WLP002 magic?

[billyjohnbrewing]

OK, so first real post after creating an account over 3 years ago.

How is it that WLP002 has a listed attenuation of 63%-70%?

I made a 1L starter with my stir plate on 27 July with 100g of Light DME. Cold crashed that 24 hours before brewing and decanted most of the "beer."

30 July, I made a Deschutes Black Butte Porter clone with an OG of 1.060. 24 hours later was sitting at 68F in my Cool Brewing Bag so I pitched. It hovered around 68-70 for 2 days then jumped/stabilized to 73 for 2 days even after adding an extra frozen 2L bottle of water. I pulled it out yesterday to come up to room temp...~75F. This thing is still bubbling once ever 4 seconds or so and is at 1.010! Is the yeast done yet?! I tasted it and it's a bit stronger than what I wanted (6.6% vice 5.5%). I have read some other posts about WLP002 70-75% attenuation but 83% seems a bit much...did I get an infection that's helping eat the sugars?

Thanks for any replies.

 

[Ozarks Mountain Brewery]

it is possible, some infections don't have any taste and accelerates the alcohol, but it could just be you made a good beer with a great efficiency too

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

it is possible, some infections don't have any taste and accelerates the alcohol, but it could just be you made a good beer with a great efficiency too

I'd really like to get on board with the "good beer great efficiency" idea but I do have to question it. Used to brew with my best friend but had to split our gear as he moved to another state. So...this was my first batch on my own and I'm pretty sure my sanitization was up to par. I guess we'll see what happens after I let it sit out for 5 days before cold crashing. Only time will tell...

 

[Colbizle]

This is pretty common with this yeast. IME wlp002 and wyeast 1968 are much more attenuating then their spec'd. 69%-75% is more of a reasonable assumption. There some threads on here with other people reporting similar results.

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

This is pretty common with this yeast. IME wlp002 and wyeast 1968 are much more attenuating then their spec'd. 69%-75% is more of a reasonable assumption. There some threads on here with other people reporting similar results.

Fair enough. I do remember reading some things similar to what you are saying. I guess I just wanted to put my experience out there as well. Most importantly I really hope the beer turns out.

 

[Ozarks Mountain Brewery]

a good tip from experience, if you get the runs after drinking the beer, well you know what happened lol

 

[IslandLizard]

WLP002 and WY1968 are very similar, if not the exact same strains.

WYeast lists attenuation of 1968 at 67-71% not 63-70. My latest fresh pack with a 2 liter "vitality starter" follows that to a T, and attenuated my Little Sumpin' Sumpin' clone from 1.071 to 1.024. That's 67%, and it ain't budging, even after multiple rousings (shaking and CO2 burping in a keg). OK, a step mash with a sacch rest at 158F may have something to do with that too, but I've done that so many times before with less drastic results. However, the beer isn't cloyingly sweet. Yes, sweet, but not what you expect when you see 1.024. Possibly it's loaded with dextrins.

In the past my 1.060 Black Butte Porter clone using fresh WY1968 came out at 1.019 (68% attenuation).

But... subsequent fermentations with the same reused WY1968 became lower and lower in gravity. At the same time, they wouldn't drop clear in 4-5 days either. They stayed hazy longer and longer. The last ones never really cleared, even after a 2 week cold crash at 32F. The yeast either mutates or more likely, the less flocculent (and more attenuating) population takes over, like a 20-30% increase with each reuse.

From another pack I made a large (1.3 liter) starter, and split it into 4s. After decanting, filled three 4oz mason jars, and rebuild a new 1.3 liter starter from the remaining 4th part. Saved one 4oz jar out and pitched the rest (250 billion cells) into my 6 gallons of 1.060 ESB last night. We'll see what happens. It's bubbling away happily, within 8 hours after pitching. I aerated with a large whisk. No pure oxygen here, yet.

What I expect is that WY1968 can be reused once, maybe twice to get more attenuation, but pitching from fresh (low generation) starters will keep its original properties more closely. I've had similar experiences with 1098/1099. Even 1272 (American Ale II), not clearing well after a few generations.

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

WLP002 and WY1968 are very similar, if not the exact same strains.

WYeast lists attenuation of 1968 at 67-71% not 63-70. My latest fresh pack with a 2 liter "vitality starter" follows that to a T, and attenuated my Little Sumpin' Sumpin' clone from 1.071 to 1.024. That's 67%, and it ain't budging, even after multiple rousings (shaking and CO2 burping in a keg). OK, a step mash with a sacch rest at 158F may have something to do with that too, but I've done that so many times before with less drastic results. However, the beer isn't cloyingly sweet. Yes, sweet, but not what you expect when you see 1.024. Possibly it's loaded with dextrins.

In the past my 1.060 Black Butte Porter clone using fresh WY1968 came out at 1.019 (68% attenuation).

But... subsequent fermentations with the same reused WY1968 became lower and lower in gravity. At the same time, they wouldn't drop clear in 4-5 days either. They stayed hazy longer and longer. The last ones never really cleared, even after a 2 week cold crash at 32F. The yeast either mutates or more likely, the less flocculent (and more attenuating) population takes over, like a 20-30% increase with each reuse.

From another pack I made a large (1.3 liter) starter, and split it into 4s. After decanting, filled three 4oz mason jars, and rebuild a new 1.3 liter starter from the remaining 4th part. Saved one 4oz jar out and pitched the rest (250 billion cells) into my 6 gallons of 1.060 ESB last night. We'll see what happens. It's bubbling away happily, within 8 hours after pitching. I aerated with a large whisk. No pure oxygen here, yet.

What I expect is that WY1968 can be reused once, maybe twice to get more attenuation, but pitching from fresh (low generation) starters will keep its original properties more closely. I've had similar experiences with 1098/1099. Even 1272 (American Ale II), not clearing well after a few generations.

Definitely a lot here to digest, no pun intended. When brewing the past few years I would consider us very amateur. However, now I really want to start narrowing down the attention to detail on the smallest yet most impactful things, like pitch and ferment temp consistency. If nothing else, I'll have ~5 gallons of beer that will get me drunk and clean me out.

a good tip from experience, if you get the runs after drinking the beer, well you know what happened lol

hahaha truer words never spoken

 

[Colbizle]

a good tip from experience, if you get the runs after drinking the beer, well you know what happened lol

huh? You won't get sick from an infected beer. How do you think sour beers are made? Pathogens don't typically survive because of the low ph of the finished wort.

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

huh? You won't get sick from an infected beer. How do you think sour beers are made? Pathogens don't typically survive because of the low ph of the finished wort.

IIRC there was a case in Africa maybe a year or so ago where a bad batch of some local fermented brew that killed like 70 people. They thought it was crocodile bile that was spiked in it, however crocodile bile isn't poisonous...

I don't doubt something could infect beer and survive both the alcohol and pH environment, I'm just hoping that's not the case with my beer.

Also, I definitely understand how certain bacteria can actually be helpful in the profile of the beer you are making, most notably the lambic. I currently have ~3 gallons of a cherry lambic in bottles that was aged in secondary/tertiary for ~1.5 years. Bottle aging now sitting around 1.5 years as well. I'll have to crack one open soon to see where it's at since the last one I had was almost a year ago.

 

[serum]

I've had loads of beers go way beyond the attenuation levels the manufacturers put on the specs. I think it's something to do with how I mash.

 

[tagz]

I've gotten 1968 (same strain) to consistently push 80%AA. You built up a starter, did a step mash, and fermented pretty warm so I don't think it's unreasonable to think it got that far on its own.

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

Definitely didn't do a step mash but did mash @148 instead if 152 so maybe that played into it. Also, I ended up being right in the sweet spot of 68F for the first 2 days which is pretty cool for what we normally do. Used to just room temp ferment most ales.

 

[tagz]

Oh whoops, that was island lizards post! For me, I was getting 80%AA when I was having issues with my thermometer. Thought I was mashing at 154, but was really mashing in the mid-high 140s.

 

[55x11]

OK, so first real post after creating an account over 3 years ago.

How is it that WLP002 has a listed attenuation of 63%-70%?

I made a 1L starter with my stir plate on 27 July with 100g of Light DME. Cold crashed that 24 hours before brewing and decanted most of the "beer."

30 July, I made a Deschutes Black Butte Porter clone with an OG of 1.060. 24 hours later was sitting at 68F in my Cool Brewing Bag so I pitched. It hovered around 68-70 for 2 days then jumped/stabilized to 73 for 2 days even after adding an extra frozen 2L bottle of water. I pulled it out yesterday to come up to room temp...~75F. This thing is still bubbling once ever 4 seconds or so and is at 1.010! Is the yeast done yet?! I tasted it and it's a bit stronger than what I wanted (6.6% vice 5.5%). I have read some other posts about WLP002 70-75% attenuation but 83% seems a bit much...did I get an infection that's helping eat the sugars?

Thanks for any replies.

Attenuation is also strongly dependent on your ingredients, mash schedule etc.
The range is just a "guesstimate" assuming some random set of ingredients.

You can get above 100% "apparent" attenuation (yes, above 100% - just have to ferment below 1.000) with just about any yeast if you use mostly table sugar, for example.

I really don't get why attenuation is a useful number. maybe comparing yeast strains, but otherwise it's totally useless in my work flow.

Finishing gravity is important - it tells you how dry or sweet your beer is. So is ABV, maybe IBU (but there is much more to that), and of course you should make sure fermentation finished regardless of what yeast manufacture "predicts" it will finish at. Let it ferment until it stops.

 

[worlddivides]

Like 55x11 just said, it is just a guesstimate.

I regularly get apparent attenuation way above the percentages reported by the manufacturer. For example, I recently made a batch of beer with Danstar Windsor where a simulation put the final gravity at 1.019, but it actually came out to 1.011. Before that, I had made a beer with Danstar Windsor yeast that had a simulated final gravity of 1.020 and that one came out right around 1.010, a full 10 points lower than the simulation. I forget the attenuation, but it was something like 15% higher than it should have been.

I tend to have problems with efficiency way higher than expected and attenuation way higher than expected quite regularly. I generally don't mind too much, but I've had times where I was shooting for a 5% ABV beer and I actually got a 7% ABV beer because both the efficiency and attenuation were way higher than the recipes assumed they'd be.

Having a lower gravity alone is DEFINITELY not a reason to just assume your beer is "infected." You definitely need something more than that.

 

[MHoffSilver]

My 2 cents.

At the moment I have a New England IPA with WLP002 in the FV. It is heavily dry hopped (should have been dry hopped at 0%, 50%, 75% fermentation, but the calculations on the attenuation sort of messed up the percentages).
The recipe called for a FG of 1020'ish, with a measured OG of 1067. However the FV is now down to 1005 which should suggest an apparent attenuation of 92%!
This surprise me a lot - but the only explanation I can find is that the Dry hopping have an impact on the yeast balance between floc and attenuation.
The dry hops seems to make the yeast stay in suspension in stead of floc'ing.

An absolutely un-scientific theory leads me to believe that the yeast in suspension - due to the heavy dry hopping schedule - will be in contact with the fermentables a lot longer than if normal hopping/dry hopping. And this could lead to a higher attenuation than normal.
This ... or it may have an infection, but I do not see or taste any signs of this

 

[Torrefaction]

I used WLP002 in my first ever AG IPA, a Stone IPA clone. Got 80+ attenuation with no starter (dumped my starter cause it smelled funny (lol) and ran out for a fresh vial). Great beer! The recipe (from Brew Your Own) assumed 81% attenuation with 002, so I can't imagine this is too weird. Let us know how it turns out.

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

Thanks for all of the input. Just put it in the fridge to cold crash before the gelatin addition tomorrow. The activity had definitely ceased after the 4+ day room temp rest and cleared out quite a bit. I'll check back in this weekend with the result.

 

[serum]

Definitely didn't do a step mash but did mash @148 instead if 152 so maybe that played into it. Also, I ended up being right in the sweet spot of 68F for the first 2 days which is pretty cool for what we normally do. Used to just room temp ferment most ales.

I think a single infusion at 148 will get it pretty low. That's what gave me high attenuation with yeasts that were meant to leave a bit more behind.

 

[Chris_Primavera]

I used 002 exclusively for about a dozen batches in a row. Straight from the pack, it attenuated as listed. If I saved the slurry and re-pitched, each generation attenuated more - to the point of the 83% you are seeing.

My concern is why are you adding a 2L bottle of frozen water? seems like an opportunity for infection and may be the source of your problem.

 

[IslandLizard]

I used 002 exclusively for about a dozen batches in a row. Straight from the pack, it attenuated as listed. If I saved the slurry and re-pitched, each generation attenuated more - to the point of the 83% you are seeing.

Did you also notice that with repeated re-use it would floc out way less quickly too, the yeast becoming more powdery?

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

I used 002 exclusively for about a dozen batches in a row. Straight from the pack, it attenuated as listed. If I saved the slurry and re-pitched, each generation attenuated more - to the point of the 83% you are seeing.

My concern is why are you adding a 2L bottle of frozen water? seems like an opportunity for infection and may be the source of your problem.

The frozen 2L bottle of water was in a 2L bottle that was set inside my cool brewing bag to control fermentation temps.

 

[billyjohnbrewing]

Checking back in after having the porter on tap for a few days now. The initial pint or so definitely had a funky finish. I'm guessing that was from the crap the settled to the bottom of the keg because a day later after just dumping another pint it seems to be good. I will say though that the finish isn't quite right however I'm assuming that's from the almost 1% more ABV than initially expected. Thinking now, maybe I should have tossed some maltodextrin/water mix at kegging to add more mouth-feel as compensation for the higher alcohol...would this have worked?

All in all though it's definitely drinkable and definitely over 6%

We'll see how my Hacker Pschorr clone goes, somehow missed 1.054 OG with 1.041. Quite strange, followed Beersmith volumes to a T and did a 90 minute boil to bring the volume down. But that's another day.

 

[Brew_G]

I recently brewed for the first time with 1968, and IPA that went from 1.069 to 1.013 for 79% attenuation. I mashed at 148F and roused a couple times, but it definitely surprised me.

I'll be brewing a brown ale this weekend with yeast harvested from the starter I made for the IPA. I'm hoping for something more like 74%, so I'll mash at 152F. We'll see.