# National Comp & Powels Malts



## Darren (24/11/05)

crells said:


> Thanks for tips guys.
> 
> (the best brew at vicbrew & nationals this year used powells).
> [post="93013"][/post]​




Is that true. I doubt it!
cheers
Darren


----------



## T.D. (24/11/05)

I believe it is Darren. I can't remember the exact details but I know some of the top (and I mean TOP) brews in the state and national HB comps were done with Powells. I must say, I opened a bag of Powells Ale malt this afternoon and it smelt absolutely unbelievable! In my opinion it seemed much more "rich" than the JW ale malt I have been using up until this point. Proof is in the pudding of course, and I am yet to do my first brew with the stuff, but its all looking good so far!  

Ross, what was the overall EBC of your amber? Seems like it would have been pretty dark (say 35 EBC???). Nothing wrong with that of course. Your recipe does have less Dark Crystal in percentage terms than crells'. I have used 400g of JW D Crystal in a brown ale once and it came out brilliantly, so there's no reason why its a definite no no. I have just found that 200g is a good limit for the style I like. I have been getting a bit over the big heavy amber ales though of late, so I am tending to cut back a bit on the darker malts. That's another reason why I thought I'd try a slightly lighter crystal next time like Fawcetts, or JW's regular crystal. I like your use of carapils though - I am going to start adding a dab of this in my ales from now on - I love the stuff!


----------



## Darren (25/11/05)

T.D. said:


> I believe it is Darren. I can't remember the exact details but I know some of the top (and I mean TOP) brews in the state and national HB comps were done with Powells.
> [post="93133"][/post]​




TD, you said the winning brew . Even some kit beers do well in comps. Like I said I very much doubt the winning national beer was made from Powells malt.
I will stand to be corrected though.
cheers
Darren :beer:


----------



## AndrewQLD (25/11/05)

Darren said:


> T.D. said:
> 
> 
> > I believe it is Darren. I can't remember the exact details but I know some of the top (and I mean TOP) brews in the state and national HB comps were done with Powells.
> ...



Well, my all powells hefe wiezen placed third in the nationals, and my all powells english pale, American pale, australian dark ale and czech pilsner all placed 3rd,3rd,3rd.2nd respectively in the ANAWBS. I love the powells malt, fantastic malt profile and easy to crush. Great flavour and aroma too.
sorry for the thread hijack, back on topic.
Ross thats a killer hop schedule, you and jayse will be buying shares in hopco soon  and I would have to agree that 500g of crystal is a little over the top, maybe halve that and a little Powells Caramalt for that nice caramel touch h34r: 

cheers (glad it's friday)
Andrew


----------



## Darren (25/11/05)

AndrewQLD said:


> Well, my all powells hefe wiezen placed third in the nationals, and my all powells english pale, American pale, australian dark ale and czech pilsner all placed 3rd,3rd,3rd.2nd respectively in the ANAWBS.
> cheers (glad it's friday)
> Andrew
> [post="93291"][/post]​




Great stuff Andrew, you have done well. Like I said before I doubt the winning beer in the nationals was made with Powells malts.
cheers
Darren


----------



## AndrewQLD (25/11/05)

Darren said:


> AndrewQLD said:
> 
> 
> > Well, my all powells hefe wiezen placed third in the nationals, and my all powells english pale, American pale, australian dark ale and czech pilsner all placed 3rd,3rd,3rd.2nd respectively in the ANAWBS.
> ...



OK Darren, I'll bite, what makes you think a winning beer wasn't made with Powells malt, (not that I would have any idea) just curious.

Cheers
Andrew


----------



## Darren (26/11/05)

Andrew,
Only Crispy can confirm what malt the beer was made from. He recently purchased a few hundred kilos of malt again from me a couple of weeks ago.
Suggests he was pleased with the results from the first lot
cheers
Darren


----------



## wee stu (26/11/05)

Darren said:


> Andrew,
> Only Crispy can confirm what malt the beer was made from. He recently purchased a few hundred kilos of malt again from me a couple of weeks ago.
> Suggests he was pleased with the results from the first lot
> cheers
> ...



OK some clarification (maybe).

Crispy was best brewer of show at the AABC Nationals. 

The highest scoring beer of that show was from Mark Leatham of Victoria (an American Pale Ale) - if Mark posts here, perhaps he can tell us whether he used Powells or not?

FWIW at least one (and I would have an educated guess, both) of the joint equal best beers of show at ANAWBS were not brewed with Powells, but with malt supplied by Darren (thank you, Darren - and I still owe you for a bag :huh: ).

Just goes to show there a lot of good brewers, and good malts, around the place  






5 minutes to midnite h34r: 
awrabest, stu


----------



## T.D. (26/11/05)

Darren, I don't remember saying that the winning beer in the nationals was made from Powells. I think what I said was along the lines that some of the most successful beers in state and national comps were made from Powells.
I actually have no direct information on it - I am going on what I remember reading on the topic. I agree with Andrew - what makes you think it is such an unlikely scenario? Like I said before, when I opened that bag of Powells Ale malt I have never smelt anything like that from any of the malt brands I have used in the past. We'll see how the beers come out - obviously that is the most important thing - but at this point I would not discount the stuff for a second! :beer:


----------



## Ross (26/11/05)

T.D. said:


> Darren, I don't remember saying that the winning beer in the nationals was made from Powells. I think what I said was along the lines that some of the most successful beers in state and national comps were made from Powells.
> I actually have no direct information on it - I am going on what I remember reading on the topic. I agree with Andrew - what makes you think it is such an unlikely scenario? Like I said before, when I opened that bag of Powells Ale malt I have never smelt anything like that from any of the malt brands I have used in the past. We'll see how the beers come out - obviously that is the most important thing - but at this point I would not discount the stuff for a second! :beer:
> [post="93384"][/post]​



maybe someone is worried about sales  ...


----------



## Darren (26/11/05)

Just curious. Did anyone get a first or gold medal with powells malt?
I know that a LOT of the winners in this years State show bought malt from me. 
Weyermann pilsener malt IMHO is the best malt going around, Marris Otter is great for english styles but overpriced. Barret Bursten Galaxy makes a great strong ale and is great value for money at $45 bucks a bag.
If i got a batch of mouldy malt (such as Powells) I would demand a refund. Anyone get a refund from Powells?


As usual you get what you pay for I guess.

cheers
Darren


----------



## warrenlw63 (26/11/05)

Couple of mouldy bags is chucking the baby out with the bathwater somewhat. That said I'd be pissed off If I received them. <_< 

I've got no idea what malts were used in winning nationals recipes. I do know one thing. I've only used Powells malt once and I found it to be a really nice Ale malt. As good as Marris Otter IMO. :beerbang: 

Oh, I don't advocate this everytime, however occasionally it doesn't hurt to support local products. We'd be the first to bitch about it if they left our shores or shut down completely.

(Nationalistic rant off) :beer: 

Warren -


----------



## tangent (26/11/05)

that marris is a tasty malt tho
i could almost eat her out of the bag!


----------



## tdh (26/11/05)

Let's call her 'Maris' (only ever 1 'r').

tdh


----------



## Doc (26/11/05)

These posts have been split off from the American Amber thread as per some PM's/Reported Posts.

Beers,
Doc


----------



## redbeard (26/11/05)

Darren, if your curious about what malts won what prizes, pls do your own legwork and ask the people involved. then post here if it agrees with your dick ^H^H^H^Hmalt is better than what other people sell ....

cheers


----------



## Batz (27/11/05)

Darren said:


> Just curious. Did anyone get a first or gold medal with powells malt?
> I know that a LOT of the winners in this years State show bought malt from me.
> Weyermann pilsener malt IMHO is the best malt going around, Marris Otter is great for english styles but overpriced. Barret Bursten Galaxy makes a great strong ale and is great value for money at $45 bucks a bag.
> If i got a batch of mouldy malt (such as Powells) I would demand a refund. Anyone get a refund from Powells?
> ...




My Scottish won a first , brewed with Powells malt , now that is not to say it may have been better brewed with another brand malt.

In my bulk order from Powells with recieved 3 bags of the Munich that was the same batch some had problems with , Powells did not charge us for this.

Yes you do get what you pay for , good value for money in my opinion.

Batz


----------



## Screwtop (27/11/05)

Really did not want to add to this thread, but felt this had to be said.

What about the craftsmans skill?

It would be so easy to brew prizewinning entries, if all we had to do was buy the right malt.


----------



## wee stu (27/11/05)

Batz said:


> My Scottish won a first , brewed with Powells malt , now that is not to say it may have been better brewed with another brand malt.
> Batz
> [post="93536"][/post]​



'twas a good beer Batz, it rightfully shaded mine - and mine was made with fully imported Golden Promise malt. Echoing screwtop, I raise my glass to a superior craftsman's skill :beerbang: 

I think the mouldy malt in MAH's Adelaide order has jaundiced a lot of the local SA brewers' opinions. I still have two unopened sacks of malt from that order, which I have been avoiding, I can still remember with dread the Munich MAH and I opened at his place. 

Given the positive feedback (on this and other threads) however, I am now looking forward to giving the grain a go in future brews. 

If Darren can continue to supply Galaxy and imported malts to Adelaide brewers I will also continue to use these grains also. I have only the highest praise for the grains Darren has supplied me with. Customer service has always been excellent from Darren too.












3 minutes to midnite h34r: 
awrabest, stu


----------



## Darren (5/12/05)

Just bringing this topic back up.
Did anyone win a class or get a gold medal with Powells malt this year?

cheers
Darren


----------



## AndrewQLD (5/12/05)

Darren said:


> Just bringing this topic back up.
> Did anyone win a class or get a gold medal with Powells malt this year?
> 
> cheers
> ...




Darren, look four threads up  
Andrew


----------



## Jim_Levet (5/12/05)

Look what RedOak did this year using Powell's
www.beerawards.com
James


----------



## Darren (5/12/05)

OK, thats one! Anymore?


----------



## T.D. (5/12/05)

Jim_Levet said:


> Look what RedOak did this year using Powell's
> www.beerawards.com
> James
> [post="95514"][/post]​



So RedOak use Powells? They took out quite a few awards...


----------



## T.D. (5/12/05)

Darren said:


> OK, thats one! Anymore?
> [post="95521"][/post]​



How many do you require?


----------



## Darren (5/12/05)

Darren said:


> crells said:
> 
> 
> > (the best brew at vicbrew & nationals this year used powells).
> ...




TD, just following up on the above misleading statement. 

FWIW, the Port Dock hotel won the best stout a couple of years back at the IBA. They were ALL extract then. 
I really want to know how Powells faired in blind judging. If they did well I may buy some. If not I will stick with the imported malts.

cheers
Darren


----------



## T.D. (5/12/05)

Fair point Darren.

It does appear that Powells is picking up quite a few awards though. I did my first brew with Powells on the weekend. All seemed to go well (from a quality point of view - my efficiency was terrible!). I am looking forward to trying it when it is done. Just that efficiency - the worst I have ever had (would you believe 52%!). I only ran it through the mill once (BC on stock roller spacing) and it looked like a good crush. I am doing another brew on Wednesday which I will mill the grain twice for. Lets hope things improve a bit. As I have said before, the malt smells great and seems like a real goer on paper, but if the efficiency remains low I am going back to Joe White, no question about that.


----------



## Justin (5/12/05)

Yeah try your mill spacing T.D.

For some reason my mill wouldn't pull the grain through on Sunday morning on the setting I had it on (I forget if it was my normal setting or not-a mate comes round and mills on it as well and insists on grinding the hell out of his malt and double milling-ie. flour, so he messes with my spacing. I suspect it was left on the narrowest gap for the second milling so wouldn't pull uncrushed grain through).

Anyway, I was in a rush so just opened the gap to factory setting and crushed away. Did a double batch of stout and my efficiency was 60%- I haven't been that low ever (that I recall anyway). So I'll be closing the gap up a bit more again- I suspect the low efficiency was my coarse crush but it did look quite ok. I think I'll stop my mate adjusting my mill all the time because it messes up my efficiency/consistency.

But narrower than factory is a better setting. I usually have the little marks on the adjusters 2-3mm narrower than factory and that was giving me a good crush and efficiency as well as feeding the malt well.

Just to bring this slightly back to topic, I was going to use Powells malt for the stout but didn't have the specs in Promash (I'll do that today) so I used JW Trad Ale. The next batch will be with Powells as I have to agree with most of the statements above-it smells fantastic.

I suspect a powells pale ale in the near future.

Cheers, JD


----------



## T.D. (5/12/05)

Great post Justin, exactly the sort of info I was after!

I'll adjust my mill so that the dial is 2-3mm from stock and give that a try. That is very interesting that using JW Ale you got 60% efficiency at the stock spacing - I have heard that when using Powells you can expect up to 5-10% less efficiency, which makes my 52% seem quite plausible.

So Justin, at the closer spacing, you only put the grain through once right?

Also, what is your efficiency usually?

Thanks :beer:


----------



## Justin (5/12/05)

Hi T.D.

Yeah I was a bit surprised by the efficiency drop but I really do put it down to the roller gap. I was going to mill it again when I set it at the factory setting but looking at the malt it looked to be alright so I left it. Not sure why I chose the factory spec instead of going a bit tighter, I think I was just in a rush so knew it would feed properly at the factory spec and I didn't want to mess about too much because I was already late (brewing at someone else house). But it is normally a bit closer (the 2-3mm from stock that I mentioned).

I only mill through once, my friend insists on double milling and changing gaps for wheat, rye and pearled barley (I've never used pearled or rye) and piss farting around so I let him go for it. I usually just mill at the one setting and in the one pass. The normal efficiencies I got with fly sparging were 80-85% with my old tun, with my new tun and manifold and going to batch sparging I've been getting around 75%+/- one or two %.

I batch sparged this one and it was a fair bit low. Just did my normal procedure so I'm guessing it was the crush. I'll tighten it up for the next batch and see how it goes again.

FWIW I've only ever had a sparging issue with a fine mill gap once and I think that was my fault anyway-rushing the sparge, the world cup rugby was on at the same time. Normally I have no probs with sparging.

Hope it gives you some starting points to work with.
Cheers, Justin


----------



## T.D. (5/12/05)

Thanks again Justin. I'll give that a go and see what happens.

Cheers. :beer: 

p.s. apologies for the off-topic discussion!!


----------



## sosman (5/12/05)

Darren said:


> Darren said:
> 
> 
> > crells said:
> ...


What is misleading about that statement? It is a statement of fact and completely relevant to the topic of the thread.

If you have a personal prejudice against it, just don't use it.


----------



## Batz (8/12/05)

T.D. said:


> Fair point Darren.
> 
> It does appear that Powells is picking up quite a few awards though. I did my first brew with Powells on the weekend. All seemed to go well (from a quality point of view - my efficiency was terrible!). I am looking forward to trying it when it is done. Just that efficiency - the worst I have ever had (would you believe 52%!). I only ran it through the mill once (BC on stock roller spacing) and it looked like a good crush. I am doing another brew on Wednesday which I will mill the grain twice for. Lets hope things improve a bit. As I have said before, the malt smells great and seems like a real goer on paper, but if the efficiency remains low I am going back to Joe White, no question about that.
> [post="95539"][/post]​




Look guys I don't push Powells malts at all . I can afford them and I believe I brew a fairly nice beer with them as well.
I like to brew as often as I can , in my lfe style at present $20.00 for a bag of ale compared to $67.00....I can afford ! I brew heaps with Powells.
If Darren was at the Sunshine Coast with good deals , well I'll possiably buy from him.

Efficiency drop is not a fault of the grain Justin , it is a different grain you must learn too mash with , most brewers here now get exellent efficiency with Powells.

Batz


----------



## tangent (8/12/05)

20 bucks a bag??????
even with a drop in efficiency, you gotta be happy with that!

saying that, my introduction to my first malted grains being Scottish Maris Otter and German Pilsner certainly has given me a lot of respect for traditional malt producers as well as the diversity of malted grains. (Through work in the agricultural media, I'd been brainwashed to believe that Aussie grain is far superior to European competition, but maybe it's the maltsters that are superior???)

I'd be keen to use cheap malts to flesh out a recipe but the proper stuff is pretty damn awesome. I'm really keen to try my latest Aussie pale malt brew to compare as i am keen to support good Aussie produce and producers.


----------



## Stuster (8/12/05)

> Efficiency drop is not a fault of the grain Justin , it is a different grain you must learn too mash with , most brewers here now get exellent efficiency with Powells.



I am thinking of getting some Powells malt soon Batz, probably some ale and Munich. Any suggestions on how to treat this grain right?


----------



## wee stu (8/12/05)

Darren said:


> I really want to know how Powells faired in blind judging. If they did well I may buy some. If not I will stick with the imported malts.
> 
> [post="95533"][/post]​



Amidst all the huff and puff of this thread, I think this comes to the hub of Darren's points. 

At heart Darren is a professional scientist, he is looking for validated and peer reviewed results before making a commitment and changing well established practices. I suspect he doesn't place much credence on unsubstantiated hearsay evidence, no matter how impressive and convincing it may appear to some of the rest of us. If I am misrepresenting you Darren let us know. 

In the meantime, I have some Powell's to experiment with, and I suspect it is time I did my own empirical reasearch. 

God knows (and in large measure thanks to Darren) I have my own grain mountain to deconstruct :super:


----------



## redbeard (8/12/05)

hey darren, make an investment - buy a couple of bags of powells, brew some beer, then tell us what you think. perhaps even enter them in a comp. i would have thought choice of malt producers would be a small element in a winning beer.

cheers


----------



## sosman (8/12/05)

wee stu said:


> Darren said:
> 
> 
> > I really want to know how Powells faired in blind judging. If they did well I may buy some. If not I will stick with the imported malts.
> ...


And a brewing forum is the perfect place for that ...


----------



## Batz (8/12/05)

I apologize , this thread was National Comp. winners and Powells malt

I went off on a economics type thingy

Batz (will shut-up for a bit :blink: )


----------



## wee stu (8/12/05)

Batz said:


> I apologize , this thread was National Comp. winners and Powells malt
> [post="96496"][/post]​



Batz, you did win a class in a National Comp - ANAWBS, Australian NATIONAL Wine and Beer Show. Open to all brewers in Australia. Nothing to apologise about, mate. Something to bring the rafters down with :super: .

But then again, I don't really think that is what you were apologising about - was it  

slainte, stu

edit: spelling, grammar, and misinterpretation


----------



## AndrewQLD (8/12/05)

wee stu said:


> Darren said:
> 
> 
> > I really want to know how Powells faired in blind judging. If they did well I may buy some. If not I will stick with the imported malts.
> ...



Usually a professional scientist will experiment and test new ideas/products and then publish results. If what the people who have used powells malts have to say is considered unsubstansiated heresay, then I can only suggest he buy a bag and test it and then we can consider his unsubstansiated evidence as well :lol: 

Cheers and beers
I am off to bed

Andrew


----------



## Barry (9/12/05)

Good Day
I am about to make two side by side ordinary bitters, one with Powells and one with MO. If all turns out well will let you know how a blind tasting, with like minded people, goes next year. 
While the ordinary bitter style could possibly suit the MO more it is a good style to compare malt character IMHO.


----------



## warrenlw63 (9/12/05)

I reckon if somebody is trying their hardest to offer us a new product we should all be grateful. As stated I've only produced one batch with Powells and found them to be a very nice malt. I also suffered no efficiency problems. :beerbang: 

In some ways I also think this whole thread is a load of needless crap and is an open door to excessive bagging of a potentially great local product. We should consider ourselves lucky think back 5 years or so (those who can) to when the choices were merely "Schooner" or "Franklin" and be totally grateful. <_< 

Just out of curiousity Darren are you saying you'll only be convinced enough to use Powells if enough people win national trophies with it? :unsure: Just remember ingredients are only part of the equation. A shit beer can be made with any malts. 

Powells obviously had some quality control problems early in the piece. I guess that's to be expected from a fledgling company trying to establish itself in the marketplace. Just remember a lot of Micros using well-worn and tested malts (and homebrewers for that matter) can make a mess of things starting out too.

I'm sure that if Powells considers themselves here to stay the earlier problems would be all solved (or in the process of being so) by now.

Let's welcome some fairly-priced competition in the marketplace. :beerbang: 

Warren -


----------



## T.D. (9/12/05)

Sounds like a good test Barry.

I have a slight update on my efficiency woes. I wasn't going to post it here because its a bit off topic, but since others have made a few more comments re efficiency I'll do it anyway. 

My first batch using Powells malt yielded me 52% efficiency. It was meant to be an IPA, but ended up as something closer to a mild, yet with the hop schedule of an IPA!!! So I had a 1.038 OG with 60 IBUs!! I figured that beer would be a bit of a shocker so I brewed a second batch a few days later to "equalise" the mismatch between SG and IBU of the first brew. For the second one I budgeted on 65% efficiency (having reduced the roller spacing on my mill), and aimed for 1.060 and about 25 IBUs. The plan is, when the time comes to rack them both to secondary, I will blend them both - half/half - and get 50L of 1.050 beer at around 37-40 IBUs. 

Anyway, the second batch got me 62% efficiency (still way too low for my liking - I used to get 80% with JW). I can either run the grain through the mill twice at the current roller spacing, or reduce the roller spacing yet again (or both), but my intuition so far says that no matter what I do I'm never going to get anywhere near 80% with Powells. The fermenter samples (even after only 5 days) of the first brew taste great, even if the beer is VERY bitter. I may use Powells for my British ales (and take the efficiency drop as given) because I am coming to the conclusion that it may be a viable substitute for MO, adjusting for costs. For everything else I think I'll stick with Joe White. That is of course, unless I can figure out how to get some respectable efficiency outputs (70-75% is all I ask!) 

So there's my update.  


Batz, you mention there are ways to get better efficiency from Powells - what are these methods? Please don't say HERMS or decoction!!!


----------



## nonicman (9/12/05)

As an observation on the efficiency levels experienced with Powells, I've gone through around 35kg of Powells so far with no drop in efficency compared to JW. Both grain brands have been treated the same (same crush routine, same batch sparge routine). Getting 75%-80% depending on batch size. This is concerning the Ale malts from both brands.


----------



## johnno (9/12/05)

Interesting topic about the efficiency of the Powells malts.
I started AG in January this year and have used Powells in nearly every recipe.
I have only made one recipe wholly using JW malts.
All the other recipe were either 100% Powells or the bulk of the recipe was.
I have noticed my efficiency to be very low.
The one recipe using all JW malts was set to 75% eff and I got 72%.
I have always suspected it was something in my system or something I was doing wrong but am not so sure now.
I am making an all JW ale this weekend to compare the difference.
Will be interesting to see the results.
Having said that I have made some very good tasting beers using Powells but have been constantly shitted off due to the bad efficiency.

cheers
johnno


----------



## Jim_Levet (9/12/05)

Morning all
I am about to get some Powells to try. I haven't seen anybody discuss mash temps here when talking about efficiency drops. Does one temp fit all ? I want to try a step mash (55 + 72?) and a decoction over the holidays, has anybody attempted this with Powells malts?
I have also heard a brewer describe the Powells Ale as being a "very attenuative malt", but I didn't press him for more info, next time I will take a notepad.
James


----------



## AndrewQLD (9/12/05)

I found with powells malts the crush is the key to efficiency, my eff started low when I crushed in my usual manner but when I crushed finer the eff shot through the roof. I now crush my grains quite fine and have a regular eff of 75%.
We all know that certain grains require a different level of crush to be effective and I think that is the difference with powells.
At any rate I think Powells is a fantastic product with a fantastic malt profile. And the price is outstanding.

Andrew


----------



## Justin (9/12/05)

Batz said:


> Look guys I don't push Powells malts at all . I can afford them and I believe I brew a fairly nice beer with them as well.
> I like to brew as often as I can , in my lfe style at present $20.00 for a bag of ale compared to $67.00....I can afford ! I brew heaps with Powells.
> If Darren was at the Sunshine Coast with good deals , well I'll possiably buy from him.
> 
> ...



Batz, I didn't say my drop in efficiency had anything to do with the malt, did you have me confused with someone else? I used JW Trad Ale (my standard base malt) for my stout and brewed a standard recipe that I have brewed before and got 60% versus my normal 75%. All I did was change my mill gap setting as I stated in my post. That's where my efficiency went to pot and what I stated in my post. I'm well aware of the effects of a change in mill gap setting has on efficiency-why I opened my mill gap that far?? I suspect I had a brain fart in my rush to get ready.

I've never even brewed with Powells malt, I have a 25kg bag of Ale malt sitting there that I haven't even opened to look at. All I have done is smell it through the stitching on the bag. I look forward to trying this malt and I suspect it will be a great product.

Ok. That said and done, good morning everyone.

Cheers, Justin


----------



## T.D. (9/12/05)

Anybody who uses Powells malt, do you have any advice on mill settings? Justin recommended a smaller gap than the factory setting (on a barley crusher) which I have done. My efficiency went from 52% to 62%, so obviously this is a significant factor. In order to get up to 70-80% (where I used to be with JW), should I just keep milling the grain finer and finer until I get there? What are peoples' opinions on milling the grain twice?

Sorry to harp on about this stuff - its just that I have used over half of the bag of ale malt I bought and I have only managed to make around 45L of ~5% beer! I am still learning about mill specifications (this is only my second brew milling my own grain, which may be a big factor in the low efficiency also)

Thanks guys :beer:


----------



## Justin (9/12/05)

Try a smaller gap again. Depending on your mash tun manifold/bottom you can crush pretty darn fine and still not stick. I assume factory settings on all barely crushers are the same, but perhaps they aren't? I'm might be brewing again this weekend so I'll try to measure my gap with some feeler guages and let you know my efficiency and we'll see how it goes from there. PM me if you want to talk more or keep in contact about it. The mill is capable of producing a crush with great efficiency so we'll sort the problem out.

Actually, send me a PM anyway.

Cheers, Justin


----------



## THE DRUNK ARAB (9/12/05)

I have gone through my 20kgs of Powells Ale malt in less than 6 months. Getting the same efficiency every time with a single crush. I don't measure gap setting on my mill, I look at the crush to satisfy myself that it's okay. And it makes some great beers(or is that me h34r: ).

How long do you guys mash for? Are you checking that the malt is fully converted? I am a 90 minute masher with most malts except Galaxy.

My opinion only but if you bought Powells malts Darren I would be purchasing some from you as well. That is not to say I wouldn't buy the other malts you get in BTW.

C&B
TDA


----------



## T.D. (9/12/05)

Justin, 

thanks for the help mate. I'd be very interested in your results. I agree, the mill itself can't be a problem - it is built for brewing use - its got to be a matter of tweaking the settings until the best results are found. I might move my rollers marginally closer again and see what happens to my efficiency. I probably won't get time to brew again before the new year though (this time of years is a bit crazy!). I'll PM you anyway...


TDA,

I also had a look at the crush. Both times it looked great after one go through the mill - that's why I went ahead with the brewing. In fact, for the most recent brew I would have said it was a bit TOO fine if anything! I didn't come even close to having a stuck sparge though, so I'm sure I can push the limits a bit further.
I mash for 60-90 mins, mainly depending on whether I have got my sparge water ready in time etc. I think both of the Powells malt brews I have done have been closer to 90mins than 60. I did a conversion test with some iodophor in the first brew (52% efficiency) and it didn't show up any unconverted starch.


----------



## Gout (9/12/05)

I have used over 10 bags of the powells grain, eff sit around 80% and i found it the same as JW etc etc. Dont know how or why but i aint going to change a thing in order to keep this 

its been consistant for a long time now. I think i have gone into the 70's a few times and high 80's a few times but on average 75-82% 

for the price flavour and freshness i say its a winner, but thats just me, each to their own


----------



## T.D. (9/12/05)

This is kinda weird - it seems that around half of the people who use powells get worse efficiency and half get the same. Consistently inconsistent!  :blink:


----------



## SteveSA (9/12/05)

Jim_Levet said:


> snip... I haven't seen anybody discuss mash temps here when talking about efficiency drops. Does one temp fit all ?.... /snip[post="96532"][/post]​


I wasn't going to weigh into this but Jim_Levet has a good point. I've used Powells Ale Malt three times. On each occasion I've crushed on the BC factory setting (39 thou) and run the grain through twice; mashed for 75min and performed a mash-out (all part of my normal routine) My regular efficiency is 73%

1) APA; Eff 73%; Mash Temp 65C; 80% of grist
2) Smoked Porter; Eff 69%; Mash Temp 67C; 60% of grist
3) Smoked Porter; Eff 71%; Mash Temp 67C; 60% of grist

Now this is a relatively small sample so I'd be interested to see what other people's results are from different temps/regimes. It must have been used often enough for us to get some good info together.

Darren,
FWIW the Smoked Porter from 2) won 1st in SA (45/50) and 3rd in Nationals (apparently it was too smokey for some  )

BTW I don't mind lower efficiency - I just adjust my recipe accordingly - too simple.

Hangin' out for beer o'clock
Steve


----------



## T.D. (9/12/05)

Steve, I'd be happy with those efficiency percentages - as long as I get around 65-70 or better. I think I'll run the grain through twice next time and see what that does (would anybody recommend against this on a closer roller spacing than the stock BC gap?).

Eventually, with a bit of trial and error, these problems will get ironed out I guess...


----------



## Mark Leathem (12/12/05)

Yep, it's true the APA, that won Best Mash of Show at the Nationals (& VicBrew)was made with predominantly Powells Malt. The grain bill was:
86% Powells Ale Malt
4% Munich
5% Carpils
5% Carahelles

While Powells probably doesnt have a big malt profile I have found it good for hop driven beers, pale/light lagers and lighter style wheat beers.

I'm not really into measuring efficiency but I know from experience what OG I should get and havent noticed any difference using Powells

Mark Leathem


----------



## Ross (12/12/05)

Darren said:


> Like I said I very much doubt the winning national beer was made from Powells malt.
> I will stand to be corrected though.
> cheers
> Darren :beer:
> [post="93285"][/post]​





> Yep, it's true the APA, that won Best Mash of Show at the Nationals (& VicBrew)was made with predominantly Powells Malt



Pretty conclusive i'd say... Maybe time to give them a try, hey Darren?...


----------



## Darren (13/12/05)

Well done Mark and Steve. Goes to show that the malt is ok. I must add that neither smoked porter or APA are malt driven styles and would generally judged on hopping (APA) and smoke.
I will be very interested to hear your report, Barry, on the the side-by-side comparison.
cheers
Darren


----------



## AndrewQLD (13/12/05)

Darren said:


> Well done Mark and Steve. Goes to show that the malt is ok. I must add that neither smoked porter or APA are malt driven styles and would generally judged on hopping (APA) and smoke.
> I will be very interested to hear your report, Barry, on the the side-by-side comparison.
> cheers
> Darren
> [post="97301"][/post]​




Gee Darren, there's no pleasing you is there mate. I don't remember you stipulating the type of beer it had to be! <_< . All your requirements have been met, it's not only a winning beer in a National competition it's also best mash beer of show.
I'm convinced, Powells Malt is the best malt in the world and no other malt can compare :lol:  .

Cheers
Andrew


----------



## warrenlw63 (13/12/05)

Darren said:


> I must add that neither smoked porter or APA are malt driven styles and would generally judged on hopping (APA) and smoke.
> [post="97301"][/post]​



Geez Darren. So you're saying that the brewers concerned in your most "humble" of opinions could have saved themselves a small fortune and just used water and/or hops and smoke? :wacko: 

No they're not malt driven but they still need a malt backbone. That statement is so FOS. <_< 

Warren -


----------



## Darren (13/12/05)

warrenlw63 said:


> Darren said:
> 
> 
> > I must add that neither smoked porter or APA are malt driven styles and would generally judged on hopping (APA) and smoke.
> ...




No Warren,
Thats not what I am saying. You could make a pretty good example of both of those styles with the addition of extract though :blink:


----------



## sosman (13/12/05)

Darren said:


> Thats not what I am saying. You could make a pretty good example of both of those styles with the addition of extract though :blink:
> [post="97341"][/post]​


Yes but I think there is a distinction between "pretty good" and 'best beer of show at a national comp".


----------



## mongo (13/12/05)

Man! I am new to brewing AG, and I feel so silly for spending so much on imported grain. I spose newbies are allowed to make the odd mistake. You've convinced me to make the change Darren!


----------



## AndrewQLD (13/12/05)

mongo said:


> Man! I am new to brewing AG, and I feel so silly for spending so much on imported grain. I spose newbies are allowed to make the odd mistake. You've convinced me to make the change Darren!
> 
> [post="97408"][/post]​



Ha ha ha, I don't think that was what Darren had in mind :lol: .

Cheers
Andrew


----------



## Batz (13/12/05)

This is one interesting thread !

Batz h34r:


----------



## warrenlw63 (13/12/05)

Dunno. Think it cuts a fine line between interesting and needless. <_< 

Warren -


----------



## Batz (13/12/05)

warrenlw63 said:


> Dunno. Think it cuts a fine line between interesting and needless. <_<
> 
> Warren -
> [post="97434"][/post]​




Ok then this post finished!!!!

Next person posts under this topic has too brew a Coopers kit with sugar , ferment it at a high temp.
Then drink it......

Careful......don't post

Batz h34r: h34r: h34r:


----------



## big d (13/12/05)

and it may bring back such wonderful memories of where a lot of us started.


----------



## sosman (14/12/05)

Batz said:


> Next person posts under this topic has too brew a Coopers kit with sugar , ferment it at a high temp.
> [post="97439"][/post]​


Then enter it in a state competition.


----------



## warrenlw63 (14/12/05)

Then win and consequently start a thread questioning Coopers ability to make a good "kit beer". The merits could then be argued that the resultant beers weren't "malt-driven" and weren't true indicators of the said kit's true abilities blah! blah! blah! . :blink: :lol:

Warren -


----------



## warrenlw63 (27/3/06)

Okay compelled to re-open this thread.  

A few months has passed since anybody posted their findings with Powells Malt and efficiencies. Some say they get as high as the 80s with a single rest and others (myself included) get around the 50 mark.  

I usually have my grain crushed by the HBS but this will be my first batch with my own mill and I've got a 25kg sack of Powells Trad. Ale to play with.

I was told by somebody that a 40 degree rest would improve the efficiency of this malt. Anyone care to verify this? :unsure: 

TIA.

Warren -


----------



## Samwise Gamgee (27/3/06)

Grant from Powells suggested to myself that a protein rest @ 50C would probably be beneficial. (When I asked him if there were any general rules of thumb with Powell's malt)

BTW, i've been experiencing low efficiencies too compared to JW


Edit: Not sure if the protein rest will help efficiencies though.


----------



## Duff (27/3/06)

I'd like to know as well how to improve efficiency with Powells. My best result with my Barley Crusher on its finest setting is 65%, and that's run through twice. JW Malts minimum 80%.

Cheers.


----------



## snookums (27/3/06)

I can't speak for the Powells malt, but I can say that crush can make a huge difference. A poor crush (lots of nearly-whole grains, not much flour) can really kill your efficiency. If your HBS sells mostly specialty grains for steeping then they may not notice that the crush is off.

I can also recommend a dough-in and brief (15-20 minute) liquefaction rest at about 40C for any malt. When I started doing it I got less dough balls, better efficiency, and less stress about overshooting the sac. rest temperature and killing the enzymes.

Rodd


----------



## warrenlw63 (27/3/06)

Thanks Rodd and others.

Pretty much matches up with what I was told. Problem is you get mixed messages with this malt.  

50% of the brewers on the forum are talking efficiencies in the 70s with single temperature rest and others (myself included) are getting down in the 50s region.  

I'm going to try the 40 degree rest next brew I think.  

Warren -


----------



## jayse (27/3/06)

how about posting the malt analysis someone? all the answers should be contained within. 




Boozed, bruised and broken boned.
Jayse


----------



## Trough Lolly (27/3/06)

One variable that may be worth considering is mash duration...

I did a pils last weekend and mashed overnight - according to promash, I got a 5% efficiency improvement. Perhaps it's worth considering as a method in addition to the crush, etc, to further extend the efficiency of all malted grains, including Powells?

Cheers,
TL


----------



## T.D. (27/3/06)

I get ~80% with JW malt, and with Powells I get ~70%. The crush makes a HUGE difference. I can't do any better than 70% though. Haven't tried the 40degC rest, but I am happy with the beers and happy with 70% efficiency given its lower cost.


----------



## warrenlw63 (27/3/06)

Jayse.

This is the best the Powells site offers, the last line is a bit of a laugh.  

Typical analysis

Moisture Content Extract Colour Kolbach Index D.P.

<3.5% >81% 4.0 6.0 42 - 46 160 - 200
Beer Styles

Ale Malt is used to impart typical, warm mellow flavours to all styles of ales.
Flavour and colour contributions

Ale Malt is produced similarly to Lager Malt, but with higher curing temperatures of 95 105 degrees. These higher kilning temperatures are sufficient to remove DMS and grassy flavours, leaving the malt with a biscuit flavour and a hint of caramel and toffee from the oxygen hetrocyclics.

Ale Malts are often used to balance higher hop levels. :blink: :blink: 

Warren -


----------



## Joel (27/3/06)

Has anyone bothered to check if the conversion is complete? I haven't used Powells malt yet, but if I was getting unexpectedly low efficiencies I'd do the good ol' iodine conversion test to see what's going on.


----------



## AndrewQLD (27/3/06)

I am pretty sure this file is from one of our members so thanks to them.View attachment Powells_Malt_Specs.doc


Powells malts are made from the schooner variety which are lower in diastase (ezymes) than most other malts. This is possibly one of the reasons why efficiency can be a problem. I have found that increasing the mash length to 90 min gave me an efficiency increase from 65% to 70% which I am more than happy with. Also another possible way to increase your eff might be a thicker mash, If the mash is thin the enzymes are more diluted and can take longer to convert the starches to sugars, a thicker mash could help there.

Cheers
Andrew


----------



## Samwise Gamgee (27/3/06)

I've had it pointed out to me that if you compare JW malt and Powells Malt the consistency between the two is quite different.

The size of the JW grain is pretty consistant , therefore when crushing you get a uniform crush.

But the Powells Grain had quite a big range of size difference between the individual grains, so when crushing, while you might be crushing majority of the grain well, quite a bit of the smaller grains get through uncrushed.

So i now use extra powell's to boost efficiency back up.


----------



## jayse (27/3/06)

Theres nothing in those specs to suggest to me why anyone would need do anything more than a standard length single infusion mash to get the results they would expect, so unlike my first reply, the answer is not in the specs. Now what this may indicate is that this is a typical analysis and some batches vary greatly from this, which would indicate why someone has perfect results with it and some don't, ie they have a different batch. Now we all should know this degree of varriation from batch to batch is pretty much unacceptable and i wouldn't like to say for sure this is the case as i wouldn't imagine the QC at the maltings are anything less than pretty much spot on.
I haven't ever used the malt and am not about to start guessing as to the problem and i certainly am not about to say anything bad about the company when indeed i have no idea about the product at all.

So sorry I can't see any reasons either way why this malt hasn't produced the same results for everyone.

All i could possibly suggest is brewers ask for lot analysis for each batch they buy and see if there is a difference and compare results from other brewers and so forth.

Anyway i don't have any answers other than this is a bit wierd :blink: 

Born to booze
Jayse


----------



## jayse (27/3/06)

AndrewQLD said:


> I am pretty sure this file is from one of our members so thanks to them.View attachment 6481
> 
> 
> Powells malts are made from the schooner variety which are lower in diastase (ezymes) than most other malts. This is possibly one of the reasons why efficiency can be a problem. I have found that increasing the mash length to 90 min gave me an efficiency increase from 65% to 70% which I am more than happy with. Also another possible way to increase your eff might be a thicker mash, If the mash is thin the enzymes are more diluted and can take longer to convert the starches to sugars, a thicker mash could help there.
> ...



Good points andrew the DP might be were the answer is although the quoted number 160-200 is pretty much were most british style pale ale malts are i believe.


----------



## jayse (27/3/06)

am said:


> I've had it pointed out to me that if you compare JW malt and Powells Malt the consistency between the two is quite different.
> 
> The size of the JW grain is pretty consistant , therefore when crushing you get a uniform crush.
> 
> ...



this sounds pretty dodgey and i don't beleive any craft brewery is gunna buy the malt unless the homogeneity( the degree of difference is size of kernels) is not pretty much spot on, the size of all the kernels really should be pretty uniform throughout if not i'd suggest there is a fault with the malt and its not acceptable for use. I have no idea if the size really is that big in varriation so i'am not saying powells is no good i'am just saying a big varriation in size is no good irellavant of who it comes from.

Jayse


----------



## Samwise Gamgee (27/3/06)

the size difference isn't huge, but when i've done a side by side comparison, I was able to see the difference pretty easily, but this could also be a batch problem.

My thoughts on why this has happened are along the lines of JW essentially takes the best available grain due to being around for a long time, established contracts with farmers etc etc

where as Powell's as a company is relatively new so might not be able to get there hands on the highest quality produce.

I have no data what so ever to back up the above, just speculation, but it could possibly be a contributing factor


----------



## Jazzafish (27/3/06)

This is how my Powells experiences go:

First time I used it I had an efficiency around 55%. It has risen from there from using different mash temps. I did the following mash:

50*C for 20 mins
66*C for 60mins
70*C for 20mins

It got an efficiency of 74%. It recently one a comp on powells ale malt, so I guess it isn't too bad!

My recent ale was a Powells Pilsner base. It had an efficency of 71% after an hour at 67*C.


----------



## altstart (27/3/06)

:beer: 
In the last Qld bulk buy I purchased 3 sacks of Powells pale malt. I have recently motorised my own mill Crankandstein 3 roller.I have brewed two beers with the Powells pale malt crushed through my new mill. My efficiency has risen slightly from 75% to 80% with both beers. I do not know if this is due to a better crush or to the new mill. I am now drinking the first of these beers and it is very nice I guess the only way to know for sure is to crush grains from my local HBS and keep tabs on the efficiency I achieve with their Grain.
Cheers Altstart.


----------



## timmy (27/3/06)

I did an oatmeal stout with 4kgs of powells ale and 2 of pils. Ran through the mill 3 times and nudged 78%. all the specialty grains were JW,

The third run really made the difference, I basically pulverised the buggery out of it. Still not sure if the extra effort at the mill is worth the $12 saving for a 25kg sack.

editart of the specialty grains were Uncle tobys


----------



## warrenlw63 (3/4/06)

Brewed yesterday and got far better results this time.  

Efficiency was up around the 74% mark (as compared to 50% last time). Here's what changed in relevant order;

Implemented a 40 degree rest (thanks Sam) with a LG ratio of 1:1. Infused with 8 litres of boiling water to bring the temp up to 66c which gave me a sacc rest with a LG ratio of 2.5:1. As per AndrewQld's (Thanks Andrew) advice. My usual LG is 3.1.

Used a finer crush. There was a fair bit of flour in the crush but not even a hint of a stuck sparge. Please note this was my first crush I've done myself. Have been getting the LHBS to do it for the last 8 years. Bit lazy of me yes.  

After 8 years of fly sparging this only about my 5th or 6th beer that I've batch sparged. Shawn (Gough) advised me that I could possibly be adding the sparge water too cold to my second drain, was adding 76 degree water (fly sparger's mentality :lol: ). Added the water at 85c to get a grainbed temp of 75 degrees and the second drain would most likely have yielded more sugars. (Thanks Shawn).

Result was my target gravity was spot on.

Hope this helps anybody else using Powells and are achieving poor efficiency. :beerbang: 

Warren -


----------



## bindi (3/4/06)

Implemented a 40 degree rest (thanks Sam) with a LG ratio of 1:1.

interesting <_< I have used a rest for the last 5 or 6 brews of between 50-53c, can anyone [sam] "please explain" [as per Hanson  ] the thinking behind this?
Thanks.


----------



## warrenlw63 (3/4/06)

Bindi.

Not sure of the total reason for this step. Was recommended to me and it worked. I just find that Powells malts in a single temp rest was only giving me efficiency in the 55% region and there are others experiencing the same thing. I'm just wondering if Powells may be undermodified by most standards.  

This is the best I could find. It's written by the late Dr. George Fix;

_The value of the rest at 40C can not be understated. The rise in SG in this mash is almost 3 times faster than what I get when this rest is omitted. The final mash yield is ~20 % higher. Clearly there is a lot of favorable activity going on including preparation of the enzyme systems, beta glucanase activity, and highly favorable enzymatically assisted grain liquefaction.

This wort clears up very quickly (for European malts), and after ~2 gals. of recirculation it will change from a milkly turbidity to a moderate see through clarity. The 1st wort is then run into the kettle until 1 inch of liquid covers the grain surface. At this point sparging is started with the inflow and outflow rates adjusted to ~1/3 gals/min. It is of course very important to maintain the liquid cover of the grain bed. After ~30 mins. the sparge water is depleted, and the outflow is increased to ~1 gal/min. The following is typical data at kettle full: _

Warren -


----------



## AndrewQLD (3/4/06)

Interesting stuff Warren, I have noticed with the powells that my runoff is cloudy and never really becomes clear, at least not as clear as when I use other malts, did you notice this before you started doing the 40c rest as well ?

Cheers
Andrew


----------



## warrenlw63 (3/4/06)

Andrew.

Yep, you're right. Previous experiences with Powells was a rather hazy runoff and finished beer. Even though my previous 2 beers were dark ales. You could still notice the haze when the beer is held up to the light.

Yesterday was the first time I'd tried the 40 degree rest and the wort cleared beautifully after about 4 litres of recirculation. Usually I see fine bits (with any malt) running through the clear racking hose. This time there was virtually nothing. I'm wondering if this rest may clear up a few of the finer bits that get through.

I've often wondered with a single rest how much unconverted starch may be trapped in the odd clump that gets unnoticed. :unsure: 

I'd say if you can give it a try just to see what you think more than anything. I found it nowhere near as hard as I first thought.  

Warren -


----------



## bindi (3/4/06)

AndrewQLD said:


> Interesting stuff Warren, I have noticed with the powells that my runoff is cloudy and never really becomes clear, at least not as clear as when I use other malts, did you notice this before you started doing the 40c rest as well ?
> 
> Cheers
> Andrew
> [post="117823"][/post]​


Andrew I have noticed that my runoff is now very clear after using a rest at 50-53c for 30min and mash at [now thanks to tony] 68c, was mashing at 63-66 did not think it would make a diffrence but it has  . 
Read the 53c rest in one of my many brewing books <_< and have been using this rest since.


----------



## johnno (3/4/06)

I've only ever done single infusion with these malts but have had very clear beer all the time.
Even yesterdays American brown dropped into the fermenter very clear.
Strange.

johnno


----------



## Stuster (3/4/06)

My beers have also been very clear with Powells. Terrible efficiency though, in the low 50s. So may try a rest at 40 (or 53?). How long were your rests?


----------



## warrenlw63 (3/4/06)

Stuster.

My rest was 40 degrees @ 30 mins.  

Warren -


----------



## AndrewQLD (3/4/06)

johnno said:


> I've only ever done single infusion with these malts but have had very clear beer all the time.
> Even yesterdays American brown dropped into the fermenter very clear.
> Strange.
> 
> ...



The clarity issue I have is when I am recirculating the mash, the runoff never really clears as much as with, say JW malts. even at the end of the sparge the wort is not clear. After the boil my worts are crystal.

Cheers
Andrew


----------



## warrenlw63 (3/4/06)

As I said mine were/are dark beers. Scottish 60' (37 EBC) and a Dark Mild (43 EBC).

Hard to definitely ascertain being so dark but held to the light they displayed some haze at temps between 10-12 degrees.

Current beer fermenting away is an Ordinary Bitter so I should have a better idea this time. In the hydrometer jar it looked very clear though.  

Warren -


----------

