# Full Volume Mash



## thermo_47 (12/3/13)

Forgive me if this has been asked before, but my search showed nothing asked so specifically...

I'm considering trying a full volume mash. I'm in the middle of constructing my HERMS and have experimented on and off with fly sparging vs batch sparging. I'm aware that efficiency will be down with a full volume mash, but having read a few threads tonight it seems some brewers experiences have been that "too much" efficiency can lead to thin/not very malty beers. I live for malt character. I wanna chew on modt beers I make/drink. I'm well aware there's many factors involved there, but here's what I'm thinking of trying:

Mash in with full pre-boil volume at 50C.
With HERMS, step to 62 and 66C over an hour. 
Further step to 75 (estimating this will take between 15 - 30 mins depending on batch size) and then simply drain the lot to the boil kettle.

In my travels, I read up on mashes that are "too thin." Seems BIABers are using 7L/kg no worries, but most beers I like to make are 6% or bigger, meaning more grain:water. My most recent 5.5% IPA was 14.7kg of grain to get a pre-boil volume of 68L with batch sparging. Unless my maths is horrible, with a full volume mash assuming I'd need to around 83L of water to allow for grain absorbtion, but even then my ratio would be 5.64 L/kg.

The real issue is efficiency. I think my IPA with batch sparging was around 70%... anyone have experience with how "bad" full volume mash would be? I used to full volume BIAB and would be in the 60's for efficiency... but could I expect more malty flavour and body from a full volume/less efficient mash? Or will I just start wasting money..?

Food for thought - the brewer from Moa in NZ once told me that they only take first runnings to make their imperial stout.. and that beer is 10.4%! And one of my favourites.. 

All this thinking is leading me to envision a 2V system with HERMS... (if you don't count the HERMS vessel)

Heat water in the boil kettle, pump into the mash tun and ramp/rest over 90 mins to mash out without stirring or sparging, then drain and boil.. sound pretty appealing!

Could anyone with experience/informed opinions let me know what they think?

Many thanks,

Jon


----------



## manticle (12/3/13)

What's your definition of full volume, what were you making before and why will efficiency be down?


----------



## Crusty (12/3/13)

Some interesting points you make there but some of that info is a little hard to believe.
I used to have a 3V PID Rims & mashed in with a L/G ratio of 3L/KG & hit low to mid 80% efficiency.
I now Biab in an urn with a pretty thin mash, sometimes 6-7 L/KG & still achieve low to mid 80% efficiency.
I do a full volume mash, no sparge & certainly don't suffer from low efficiency. I can do beers in the urn, full volume over 6% but much more than that I'm pushing it for available space. Cutting back the batch size is another way to producing bigger beers with my system but anything over 5.5% for me just makes me too silly, too quickly.


----------



## bum (13/3/13)

I don't HERMS so I don't know if it complicates matters but it looks to me like you're talking about "no sparge" brewing. Plenty of info about it here and around the net if you don't get the info you're looking for.

As I recall it, your impressions seem correct - efficiency takes a slight hit but many perceive the beer to me "maltier". I seem to recall graphs and stuff somewhere (Braukaiser?). I can't see efficiency being so poor that cost becomes a mitigating factor. Base malt is cheap.


----------



## Crusty (13/3/13)

bum said:


> I don't HERMS so I don't know if it complicates matters but it looks to me like you're talking about "no sparge" brewing. Plenty of info about it here and around the net if you don't get the info you're looking for.
> 
> As I recall it, your impressions seem correct - efficiency takes a slight hit but many perceive the beer to me "maltier". I seem to recall graphs and stuff somewhere (Braukaiser?). I can't see efficiency being so poor that cost becomes a mitigating factor. Base malt is cheap.


Using a traditional 3V system, if you do a 60min sacc rest & a sparge & try to do the same with Biab, you will most likely suffer a loss in efficiency.
If you do a full volume mash, sacc rest for 90mins instead of 60 & mash out, no sparge with Biab, there is no reason you should suffer from any efficiency loss whatsoever. I'll argue the efficiency loss until the cows come home because I've brewed, 2V. 3V & Biab & efficiency is pretty much the same. I've never added extra grain to make up for any efficiency loss & work out all my recipes on 80% & still manage to extract more than expected, 81-82%.
Bring it on............................. h34r:


----------



## manticle (13/3/13)

Most of what I've read about no sparge BIAB done correctly suggests equal or better than average compared to 3v batch sparge equipment (what I use) and holds its own with any others (3v fly sparge and all its variations).

If efficiency is not crazy low and is consistent then it is one of the last numbers I would panic about anyway, unless your beer is shite.

Efficiency will often drop with increasing grain bill or so I've read. Most of my high gravity brews are in keeping with my low gravity ones (ranging approx. 3.5- 10 %) so my experience doesn't show a vast difference.


----------



## Yob (13/3/13)

Not going to get into the eff thing, pretty well covered but with a grist that size and only wanting to do first runnings you could also consider a partigyle on it to get a second batch from the same grain, when I did this I got 1 batch at 1075 and another @ 1045 from the one mash.. 2 batches and it only added a bit over an hour to the day..


----------



## thermo_47 (13/3/13)

Hmmm yeah all good points. I had considered doing a partigyle if I was brewing an 8% or bigger beer - no reason not to make a hoppy brown from the last of my imperial stout mash!

Mash tun space is a big concern. I was thinking of enlarging my setup anyway..  Anyone got some stainless 44 gal drums they wanna sell?

If I'm only achieving around 70-75% eff now, whether batch or fly sparging, is the difference between my setup and Crusty's 80% just the mash tun construction? If Manticle gets roughly the same efficiency between a 3.5% beer and a 10% beer, what am I doing wrong?!

Either way, next brew I'm having a go. Full volume mash with HERMS, and I reckon a 90 min mash since I won't have to sparge.. 

Thanks for everybody's 2c's


----------



## Mardoo (13/3/13)

Love to hear how it goes if you're game to post after the fact. I'm a bit of a malt-whore myself.


----------



## thermo_47 (13/3/13)

Yeah I'll definitely post the results. May take a few weeks, keeping pretty busy til easter with work.... but after that, it's time to lay the smackdown on some grain!


----------



## Bribie G (13/3/13)

At the Brisbane Home Brewing Conference "Beer Wars" session a couple of years ago, efficiencies between a 3v, BIAB full volume, ghetto bucket o death system and a Braumeister all finished within a percentage of each other. Unfortunately nobody with a mobile Herms could make it for the day, would have been interesting.


----------



## AndrewQLD (13/3/13)

There's a fair bit of info in this thread regarding full volume brewing and also the effects on efficiency.

With the system I use now my efficiencies are 80% for full volume mashing with no sparging. And BIAB system using full volume no sparge and no mash out is 80% as well.


----------



## Bribie G (13/3/13)

Priceless, absolutely priceless - with pictures of the first ever _known _BIAB full volume brew as well  - this should be archived in the Brewing Hall of Fame.


----------

