Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

30m boil questions...


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#41 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 22716 posts

Posted 05 July 2017 - 12:57 PM

I assume that for the recipes where hops are added only at the beginning of the boil that these are not good candidates for no boil.

Also, for my helles (and occasionally other beers), I do a FWH. Would anyone care to guess what happens to a FWH addition in a 30m that would be different than a 60m boil?

#42 drez77

drez77

    No Life

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11765 posts
  • LocationPalmer, MA

Posted 05 July 2017 - 01:02 PM

I assume that for the recipes where hops are added only at the beginning of the boil that these are not good candidates for no boil.

Also, for my helles (and occasionally other beers), I do a FWH. Would anyone care to guess what happens to a FWH addition in a 30m that would be different than a 60m boil?

I have thought about it and I do not have an answer but I assume it would be different.  Since some say that FWH gives similarities to 20 minute additions I would just change up the recipe.

 

I personally would only no-boil something that I wanted a big WP addition in and most lagers for me would not fall in that camp.  They would just get a standard 30 minute boil.


  • 0

#43 jayb151

jayb151

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • LocationBatavia

Posted 10 July 2017 - 07:28 PM

Would anyone care to guess what happens to a FWH addition in a 30m that would be different than a 60m boil?

 

I have figured on my system, a FWH addition was about the same as a 20-25 minute addition bitterness-wise. 

 

So can I guess a 30 minute boil would make it more like a 15-20 minute addition?


  • 0

#44 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 22716 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 07:52 PM

I have figured on my system, a FWH addition was about the same as a 20-25 minute addition bitterness-wise. 
 
So can I guess a 30 minute boil would make it more like a 15-20 minute addition?

Hey Jayb... good to see you back here. I was thinking the same thing. I'm not sure I was ever convinced that a FWH was like a 20m addition on a 60m boil but I've definitely heard that. What I would do is go with the FWH and a 30m bittering addition, try to get the IBUs to line up and just cross fingers. I'll have a helles coming up again here shortly and plan to find out. Cheers & hope all is well with the fam.

#45 jayb151

jayb151

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • LocationBatavia

Posted 11 July 2017 - 08:41 AM

Hey, thanks a lot! Man, things sure have changed around here, but I'm glad to be back. I'm doing the stay-home-dad thing right now, and we just bought our first place!

 

Actually going to my nearest LHBS today for the first time so I can get some supplies for a cider. Not exactly ready yet to go full on making beer since I'm a little short on equipment, but that's my winter project. Cheers, and I hope the helles turns out!


  • 0

#46 ER Pemberton

ER Pemberton

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 22716 posts

Posted 08 August 2017 - 02:03 PM

Guys: I had two pints of this latest helles yesterday and it was my first helles with the 30-minute boil. I'm only making a big deal about it because this beer has no late hops so it relies solely on the earlier additions and this recipe of mine has a FWH and I wondered about how the shorter boil time would impact that. We usually hear that a FWH is perceived to be like a 20-minute addition. With the shorter boil time, I would like to advance the theory that a FWH is now more like a 10-minute addition. In the two pints I tried yesterday, I seemed to pick up a little more in the way of hop presence which could be because I slightly overshot my early additions to make up for the shorter boil time and it also could be because the beer is young. Whatever the case, the beer is very nice and I feel like the FWH and/or bittering addition had more of its hop character preserved because it wasn't obliterated by that second 30 minutes in a 60 minute boil.

#47 denny

denny

    Living Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7900 posts
  • LocationEugene OR

Posted 08 August 2017 - 02:28 PM

Guys: I had two pints of this latest helles yesterday and it was my first helles with the 30-minute boil. I'm only making a big deal about it because this beer has no late hops so it relies solely on the earlier additions and this recipe of mine has a FWH and I wondered about how the shorter boil time would impact that. We usually hear that a FWH is perceived to be like a 20-minute addition. With the shorter boil time, I would like to advance the theory that a FWH is now more like a 10-minute addition. In the two pints I tried yesterday, I seemed to pick up a little more in the way of hop presence which could be because I slightly overshot my early additions to make up for the shorter boil time and it also could be because the beer is young. Whatever the case, the beer is very nice and I feel like the FWH and/or bittering addition had more of its hop character preserved because it wasn't obliterated by that second 30 minutes in a 60 minute boil.

 

I'll buy that


  • 0

#48 pickle_rick

pickle_rick

    Comptroller of <non-pr0n> pr0n

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33380 posts
  • LocationLimbo

Posted 08 August 2017 - 03:08 PM

it's hard to argue with results.  sounds great Ken!  :cheers:


  • 0

#49 miccullen

miccullen

    Cheap Blue Meanie

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 58715 posts
  • LocationSpokane, WA

Posted 08 August 2017 - 07:11 PM

bump for carlos


  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users