National Comp & Powels Malts

[AndrewQLD]

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:

[post="96490"][/post]​

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]

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]

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 **** 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.]

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]

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]

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 ******* off due to the bad efficiency.

cheers
johnno

 

[Jim_Levet]

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]

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]

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

[post="96478"][/post]​

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.]

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]

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]

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.]

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]

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.]

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]

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.]

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]

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]

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]

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