Bronzed brews recipe discussion.

[kaiserben]

The author used Pro Mash.

I actually forgot to set a temp in Brewers Friend. Doing it again just now and setting it to 66C saw the predicted FG at 1.007.

 

[Bribie G]

I'm doing a 1913 Toohey's Standard Pale Ale this afternoon, with WLP059 . I cleaned up the 40L Crown Urn then when I realised the grain bill is only 2.65 kilos, I patted it on the head, put it away and brought out its little brother, the 20L.


I'll adjust volume with boiling water as I cube it off.

One thing that I'm interested in finding out is what efficiency I'll end up with. Using Brewmate, I set eff. to 74% which seems to work just fine on my equipment but using all grain. With over a kilo of da sugaz this time It's gotta really skew efficiency as I'd guess that sugar is.. well.. 100% but I have no idea how to adjust things in Brewmate.

I'll just follow Korev's published recipe and check eff. at the end of the boil (that's easy to do, just dial back the eff. spinbox till it agrees with the OG from my refractometer).

 

[TheWiggman]

I recently got the Tooth's White Horse Ale on tap. It's been about 2 weeks in the keg and has me wondering a bit. It has a slightly sour edge to it that forms a lot of the flavour, which reminds me of kit brews. I've had this in lagers before and when I moved to adding sugar late in the ferment it yielded excellent results. It might need more time in the keg but shouldn't really. Other than that it's got a Carlton-esque catty bite about it when I champ after a sip, and shows there's a good unique beer hiding in there somewhere. Alternatively, maybe this yeast simply imparts that flavour. I've got the book now and another WLP059 so am looking forward to another recipe. Toohey's Standard sounds appealing.
Ed: Just got off the photo to my grandfather, who I'll be seeing in a few weeks. I mentioned I'll have some brews for him and brought up the White Horse ale. He said he was a Toohey's drinker back when he was a young fella, and Tooth's was a beer you had to have a taste for. Maybe this is an accurate rendition? It's certainly easy to knock back, if I was a linesman back in the '50s and this was served over the bar after a day in the sun I'm sure I'd knock back my pints before the bar closed without batting an eyelid.

 

[Bribie G]

Hit the gravities etc and will pitch this morning.

The eye opener for me is that I produced a full brew on exactly half sized equipment, illustrating that sugar use wasn't just penny pinching on the ingredients, but quite necessary to produce the brew lengths required for a beer swilling and growing population at a time when brewing plant was scarce, expensive and mostly had to be shipped from the other side of the planet on steamships.

 

[Edd Mather 6]

Known to the trade as Wort extenders (Sugars & syrup adjuncts)

 

[captain crumpet]

4th brew atm with wlp059. Seems 1-2c in mash temp makes hige difference in attenuation.

60 min at 70c OG 1.055 fg 1.020
60 min at 71c OG 1.053 fg 1.024
60 min at 67c OG 1.055 fg 1.014

Using 80% castle 2row pale 10% castle munich wheat and 10% sucrose.

This one on now 70% pale 10%wheat 20% sucrose. OG 1.060 48 hours into ferment is sitting at 1.032.

The FG brews over the 1.020 mark are quite... meaty? Too wierd of a malty flavour and does get quite sweet after a few.

Have also been using little amounts od POR for flame out and dry hop. Ive been pretty happy with how that has turned out.

Next I'm doing an IPA with a fair whack of sugar and using galaxy por melba and ekg. Anyone tried a hop forward brew with this yeast?

 

[captain crumpet]

Just learnt something last night. My results are pointless because my FG is measured with a newly acquired refractometer. I only checked its accuracy to a hydro sample at OG.

Just tested a sample where i noted 1.024 from refractometer . Hydro says 1.010.

Shit.

 

[warra48]

Just learnt something last night. My results are pointless because my FG is measured with a newly acquired refractometer. I only checked its accuracy to a hydro sample at OG.

Just tested a sample where i noted 1.024 from refractometer . Hydro says 1.010.

Shit.

You need to use an adjustment chart to use a refractometer after fermentation.

 

[technobabble66]

So wtf is the real FG of the last one, where the refractor reading was 1.014??

And what attenuation do the 3 brews indicate? ... (Opens up spreadsheet...)


EDIT: after some spreadsheeting, seems to be in the vicinity of 80% attenuation

 

[MitchD]

I hit 1.008 from a 68c mash temperature without even trying to push it with temperature. Expected fg was 1.012

 

[MitchD]

It has a slightly sour edge to it that forms a lot of the flavour. Other than that it's got a Carlton-esque catty bite about it when I champ after a sip, and shows there's a good unique beer hiding in there somewhere. Alternatively, maybe this yeast simply imparts that flavour. I've got the book now and another WLP059 so am looking forward to another recipe.

I got a big whiff of macro lager last night while kegging, not in a bad way for as bad as a macro is they are the kings of consistency. The sharp catty taste I attribute to the cluster hops and higher sulfate in the beer.

Yeast wise I'm really impressed, for a beer with 25% cane sugar it is surprisingly malty and easy to drink. I'll be reusing the cake for many many future generations.

 

[Bribie G]

MitchD, re FG, that's what I'm interested in with my current Toohey's Standard Pale Ale - at 1.047 if it actually goes down to say 1.005 - which is more than possible given the huge amount of sugar - then it's going to be plus 5% ABV and then some. I bought a hydrometer the other week just to check out my FGs - normally I just let them take care of themselves as I don't bottle.

 

[MitchD]

MitchD, re FG, that's what I'm interested in with my current Toohey's Standard Pale Ale - at 1.047 if it actually goes down to say 1.005 - which is more than possible given the huge amount of sugar - then it's going to be plus 5% ABV and then some. I bought a hydrometer the other week just to check out my FGs - normally I just let them take care of themselves as I don't bottle.

Fg realise just a number and regardless of how low it gets it'll still be drinkable. My interest is really in how accurate the recipes are as it was well published in the book historical og/fg readings but they seem incompatible to what we really know will be the fg.

I'll be making (probably) an all malt ale next time I use 059 for comparison. I'm expecting malt>hops after what I have tasted so far

 

[Bribie G]

The recipes were rendered into "modern" form using Promash. Now my experience with another program BrewMate suggests that FGs predicted by software are fairly spot on using all grain and the most common yeasts, but for this particular sugar-loving yeast, and the use of large amounts of sugars, might give different real world FGs.

That's why I bought a hydrometer to check out of interest. For sure the beers will be drinkable but it will be interesting to check the actual alcoholic content (from gravity drop over the fermentation). It's a common trap with people making their first Aldi cider.. a quite innocuous OG that ferments out to zero can produce a headbanger.

A good way of checking alcoholic content is for several testers to don 1930s clothing and then re-enact a six o'clock swill session of the day and after eight schooners, test if they are all crawling around moaning either "Did I ever tell you how much I love you Josh?" or even worse: "Why did Princess Di have to die???".

 

[Edd Mather 6]

The recipes were rendered into "modern" form using Promash. Now my experience with another program BrewMate suggests that FGs predicted by software are fairly spot on using all grain and the most common yeasts, but for this particular sugar-loving yeast, and the use of large amounts of sugars, might give different real world FGs.

That's why I bought a hydrometer to check out of interest. For sure the beers will be drinkable but it will be interesting to check the actual alcoholic content (from gravity drop over the fermentation). It's a common trap with people making their first Aldi cider.. a quite innocuous OG that ferments out to zero can produce a headbanger.

A good way of checking alcoholic content is for several testers to don 1930s clothing and then re-enact a six o'clock swill session of the day and after eight schooners, test if they are all crawling around moaning either "Did I ever tell you how much I love you Josh?" or even worse: "Why did Princess Di have to die???".

Never used either programme ! , always used , Pen/Pencil , paper & a calculator !!
The thirties thing sounds like fun though [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]

 

[MitchD]

A good way of checking alcoholic content is for several testers to don 1930s clothing and then re-enact a six o'clock swill session of the day and after eight schooners, test if they are all crawling around moaning either "Did I ever tell you how much I love you Josh?" or even worse: "Why did Princess Di have to die???".

I'll be testing mine on my brew club.

 

[Bribie G]

OK so back on topic now

 

[kaiserben]

Bottled today and gravity was as BeerSmith predicted at 1.003.

 

[kaiserben]

And also, I tasted the sample and was really impressed. I find it hard to describe beers; it definitely has an "Aussie" taste to it, but it's not shit like pretty much every macro beer out there these days.

Looking forward to trying this once it's carbed and conditioned. I reckon it'll be good fresh.

 

[kaiserben]

Just tasting a bottle now and it's reminiscent of Coopers Pale Ale (but better and cleaner). There's a distinctive sweet aroma that I like (maybe a slight pear aroma and flavour). Just enough from the hops to balance it out. It's an easy drinker, but with enough going on to keep it interesting.

And it clears up very quickly with the yeast really dropping and sticking to the bottom of the bottle.

EDIT: Will definitely brew this one again.