Out Of Date Kits - Any Issues?

[ekul]

Cheers Ross.
Longest I kept a cube was a week in summer.... Sitting next to a lawnmower.... then it formed a krausen.
8 hours of hard work and potentially delicious belgian down the sink.

I've kept a cube for over a year. It was part of a double batch and tasted the same as the earlier fermented one (not that i had a side by side compariso

 

[PhilipB]

Look in my sig - you may not need that big a pot!

Having said that, I've been eyeing off the 70L pots at CB for a while now.

Yes I read your post

 

[matti]

hat is a vastly misleading statement.
Yes the bulk of what is in the kit is Sugary Stuff but there are also a bunch of protein and minerals extracted from the malt. Protein and sugars combine into what are known as Milliard products, this is the natural darkening that happens in most foods as they are cooked. When the product is very concentrated these products form at ambient temperatures all be it slowly, in acidic environments the process is accelerated.
Then there are the Hop Products, not just Alpha and Iso-Alpha Acids but all the other hop products, these to condense over time, technically its called polymerisation, they join up into something resembling rubber that no longer does the job it was put there to do.
Kits change over time, they are best freshest but the best before or use by dates are there for very good reasons.
Mark

It looks that my two fresh wort kits now 2+ year old is going to be some what compromised...
Bloody work and Kids. I have to dust off my brewery or sell it to some one that can give it the proper care a brewery requires. Almost 3 years since I put my last AG. Maybe I get another chance later in life.
Time to give the kids some organsiation and get ready for tomorrows surveillance audit, AAAARGH

Schwede aka Matti

 

[Jay Cee]

Out of date milk makes shit coffee.

Out of date bread makes shit sammiches.

Going to spend 2-4 weeks fermenting beer and more weeks conditioning it? - Why use out of date ingredients?

Exactly, why waste all that time cleaning, fermenting, bottling on what is most likely going to be stale product.

Would the supporters of using long expired cans consider eating a can of sardines that went past its due date in 2009? While it might be OK, a fresh tin is cheap enough. So too with cans, what are they selling for, $10 each ? Small price to pay when you consider the money you save as a can-driven home beer producer.

 

[hoppy2B]

About an hour, that's how long it takes me to put down a kit including bottling and adding extra hops. No biggy.

It seem all the reactions talked about above really only equate to a synonym of caramelization, perhaps with the exception of the hops not doing their job. Easy fixed with the addition of hops which I would be doing anyway.

All of that said, I've never actually brewed with an out of date can but would be willing to give it a go to see how it turns out. I did recently heat some liquid malt extract for a short time to test the result. Its fermenting now.

 

[Jay Cee]

All of that said, I've never actually brewed with an out of date can

Not really "brewing" when using a can, out of date or not. To each their own as far as how they wish to produce beer at home, but terminology is an important consideration. The manufacturer of the can is the brewer.

The use-by date is there for a reason, in the manufacturer's taking a product to market. There's no reason to pay close attention in many cases, such as finished beer, but maybe not yoghurt. But 3 years old, using product of questionable quality for the sake of saving $10? It's barely a step up from being homeless if someone cant afford the extra $10 to make two cases of beer.

 

[hoppy2B]

Not really "brewing" when using a can, out of date or not. To each their own as far as how they wish to produce beer at home, but terminology is an important consideration. The manufacturer of the can is the brewer.

The use-by date is there for a reason, in the manufacturer's taking a product to market. There's no reason to pay close attention in many cases, such as finished beer, but maybe not yoghurt. But 3 years old, using product of questionable quality for the sake of saving $10? It's barely a step up from being homeless if someone cant afford the extra $10 to make two cases of beer.

Technically, the malt extract manufacturer isn't fermenting the product so its not actually correct to say they are the brewer of the beer by dictionary definition.
If you think the product is of questionable quality then I can understand your not wanting to use it. I was merely pointing out that the reactions described earlier in the blog could be defined as caramelization.
If I had a can that was several years past its use by date I'd actually be keen to try it out just to see what it turned out like. I know John Palmer poo poos on expired cans, but to be honest I think John Palmer's 'How to Brew' book falls short in several key areas.

 

[Jay Cee]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewing

/Brewing is the production of beer through steeping a starch source (commonly cereal grains) in water/

/Brewing specifically refers to the process of steeping, such as with making tea, sake, and soy sauce. Technically, wine and cider aren't brewed but rather vinted, as the entire fruit is pressed, and then the liquid extracted. Mead is also not technically brewed, as the honey is used entirely, as opposed to being steeped in water./


As I said, to each their own, I can see the merits of making beer from a can if you have limited time, knowledge, aptitude or equipment. Good on those who use a can of hopped malt with added extras, and in fact I'm going to show someone a process involving what I imagine is termed kits & bits before showing them how to actually brew, something they think they will do in the long term.

I don't intend to argue this point, because IMO there is nothing to argue. Your 'dictionary definitions' of brewing, and caramelisation for that matter, may be at odds with other, more credible sources. Which dictionary are you using?

 

[Yob]

Technically, the malt extract manufacturer isn't fermenting the product so its not actually correct to say they are the brewer of the beer by dictionary definition.
If you think the product is of questionable quality then I can understand your not wanting to use it. I was merely pointing out that the reactions described earlier in the blog could be defined as caramelization.
If I had a can that was several years past its use by date I'd actually be keen to try it out just to see what it turned out like. I know John Palmer poo poos on expired cans, but to be honest I think John Palmer's 'How to Brew' book falls short in several key areas.

oh good god... :blink: why?... Why? do you.. You suck so much?? h34r: what a complete load of shite.. without links to your previous statements and now admitting you have never used out of date shit.. along with your previous ramblings combined with the utter shit here.. now want to try and discredit others? :blink:

cough.. cough.. senile is my vote... You my good sir are not playing with a full hand.

..go on.. ******* mod me..

 

[bum]

now want to try and discredit others?

At the risk of legitimising that dickhead's posting in general, yob, I think wanting to discredit someone who comes into a kit thread and tries to start the tired old bullshit (that I had hoped was dead and buried by now) about who is a real brewer and who isn't should be encouraged.

 

[hoppy2B]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewing

/Brewing is the production of beer through steeping a starch source (commonly cereal grains) in water/

/Brewing specifically refers to the process of steeping, such as with making tea, sake, and soy sauce. Technically, wine and cider aren't brewed but rather vinted, as the entire fruit is pressed, and then the liquid extracted. Mead is also not technically brewed, as the honey is used entirely, as opposed to being steeped in water./


As I said, to each their own, I can see the merits of making beer from a can if you have limited time, knowledge, aptitude or equipment. Good on those who use a can of hopped malt with added extras, and in fact I'm going to show someone a process involving what I imagine is termed kits & bits before showing them how to actually brew, something they think they will do in the long term.

I don't intend to argue this point, because IMO there is nothing to argue. Your 'dictionary definitions' of brewing, and caramelisation for that matter, may be at odds with other, more credible sources. Which dictionary are you using?

I'm using the Encyclopedic World Dictionary, Copyright The Hamlyn Publishing Group Limited 1971.
Its quite a large tomb, quite comprehensive.


Brew:

Definition 1 : to make (beer, ale, etc.) from malt, etc., by steeping, boiling, and fermentation.

Definition 4 : to concoct or contrive


If you look up concoct, and not just in my dictionary, it means : to make by combining ingredients, to prepare; make up; contrive



On the whole, I agree that steeping ingredients as on the part of the malt manufacturer is an act of brewing. That does fall under one of the definitions I haven't listed. However I point out that the malt manufacturer is not brewing the beer as I pointed out.
Secondly, using malt extract to produce beer is clearly an act of brewing by dictionary definition.

Wiki is not a definitive source. You cannot present Wiki in a court of law, nor can you use Wiki as a reference for school projects etc. And that Wiki definition is a very simplistic one. I'm just speaking English. I'll be damned if I start speaking Wiki to satisfy the mentality of the likes of Yob.
You've stated that brewing specifically refers to the process of steeping. Yes it does, but that is not a complete definition. And the definition you've provided states its the production of beer. The malt extract producer hasn't produced beer, they've produced malt extract.

And I honestly don't know why its a problem to others if I have a curiosity about how things will turn out if I try them.

 

[hoppy2B]

At the risk of legitimising that dickhead's posting in general, yob, I think wanting to discredit someone who comes into a kit thread and tries to start the tired old bullshit (that I had hoped was dead and buried by now) about who is a real brewer and who isn't should be encouraged.

I object to you making abusive comments.

 

[rotten]

This may have been said but


I use fresh whole crushed grain for beer. What did step 2 or 3 say in your dictionary?

You my friend are a knob end, and are dilusional if you think you are helping someone with your writing.

On a side note you may well make great beer with your out of date tin of goop, but how consistent wil it be. Oh hang on, you haven't done it before.


My 3c, nothing more

 

[rotten]

You may be referring to the urban dictionary, in this case a 'knob end' in case you were curious would mean and I quote "
Knob End A complete cock (usually male)."

 

[petesbrew]

I'm using the Encyclopedic World Dictionary, Copyright The Hamlyn Publishing Group Limited 1971.
Its quite a large tomb, quite comprehensive.


Brew:

Definition 1 : to make (beer, ale, etc.) from malt, etc., by steeping, boiling, and fermentation.

Definition 4 : to concoct or contrive


If you look up concoct, and not just in my dictionary, it means : to make by combining ingredients, to prepare; make up; contrive



On the whole, I agree that steeping ingredients as on the part of the malt manufacturer is an act of brewing. That does fall under one of the definitions I haven't listed. However I point out that the malt manufacturer is not brewing the beer as I pointed out.
Secondly, using malt extract to produce beer is clearly an act of brewing by dictionary definition.

Wiki is not a definitive source. You cannot present Wiki in a court of law, nor can you use Wiki as a reference for school projects etc. And that Wiki definition is a very simplistic one. I'm just speaking English. I'll be damned if I start speaking Wiki to satisfy the mentality of the likes of Yob.
You've stated that brewing specifically refers to the process of steeping. Yes it does, but that is not a complete definition. And the definition you've provided states its the production of beer. The malt extract producer hasn't produced beer, they've produced malt extract.

And I honestly don't know why its a problem to others if I have a curiosity about how things will turn out if I try them.

It's "tome", FFS.
Fail.

 

[bum]

I object to you making abusive comments.

Last time I defend you then, dickhead.

On your bike.

 

[staggalee]

I have done some research in the past thanks Yob. Trolling the net I have found information about people making award winning beer with mature kits.

Trolling the net?

 

[petesbrew]

Trolling the net?

It's the only way, stagga.

 

[mattyra]

Ive always been told to make good beer by using quality ingredients (this includes the fresher the better), good cleaning and good temperature control. Take one away and it doesn't work.

I have tried to use out of date kits (purchased for half the price) brewed them all up and then decided to stock pile them for a month or so before drinking. This was roughly 2 years ago and the bottles are still full of those brews I made. They are aweful.

 

[loikar]

Seriously, who gives a ****?

You blokes take this shit far to seriously.

Who cares if he likes fermenting in his "late night codger sock" with ******* tree sap and the cross-contaminated vaginal yeast from his wifes inner-tube looking cheese pocket due to a severe foot fetish?
Who cares if he says he makes shit beer or a great beer from it?

It's the internet, the dude can say what he wants.
Like lambs to the slaughter you all go running.
Yob, you get sucked into this every time.

SO!

Put up, shut up or delete the thread!

brew an out of date kit and an in date kit.
Same kit, same yeast, same temp same time.
then there's nothing for you dicks to argue about.

or Delete this thread

BeerFingers
Fan of well made Kit&Bits beers (Shutup Smurto!)

**** I need a beer...