometer i've seen everything from 0.97 to 1.04... too much variation for me.