theotheragentm
Member
Why do we use carboys for secondary fermentation rather than another plastic bucket? What about plastic carboys? Is there a difference in the containers?
Why use carboys?
- Thread starter theotheragentm
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
Secondary is usually considerably longer than primary and plastic is much more permeable by oxygen. Whether "plastic" carboys such as Better Bottles are suitable for secondary has been debated over and over again so I don't think we need to re-hash that. Do a search if you're interested in further info on that one.
I like to use glass carboys for primary and secondary for two reasons: 1. You get to see the fermentation happening (that's just cool to me) and 2. Glass wont attract bacteria like plastic will. Plastic will eventually degrade and u can get contamination in there.
windbreaker123
Well-Known Member
*
As for carboy vs bucket, I think the premise is that the liquid after the primary is supposed to be high enough to reduce any headspace and the chance for oxidation.
Don't forget about kegs as a secondary too.
Don't forget about kegs as a secondary too.
windbreaker123
Well-Known Member
![Craft A Brew - Safale S-04 Dry Yeast - Fermentis - English Ale Dry Yeast - For English and American Ales and Hard Apple Ciders - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [1 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41fVGNh6JfL._SL500_.jpg)
Fantastical
Well-Known Member
Agreed.
milesvdustin
Well-Known Member
I use better bottles for primary (i never secondary, just bulk age on the yeast) because I like to see what's happening. It's like the yeast are having a party in my fermenter!
ArcaneXor
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,502
- Reaction score
- 128
Carboys (whether plastic or glass) have many advantages and some disadvantages compared to buckets, which are probably listed in the "versus" beginner's sticky thread - the most important factors are oxygen permeability, durability, easy of cleaning/sanitation and cost.
For most of my beers, I use Better Bottles (plastic carboys) for primary and stainless (kegs) as bright tanks (secondaries, if you want to call them that), unless I am adding additional fermentables like fruit, in which case I'll do a true secondary in another Better Bottle before kegging. For sour beers, I use a bucket.
For most of my beers, I use Better Bottles (plastic carboys) for primary and stainless (kegs) as bright tanks (secondaries, if you want to call them that), unless I am adding additional fermentables like fruit, in which case I'll do a true secondary in another Better Bottle before kegging. For sour beers, I use a bucket.
teetee523
Active Member
I was thinking about this a little bit recently as I've just been using a plastic bucket for my primary fermenter since I started brewing. We've only done about 3 or 4 brews in there and have been careful when cleaning/sanitizing so we don't scratch it, but when should we replace the bucket just to be safe? I don't want there to be contamination because of scratches or anything.
Thanks!
Thanks!
McGarnigle
Well-Known Member
This has been argued here before, and some people have been using their plastic pails for a decade or more. If you have had problems with infections or know you scratched it up, then maybe buy a new one. But 3-4 brews is too soon to be worrying about anything, IMO.
To the OP's original question: it's the shape that determines secondary use. Carboys (whether plastic or glass) are tapered at the top to limit surface area.
Dome555
Well-Known Member
I've actually been wondering the same thing teetee. I'd think that if you treat the bucket the same as you would treat a BB then it would last just as long. If that's true, and if it's not I'm all ears, then it seems like we're paying for the ability to voyeur the yeast and to have restricted access to the interior so we can't jack it up in the price difference between bucket and BB. Personally I'm ok with that because I like watching that yeast party in there and cannot be trusted to not scrub the bucket without thinking, but I'm still curious.
JKalpowsky
Member
Rather I thought it was that we use 5-gallon carboys specifically for secondary use in a way to decrease the amount of headspace. In a 6 or 6.5 gallon carboy, you have nearly the same amount of headspace as in a bucket fermenter. (My carboys are a touch smaller in diameter than my buckets, but not by much, and not nearly enough to make a difference)
Not this old, oxygen permeability BS again.......Most of the arguments against about them are 10 years out of date. ANd even then the whole oxygen permeability difference were negligable if any. More like it was perpetuated by the glass carboy industry than anything else.
Modern plastics have come along way, especially in the last couple years after the Bispahenol A recalls. More and more of the new bottles coming out are made of the same stuff as the better bottles. In fact the company that made better bottles started making bottles for the water cooler industry. Some water companies even advertise they are using better bottles for their products. And some of the water better bottles have ended up at homebrew shops mis labled, there was even a thread on that here a couple years ago, iirc the OP called the BB company and they said they got mixed up in the warehouse, but they are the same bottles, just that the water bottles are stamped "not for re-use" and some other legal mumbo jumbo, but they are the same bottles.
And of course other manufactureres have been changing their plastics as well.
There's just too many variables in plastic water bottles these days, since so many companies changed their plastics a couple years ago so we wouldn't grow man-****s due to BPA, to be able to make a blanket statement like "they're oxygen permeable" anymore.
That might have been the truth 5 years ago, but there's been some leaps in the industry the last few years. Heck even the BMC brewers started putting their beers in plastic bottles for ballparks and stuff not to long ago, and THEY did that becasue of the leaps in plastic bottle technologies. I posted an article about that on here a couple of years ago, when I think miller started bottling with them.
Seriously, the reasons that glass carboys were traditionally used to secondary, was so the the homebrewer could see when his beer was clear. And for the first 100 years or so the carboy was MADE OF GLASS....In fact fermenters were either just carboys or ceramic crocks to make beer in, THEN plastic buckets came around.
It's really that simple. And then a bunch of folks decided to overcomplicate the explanation, especially the glass carboy makers, who were threatened by the appearance of PLASTICS in the 50's, decided to "explain" how their products were superior, and we bought it lock stock and barrel. But remember doctors used to say that smoking cigarettes was good for us?
Do we still keep repeating that 4 out of 5 doctors recommend a pack of camels a day? Or do we "think" more deeply about it?
If folks can long primary in a bucket, even over 6 months, with no oxydation issues, then just maybe that old belief that is so easily repeated, is no longer valid?
It's not the same plastic any more......look at the better bottles....they're not the same plastics any more...most plastics aren't the same plastics from 60 years ago, yet we keep repeating the same old "bs" about oxygen permeabilty. Just like we rotely repeat autolysis from yeast that was far less healthy and fresh 30-50 years ago.
The biggest thing is headspace, you want to eliminate headspace if you're going to sit a beer in a secondary for a long time (But if you're long primarying and don't open the bucket and leave the co2 in the headspace- you don't have to worry.)
Modern plastics have come along way, especially in the last couple years after the Bispahenol A recalls. More and more of the new bottles coming out are made of the same stuff as the better bottles. In fact the company that made better bottles started making bottles for the water cooler industry. Some water companies even advertise they are using better bottles for their products. And some of the water better bottles have ended up at homebrew shops mis labled, there was even a thread on that here a couple years ago, iirc the OP called the BB company and they said they got mixed up in the warehouse, but they are the same bottles, just that the water bottles are stamped "not for re-use" and some other legal mumbo jumbo, but they are the same bottles.
And of course other manufactureres have been changing their plastics as well.
There's just too many variables in plastic water bottles these days, since so many companies changed their plastics a couple years ago so we wouldn't grow man-****s due to BPA, to be able to make a blanket statement like "they're oxygen permeable" anymore.
That might have been the truth 5 years ago, but there's been some leaps in the industry the last few years. Heck even the BMC brewers started putting their beers in plastic bottles for ballparks and stuff not to long ago, and THEY did that becasue of the leaps in plastic bottle technologies. I posted an article about that on here a couple of years ago, when I think miller started bottling with them.
Seriously, the reasons that glass carboys were traditionally used to secondary, was so the the homebrewer could see when his beer was clear. And for the first 100 years or so the carboy was MADE OF GLASS....In fact fermenters were either just carboys or ceramic crocks to make beer in, THEN plastic buckets came around.
It's really that simple. And then a bunch of folks decided to overcomplicate the explanation, especially the glass carboy makers, who were threatened by the appearance of PLASTICS in the 50's, decided to "explain" how their products were superior, and we bought it lock stock and barrel. But remember doctors used to say that smoking cigarettes was good for us?
Do we still keep repeating that 4 out of 5 doctors recommend a pack of camels a day? Or do we "think" more deeply about it?
If folks can long primary in a bucket, even over 6 months, with no oxydation issues, then just maybe that old belief that is so easily repeated, is no longer valid?
It's not the same plastic any more......look at the better bottles....they're not the same plastics any more...most plastics aren't the same plastics from 60 years ago, yet we keep repeating the same old "bs" about oxygen permeabilty. Just like we rotely repeat autolysis from yeast that was far less healthy and fresh 30-50 years ago.
The biggest thing is headspace, you want to eliminate headspace if you're going to sit a beer in a secondary for a long time (But if you're long primarying and don't open the bucket and leave the co2 in the headspace- you don't have to worry.)
This is correct. I'm always baffled to see this question come down to issues of oxygen permeability and the like. There's a reason for a change in both the shape AND size of the secondary container -- not only are secondaries always carboys, they're smaller carboys, too. This is because when you don't have the activity and CO2 production of primary, you want to the reduce the surface area potentially exposed to air. This is accomplished with the narrow carboy neck as well as the smaller volume, which puts the level of the beer up into the neck where only a very small circle is potentially exposed. I would say the other reasons glass is maybe somewhat preferred are #1-sanitation (if your beer is sitting in there for a couple of months, it does need to be super-clean) and #2-oxygen permeability (this is highly debated and certainly unclear whether it's anything more than a crackpot theoretical possibility). I use a Better Bottle for secondary and don't have any problems. Lots of people do. But I wouldn't use a bucket primarily because of the headspace issue.
McGarnigle
Well-Known Member
I agree that size is a crucial. The tapering is meaningless if you have 5g in a 6g carboy. I have always thought the tapering does help, however. Even if you had a 5g pail, I think it would be hard to get it filled close to the top with 5g of wort.
sgillespie
Well-Known Member
The reason for secondary in carboy is definitely head space. Whether or not to use them for primary is really preference. I like many others here prefer better bottle carboys, just because I like to see whats going on.
This makes a lot of sense.
I'll still take the 0 permeability of glass/stainless over the "almost 0" of plastics if I'm going to age something for a significant amount of time. Effects may be small and of course there are many other things at play, but if I have that much time invested in something I'd rather not add one more variable.
Buuuuut, the bottom line is that the majority of it is personal preference and you can make fine beer using plastics, glass, or stainless. Everyone has their own opinion and reasoning, so just do what works for you.
Buuuuut, the bottom line is that the majority of it is personal preference and you can make fine beer using plastics, glass, or stainless. Everyone has their own opinion and reasoning, so just do what works for you.
JohnTheBrewist
Well-Known Member
I'm completely with Revvy here. Its frustrating to see brewing myths perpetuated simply because someone read it somewhere, or a given explaination seemed to make sense.
I fermented solely in buckets almost the entire time during my first go round with this hobby from 1990-2003 (I had a carboy early on, broke it, and just used buckets since). Thats longer than, and before, most members of this forum were brewers. I have never had any problems with infection or oxidation of my beer. Back then, I still transferred to a secondary after krausen, because that's what the books told you to do. But my secondary was just another bucket.
Nowadays, I still use buckets for my small batches, but use a conical for large batches. If headspace and surface area were really an issue, why would anyone use a conical fermentor? Why would anyone buy a 22gallon brewhemoth conical and use it with 5 or 10 gallon batches? Because its a non-issue.
I choose to believe that carboys were a convenient container and already in use, so brewers adapted them. Many people like them so they can see their beer. But I like to set it and forget it. I set my beer to fermenting and forget about it for 3-4 weeks (sometimes more) then bottle or keg. I dont have the need to keep looking in on it. I have enough experience to know that it'll be fine without my help. I also no longer use a secondary, in the sense it was used in the early brewing books. But I may allow it to condition in a corny for a while.
So, to me, the bottom line is: Ferment in whatever you want that is sanitary, doesn't leach chemicals, and reasonably keeps oxygen and bacteria out.
I fermented solely in buckets almost the entire time during my first go round with this hobby from 1990-2003 (I had a carboy early on, broke it, and just used buckets since). Thats longer than, and before, most members of this forum were brewers. I have never had any problems with infection or oxidation of my beer. Back then, I still transferred to a secondary after krausen, because that's what the books told you to do. But my secondary was just another bucket.
Nowadays, I still use buckets for my small batches, but use a conical for large batches. If headspace and surface area were really an issue, why would anyone use a conical fermentor? Why would anyone buy a 22gallon brewhemoth conical and use it with 5 or 10 gallon batches? Because its a non-issue.
I choose to believe that carboys were a convenient container and already in use, so brewers adapted them. Many people like them so they can see their beer. But I like to set it and forget it. I set my beer to fermenting and forget about it for 3-4 weeks (sometimes more) then bottle or keg. I dont have the need to keep looking in on it. I have enough experience to know that it'll be fine without my help. I also no longer use a secondary, in the sense it was used in the early brewing books. But I may allow it to condition in a corny for a while.
So, to me, the bottom line is: Ferment in whatever you want that is sanitary, doesn't leach chemicals, and reasonably keeps oxygen and bacteria out.
randallr
Active Member
Do you think those water containers that come on water coolers would work?
mlyday
Well-Known Member
I think instead of oxygen permeability, people should be worried about the light getting through the glass or clear plastic. Probably much more of a problem. Ill stick with the long primary in a bucket, and no secondary. Unless I can come up with the cash for a cool looking SS conical.
If they are <1> and <2> recycling code, then yes...this question gets asked once a week, there's a million threads discussing this.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
You don't need the "cool looking SS conical" to get a SS fermenter... Just pick up some kegs and ferment in them. :rockin: I have a batch in one of my 1/6 Sanke kegs right now. I've also fermented ~5 gallons in a corny keg before. I am hunting for some 1/4 Sanke kegs so that I can ferment more than 5 gallons at a shot (they hold 7.75 gallons) as well as ferment something with top cropping yeast. Used Sanke kegs can usually be picked up pretty cheap, if you hunt around for them...
I might use the 6 gallon PET carboy still, when it makes sense, until I get the 1/4 kegs... Then, it will probably just be used for occasional batches. There's just something really appealing about seeing kegs with airlocks fitted lined up...
cadarnell
Well-Known Member
how big of a boogie man is head space in a secondary really ???
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
Much bigger than the actual 'need' to use another vessel/bright tank... As pointed out already, the reasons for racking go back 30+ years. With the advances in yeast, and other ingredients (available to home brewers) quality improving over the years, the actual 'need' to secondary has all but vanished. Instead of part of the normal process, it's now only rarely 'needed'... More often, it's a matter of choice by the home brewer.
IMO, you're better off having a couple more primaries, and just go longer there. When you want to rack into another vessel (long term aging, multiple flavor additions that need to be done in steps, getting off of one before adding the next) then you can use whatever you want. Personally, I'll use a keg for that. I'm using my only 5 gallon glass carboy as a primary for a 3 gallon hard ginger ale recipe. In about a month, I'll check on it to see if it's ready for either bottles, or if it needs more time. Since I have some ginger root in the carboy. I'll might want to rack off of that after a while. Then again, it might be good sitting on it for the month (or so)...
JohnTheBrewist
Well-Known Member
I don't understand the question. I personally don't believe head space is an issue at all during fermentation. I might be more concerned about headspace for long term conditioning, especially on lighter beers (although I have no proof to justify that statement). I would have no hesitation about leaving a 5gallon brew in a 6.5gallon bucket untouched for a couple (maybe a few) months. But if you're going to be opening the lid to peek in, all bets are off.
Similar threads
