Viking malts

[bovine_OB]

In my experience, just binge brewed a rye ipa, Munich helles, and hefeweizen. All three used Viking pilsner and Viking specialty malts when possible. Yeasts were us05, 34/70, and Munich classic respectively, all fermented in the recommended temps. The flavor is lacking in all three beers. Each is almost watery, just meh. Not bad, just doesn't punch a guy in the face with malt flavor. Efficiency was ok, maybe a little lower than expected. And FG was as low or lower than expected. Color was slightly darker than prior brews, especially for all the pilsner that was in these recipes.

 

[Saunassa]

I had to open up the mill a bit because the grains were larger then the American two row. efficiency with biab was good. there is a noticeable difference in the flavor of the raw grains when you taste/chew them side by side and I may prefer the flavor of the Viking. Slightly darker does not bother me, finished flavor will and I will have an idea next week when the Hornindal yeast beer is done carbing. Real test will be when I brew up the BM Centennial blonde to compare with the American malt version I did a few months ago. Low hopped so it is hard to hide anything malt related with that blonde.

 

[Soulshine2]

I tapped a Belgian Pale I made with Pils, Vienna, caramel 200 (75L), special B and WLP500 last night. All viking except the special B. Tastes great.View attachment 625943

thats a good looking beer. hows the taste notes?

 

[Soulshine2]

In my experience, just binge brewed a rye ipa, Munich helles, and hefeweizen. All three used Viking pilsner and Viking specialty malts when possible. Yeasts were us05, 34/70, and Munich classic respectively, all fermented in the recommended temps. The flavor is lacking in all three beers. Each is almost watery, just meh. Not bad, just doesn't punch a guy in the face with malt flavor. Efficiency was ok, maybe a little lower than expected. And FG was as low or lower than expected. Color was slightly darker than prior brews, especially for all the pilsner that was in these recipes.

I love those 3 beers, disappointing you didnt get the results you were after.

 

[Stand]

thats a good looking beer. hows the taste notes?

Thanks man! It turned out alright, except that I used too much Special B which I hadn't used before. I used 5%, and it dominated the flavor. Next time I'm just going to elminate it and switch the Vienna for Munich and a little D90. Not a fan of burnt marshmallows.

 

[Soulshine2]

Thanks man! It turned out alright, except that I used too much Special B which I hadn't used before. I used 5%, and it dominated the flavor. Next time I'm just going to elminate it and switch the Vienna for Munich and a little D90. Not a fan of burnt marshmallows.

yeah, special B in brewing is like salt in food, tiny bit adds flavor, tiny bit too much and its ruined . You cant undo it.
Do you have the book by Ray Daniels -"Designing Great Beers" ?

 

[Stand]

Yeah, I have the Ray Daniels' book, but he doesn't cover Belgian beers. I have the Stan Hieronymus book as well, and I think I remember him saying he's talked to Ray Daniels about making a version just around Belgian beers. I wish he would! Really good resources.

 

[tennesseean_87]

So I've used these malts a few times now.

First was a double batch of 50/50 pils/wheat. Efficiency was low for me at 70% (usually 75ish). Half got soured and became a Margarita Gose, which I'm really happy with. The other half got an addition of cold-steeped chocolate wheat and lots of Medusa hops and became a dark wheat session IPA. This came out well, too, but neither of these are particularly malty beers. THey both have a lot else going on, so maybe not the best to judge the flavor of the malt.

I just brewed a light-weight pils-ish beer. It was a half lb of carapils, 1.25lb munich, and pils to 1.040 with bittering charge to get 20 ibus and an oz at 10 min and flameout. I got good efficiecny at 80%, but I find I usually get better efficiency when doing a protein rest (15-20 minutes at 115F). We'll see how this one turns out.

 

[Stand]

Morebeer had Spalter Select for 9.99 a pound, so I did a lager with Spalter Select, Viking Pils, and Imperial L28 Urkel. This is the first time I've ever made a lager, but it turned out better than I expected. I get a light sweetness and some bread/crackers from the malt. It lingers slightly in a very pleasant way while still being crisp. You just want another sip, and I think my keg must have sprung a leak it's going so fast. I'm very happy with the malt.

 

[CodeSection]

While I'm still interested in learning more about various results when using Viking grains, it appears for me that there is another reason to hold off using them. A few posters have mentioned they had to increase the gap size of their mill since the Viking grain was larger. I take it as you could not mix the Viking grain with your other grains and achieve the same crush. For me, it would get old quickly having to constantly change the gap size for one recipe...even changing it an extra one time would be annoying.

So, for those that changed their milling gap, what was the "old" size to the "new" size? Perhaps their original size was smaller than I crush now.....

Viking Potential Issues
1. Lovibond. However, that should be eliminated with their Xtra Pale Grain.
2. Efficiency. Mixed reviews.
3. Taste. Mixed Reviews.
4. Repeatable brewing results. Various posts suggest this is a problem.
5. Grain size. Must change mill gap? Perhaps that is why there may be efficiency issues.

Viking Benefits
1. Cost is about 23% less than GW 2-Row.

I would like to save money just like everyone else and that is why I am following this thread. However, at the end of the day, saving money is a much, much lower priority for me if the cost is lower efficiency, negative taste as compared to the original recipe, poor repeatable results and lastly, now having to constantly change the mill's gap size.

Please keep posting your results.

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

... but neither of these are particularly malty beers.

Mash temp?

 

[Saunassa]

After posting here someone suggested checking the gap on the mills to see if parallel. It was slightly wider on one end so I did the old credit card trick. So the gap is now even across and set it for loose card. mixed the grains together and ran them through. Had a nice crush yet left the husks fairly well intact. I will dig up some feeler gauges and see what the gap is.

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

I found the following. Perhaps, helpful?

http://www.vikingmalt.com/how-can-we-help/recipes-brew-reports/

 

[CodeSection]

I found the following. Perhaps, helpful?

http://www.vikingmalt.com/how-can-we-help/recipes-brew-reports/

I read those as well....

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

Plus contact Viking, ask questions, etc. Maybe get better insight to their malt directly from them.

 

[Saunassa]

Since they do not list the diastatic power factor on many of their grains I sent an email to their brewmaster in Finland. He sent me an email within 8 hours with his suggested numbers to use for brewing software. Then again perhaps it helps that I have a Finnish name.

 

[Saunassa]

Used my feeler gauges. Gap between the rollers is .034"

 

[Stand]

I just measured my gap at .045, but it should be noted that my barley crusher is 7-8 years old and probably needs to be replaced.

I brewed today and I got 83% efficiency with that gap.

 

[CodeSection]

Since they do not list the diastatic power factor on many of their grains I sent an email to their brewmaster in Finland. He sent me an email within 8 hours with his suggested numbers to use for brewing software. Then again perhaps it helps that I have a Finnish name.

Are those numbers easy to share?

Used my feeler gauges. Gap between the rollers is .034"

Well based upon that gap size, I will not have to change anything on my mill since I mill at .035. Based upon your recent milling, item number five above on my list is no longer an issue for me. I'm guessing it will not be that much an issue with others at that gap size or larger. Thanks for taking the time to measure your gap size!

 

[CodeSection]

Duplicate. Weird that it didn't show as posted the first time....

 

[CodeSection]

I just measured my gap at .045, but it should be noted that my barley crusher is 7-8 years old and probably needs to be replaced.

I brewed today and I got 83% efficiency with that gap.

Wow, I would not have expected that.

 

[Saunassa]

Are those numbers easy to share?

I supplied them to Brewers friend to update their data.

These are the Viking numbers I have on hand:
Pale ale 2.5L DP 65
Pilsner 1.9L DP 76
Vienna 3.6L DP 50
Pilsner Organic 2L DP 67
Pilsner Zero 1.9L. DP 76

He stated that the numbers tend to be higher but these are the ones they provide if asked.

 

[CodeSection]

I supplied them to Brewers friend to update their data.

These are the Viking numbers I have on hand:
Pale ale 2.5L DP 65
Pilsner 1.9L DP 76
Vienna 3.6L DP 50
Pilsner Organic 2L DP 67
Pilsner Zero 1.9L. DP 76

He stated that the numbers tend to be higher but these are the ones they provide if asked.

That explains the efficiency issues people have been having when substituting Viking 2-Row DP 65 in place of GW 2-Row DP 141 or Rahr 2-Row DP 131 or Briess 2-Row DP 140....

I find it interesting that MoreBeer does not provide the DP information on the Viking grain but yet provides it on GW, Rahr and Briess. After all, you were able to get it so why not them? Could it be that it might impact sales?

 

[Saunassa]

How many of these malt companies test the dp of their grain on each lot and update the info or is it just a yearly update?
It could be that what Viking gave me is the lowest they see whereas the others give the highest they see. Devils advocate on this one.

From what I have read as long as it is over 35 they can self convert. The use of specialty malts and grains that have little to no ability appears to me as what will have a big impact on conversion.
As long as you are not using a high percentage of low DP grains I would think proper crush, temp control and mash length would offset the different between the Viking and the Breiss, rahr or gw malts.
Then again I am new to this so may be way off base.

 

[CodeSection]

How many of these malt companies test the dp of their grain on each lot and update the info or is it just a yearly update?
It could be that what Viking gave me is the lowest they see whereas the others give the highest they see. Devils advocate on this one.

Not to be argumentative here, but that does not make any sense to me. The purpose of providing data points is so the consumer can compare that data. In Vikings case, even "if" their DP does go up 10%, their DP is still less than 50% of others. If Vikings DP went up 20% it is roughly 50% of what the others are. Again, MoreBeer has been marketing the grain as a cheap 2-Row replacement. I believe the missing DP in MoreBeer's data listing has more to do with marketing and selling the product.

I suggest Viking provided you the data because they felt it was beneficial to you. Even you believed it was beneficial since as you posted above in post #82 you provided the DP data to Brewer's Friend so they could "update their data."

From what I have read as long as it is over 35 they can self convert. The use of specialty malts and grains that have little to no ability appears to me as what will have a big impact on conversion.
As long as you are not using a high percentage of low DP grains I would think proper crush, temp control and mash length would offset the different between the Viking and the Breiss, rahr or gw malts.
Then again I am new to this so may be way off base.

I am under the belief the minimum DP available is 30. Yep, all those items you listed make a difference! It sounds like those who were having efficiency issues with true, tried and repeatable recipes may not have realized the difference in DP. Perhaps if they experimented and tweaked their recipes along with their process to the data available (including the now disclosed DP), they will have more success.

Again, I am hoping more people post their experience with Viking grain. I'm hoping to read about positive posts that show repeatable results in the areas I previously listed. As of now, a couple had success with a recipe. But I'm getting the impression the grain is not a true cheap 2-Row replacement but rather is better used with a mixture of other 2-Row. If that is the case, why bother as the $0.26/lb savings would be minimal to warrant changing proven recipes.

 

[Saunassa]

My last post question, does anyone have Beersmith and able to see what he has been provided for numbers? Curious to see if he was given different data then I was.
So far I like the grain and the beer I have been brewing has been tasty but I dont have time tested recipes like many of you do as mine are all new to me. Once I have more experience I will brew up two batches of beer, one using Viking and the other using Breiss and see if I can taste the difference. Probably not cause I am an old fart.

 

[bracconiere]

Viking Potential Issues
1. Lovibond. However, that should be eliminated with their Xtra Pale Grain.
2. Efficiency. Mixed reviews.

just thought i'd confirm, lovibond is an issue, but i got decent efficiency.....this is what my 100% Pale malt brew looks like! damn near a brown ale

and no, it's not the same as my profile pic, i used a lot of crystal malt in it!

 

[Stand]

Wow, I would not have expected that.

I had to back off on the gap to keep grain moving with the Viking malts for sure, and honestly I was surprised as well at the efficiency. I thought I'd have a drop, but I didn't. 82-83% is what I have been getting for probably 4 years or so, and even if my grain mill wasn't dying (it is), I'd still want to back it down because my lautering was MUCH smoother after changing the gap.

I recirculate through a RIMS tube for the entire mash to hold temperature, so I am no stranger to a stuck mash.

I'm really not willing to take a hit on quality to save a few bucks. I agree with that sentiment entirely. On the other hand, I don't want to pay more for a name. I've been so happy with the pilsner malt that I'm using it as the base for all my Belgian/German beers.

I stopped buying Briess 2-row and switch to Rahr/GW because I just think they taste better. Briess seemed well... less everything. I dunno I just didn't like it. I've been using Rahr and GW depending on which I get cheaper because I like them equally; both are great. Viking pilsner to my palate has more character than 2-row GW/Rahr/Briess without some of the character I'd get from a Pale ale malt (which I tend to only use in Pale Ales).

I am going to stick with GW 2-row for my IPAs, but I'm mostly making Belgian beers at this point, and the Viking Pilsner is great. I really can't speak to their Pale Ale.

I say try it once and make a beer. See what you think. Or not. Do what makes you happy. This is a hobby after all.

Cheers!

 

[CodeSection]

I had to back off on the gap to keep grain moving with the Viking malts for sure, and honestly I was surprised as well at the efficiency. I thought I'd have a drop, but I didn't. 82-83% is what I have been getting for probably 4 years or so, and even if my grain mill wasn't dying (it is), I'd still want to back it down because my lautering was MUCH smoother after changing the gap.

I recirculate through a RIMS tube for the entire mash to hold temperature, so I am no stranger to a stuck mash.

I'm really not willing to take a hit on quality to save a few bucks. I agree with that sentiment entirely. On the other hand, I don't want to pay more for a name. I've been so happy with the pilsner malt that I'm using it as the base for all my Belgian/German beers.

I stopped buying Briess 2-row and switch to Rahr/GW because I just think they taste better. Briess seemed well... less everything. I dunno I just didn't like it. I've been using Rahr and GW depending on which I get cheaper because I like them equally; both are great. Viking pilsner to my palate has more character than 2-row GW/Rahr/Briess without some of the character I'd get from a Pale ale malt (which I tend to only use in Pale Ales).

I am going to stick with GW 2-row for my IPAs, but I'm mostly making Belgian beers at this point, and the Viking Pilsner is great. I really can't speak to their Pale Ale.

I say try it once and make a beer. See what you think. Or not. Do what makes you happy. This is a hobby after all.

Cheers!

I was hoping you would give an in-depth review as I was thinking of you earlier when I mentioned a couple of people have had success. Thank you. I probably will at some time try a recipe. At the moment, I am working on Fall and Winter brews to give to clients and I want to stay with what has worked and have been positively received from my clients.

 

[NitrogenWidget]

I bought a whole lot of viking malt on sale in the spring.
Less than I normally pay and free shipping.
I didn't think about it until I read this but I do BIAB and have my corona's gap as thick as a credit card. I also use a high torque drill and the first time I milled pale malt the bucket I have it housed in got away from me because it was working harder to mill it.
Bent the heck out of the bolt I was using to drive it.
All because I had the trigger locked. don't do that anymore.

I got a shorter bolt and held onto it better.

My efficiency was a tad lower than expected so I boiled down to 10 gals. instead of my normal 11 gals.

i've got red wheat, pils and pale.
didn't notice anything different with pale other than the milling issue but pilsen seems a little darker and the red wheat is well expected to be darker and i'm not that experienced so didn't notice anything there.

otherwise it's all i've used for most of my generic beers and people are drinking just as fast as other grains.