Ron Pattinson's Recipes - much stronger than on paper?

[Gadjobrinus]

I have only recently acquired Ron Pattinson's vintage book and have begun to read through his monumental blog. I'll be getting many more of his books.

One issue I'm having is that if simply transcribing his recipes into my brewhouse, as written, I'm getting much, much higher strengths and IBUs than he lists for his expected values. For instance, I'd love to do the 1915 Courage Porter. But on my system, according to his recipe (OG 1.050, IBU 36), I'm getting expected OG 1.061 and expected IBU of 54. Of course I don't expect an exact correspondence, or perhaps even a close correspondence, but the discrepancy here seems striking.

Am I missing something? Does anyone else have this issue using his recipes?

 

[mac_1103]

Does he give the efficiency of his system? How does it compare to yours? Does he give the %AA for the hops? Are you using the same formula for calculating IBU?

 

[Hoochin'Fool]

Here's the recipe, should help with the discussion...

http://barclayperkins.blogspot.com/2020/08/lets-brew-wednesday-1915-courage-porter.html
My two cents: The AA% isn't mentioned, so I think the way to treat those, is ignore the listed weight of the hops, and use software to figure out how much of your hops with their AA% you'd need at those timed intervals to reach the stated 36 ibus. As for the gravity difference, probably a combination of you having a higher efficiency, and modern barley yielding a bit more malt sugars than grain did back in 1915.

 

[MaxStout]

Modern brewing ingredients, gear and processes have made for more efficiency than they had in 1915.

 

[Gadjobrinus]

Ah, gotcha, thanks guys. So he researches and basically replicates the originals, as best as possible - not making much compensation then for modern practices, and it's up to us to try and capture the original as best as possible, given our system and modern ingredients?

About right?

 

[DBhomebrew]

He provides his recipe assumptions somewhere on his blog. But, really it's not different than taking a recipe from any other brewer.

Ignore the actual amount of malt by weight. The percentage by weight and OG are what matters. Whether you brew 5G US, 5G Imp, 100 barrels, whether you use a traditional tun and fly sparge or BIAB full volume, whatever. It doesn't matter to the recipe. 85% base, 5% crystal, 10% sugar, a bit of black or brewer's caramel to hit the right color. Use whatever much of that to hit the recipe's OG on your system.

 

[DBhomebrew]

use software to figure out how much of your hops with their AA% you'd need at those timed intervals to reach the stated 36 ibus.

Exactly

 

[DBhomebrew]

https://barclayperkins.blogspot.com/2023/12/notes-on-my-historic-recipes.html?m=0

 

[Gadjobrinus]

He provides his recipe assumptions somewhere on his blog. But, really it's not different than taking a recipe from any other brewer.

Ignore the actual amount of malt by weight. The percentage by weight and OG are what matters. Whether you brew 5G US, 5G Imp, 100 barrels, whether you use a traditional tun and fly sparge or BIAB full volume, whatever. It doesn't matter to the recipe. 85% base, 5% crystal, 10% sugar, a bit of black or brewer's caramel to hit the right color. Use whatever much of that to hit the recipe's OG on your system.

Thanks. That's basically what I did, but wondered if that would somehow change the character from the original brew. What you're saying makes sense.

 

[Gadjobrinus]

https://barclayperkins.blogspot.com/2023/12/notes-on-my-historic-recipes.html?m=0

Thanks.

Edit: OK, that clear it right up! His recipes are for 5 Imperial gallons, or about 6 US gallons. Hitting that, with 80% efficiency (my system), it's about spot on in terms of the OG. The hopping still shows as quite high - I'm getting 47 IBU's, his, 36. It seems quite far off to ascribe significantly different AA's to the fuggles and Hallertau (unless they are? I'm using 4.4% for the fuggles and 4.5%, Hallertau), or somehow the formulas used are that different. Anyone else run the recipe no's? What are you getting?

 

[BigEd]

I have only recently acquired Ron Pattinson's vintage book and have begun to read through his monumental blog. I'll be getting many more of his books.

One issue I'm having is that if simply transcribing his recipes into my brewhouse, as written, I'm getting much, much higher strengths and IBUs than he lists for his expected values. For instance, I'd love to do the 1915 Courage Porter. But on my system, according to his recipe (OG 1.050, IBU 36), I'm getting expected OG 1.061 and expected IBU of 54. Of course I don't expect an exact correspondence, or perhaps even a close correspondence, but the discrepancy here seems striking.

Am I missing something? Does anyone else have this issue using his recipes?

Pattison's recipe lists the grist bill in percentages. Use those numbers and figure the amounts to use based on OG target and your system's efficiency.

 

[patto1ro]

My recipes are all based on 72% efficiency. Run through BrewSmith.

As has been said, you can always use the percentages.

 

[Wigglebutts Brewery]

A lot of the historical recipes use “dated” hops that were likely not vacuum packed nor stored in the freezer.
I use Beersmith to dial in the IBU’s for his recipes.
If you get into historic recipes, look at the Crisp heritage line of malts. I’m really pleased with results from Chevallier malt. Let the beer age a couple months for best results.

 

[kevin58]

Since we don't know what efficiency Ron writes his recipes I adjust the grist percentage to approach his OG... or sometimes the ABV since the attenuation of the yeast I use may be greater. I will also adjust my hop additions to match the IBU levels in his published recipes.

 

[kevin58]

Ah, gotcha, thanks guys. So he researches and basically replicates the originals, as best as possible - not making much compensation then for modern practices, and it's up to us to try and capture the original as best as possible, given our system and modern ingredients?

About right?

Ron mentions quite often in his articles how he handles brewing logs. If you read enough of them you will pick up info on how he deals with illegible handwriting, undecipherable scribbles and shorthand, etc. He wrote a brief outline of all of it not too long ago...

http://barclayperkins.blogspot.com/2023/12/notes-on-my-historic-recipes.html

 

[McMullan]

I input the recipe as is into BeerSmith then adjust the base malt down a tad until I hit the expected OG. I like living on the dark side, so brown malt, black malt, etc., stay as suggested. It's always going to be an approximation regardless how accurate the 'transcribing' is, because there are so many factors (biological mainly) involved in the process. All Ron's recipes that I've done have surpassed my expectations. Whether they're anything like the original beers or not I don't have the foggiest. Things have changed a lot, inevitably. I've been experimenting with Chavellier malt a lot this year. What a massive contrast! Comparable difference for brown and black malts too? Who knows? All that matters is it's enjoyable. It's only beer. I wouldn't get too hung up on chasing myths and legends trying to perfect clones.

 

[Gadjobrinus]

Thanks guys. I wouldn't expect to be able to replicate Ron's beers, much less anything historical. I see recipes not as blueprints but more as insights into a brewer's (or cook's, or baker's) mind, so I try to capture that instead of any rote replication. Just helpful to know his presumptions going in, and I think I've a better idea now, many thanks.