Topics Topics Help/Instructions Help Edit Profile Profile Member List Register  
Search Last 1 | 3 | 7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

Visit The Brewery's sponsor!
Brews & Views Bulletin Board Service * Brews and Views Archive 2004 * January 9, 2004 * Samichlaus Update.... < Previous Next >

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
For Richer or for PorterJoe Alf12-16-03  10:46 pm
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
 

Walt Fischer (24.221.196.114)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 03:53 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Welp the sami is doing great!
Its been sitting at 62 for a week now, and been split into 2 15 gallon batches...
I stirred it up again(gently), like everyday, to get all the yeast back into solution..
I just racked it all together now that the "explosion" is done, and now have it all in 1 30 gallon fermentor..
I adjusted the cooler to 52 and have just put it in there for the next 4-6 weeks :)

Its now reached 1.080 and taste Great, even if it is still sweet as heck :) And its still fermenting away at a nice pace...

Ok.. now the Real Question....
I just measured the FG of an actual bottle, as the gravity of this stuff came up before...
I whipped out the bubbles and it measured at...
1.010
.... wow.....yes.. no kidding.. 1.010
I have to think that Joe Alf might have been right when he montioned that Micheal Jackson mentioned that he thought it was a 1.118 OG beer, taken down to 1.012
This makes more sense then the Clone Brews saying 1.140 down to 1.035.

Whats even sillier.. is i now realize i took the OG wrong.. duh...(i was drinking that damn 12.6% Golden, so it could happen.. heh)

I now realize my reading was actually 1.114... not 1.140
So while at first i thought i screwed up.. i actually might have hit it about on the money..."true" Sami wise...

So while i didnt get as good a conversion as i had thought(ill have to look at that), if i take it down to 1.010, ill hit just about 14%.... which should put it almost exactly inline with the 2002 bottle i just tested...

Soooo.. what cha all think?

Walt
 

Randy McCord (216.174.177.168)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 04:46 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I hope it works out for ya! I've never tried that beer or many others that people mention here because they don't sell anything even close to that here in S. Illinois. Me and the wife plan to take a good trip on the Harley this summer, so maybe I can find a liquor store different than the ones within a 50 mile radius of here! If I do find a beer like this, I'll have to make sure the riding is done for the day.
 

Joe Alf (65.141.57.88)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 01:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Sooo,I guess I'll have 'The World's Strongest Lager!
At 1.129 O.G.,should be finishing circa 1.025.
That seems like a better amount of sugar to hide 14%ABV behind.Can't believe 1.010 can come off so sweet,did that bottle have that characteristic sweetness I remember?
Took a reading this A.M.1.100,ferm temp 50d,only roused today.Tastes and smells nice, and sweet!
My conversion temp was all about Beta amylase [145d,so a low F.G. should be a possibility..I have taken a 1.171 down to 1.062 with WLP099 and champagne yeast.I'm tempted to rack on to a cake of Bavarian Lager but don't want to dilute the "belgian" character this yeast is supposed to give,any comments on this?
 

Walt Fischer (24.221.196.114)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 06:34 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yea.. i hear ya Joe.. I was surprised when the Rochefort 10 was 1.012
The Sami tasted nice n sweet at 1.010
This all brings me back to my drive for lower FG's...
I havent tested the FG of a bottle of beer that was over 1.020 yet...
Yet many home brewers often have FG's over 1.020..

hmmmm...

Walt
 

PaulK (68.32.217.196)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 06:38 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Walt - Isn't the 62 deg. ferment a bit warm for a lager yeast or is this typical for a Sami clone? Never did one myself.
 

Joe Alf (65.139.154.57)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 09:53 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I bottled an Imperial Stout last week OG 1.092
FG 1.030 after a long secondary and a Lager yeast slurry to finish it off. Mash temp was 156d,that could explain it.Anyway, I never achieve a low FG unless the beer sits a looong time in the cooler or a bottle,and yes,I stir-up lots of yeast and aerate with lots of pure O2. With a FG that low, might we suspect sugar? It wouldn't be unexpected in a Rochefort or any other big Belgian. Has Sami ever said "All Malt"?.
Now I have the option of dilution to ease the stress on the yeast,or drop the FG,but I doubt I'll ever get close to 1.010,although 16%ABV Lager would definetly be good to have in the inventory.
 

Doug Pescatore (141.232.1.10)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 10:04 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Remember that the true attentuation of a giant beer doesn't have to be unreasonable to reach 1.010. With all that alcohol having a SG of 0.7, I can see you getting down to 1.010 and still having a sweet brew. If sugar was used as a significant part of the fermentables, I could see the FG getting below 1.000.

-Doug
 

Bill Pierce (24.141.63.119)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 11:19 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Doug, your point is taken (alcohol is less dense than water), but for the record the specific gravity of ethanol is 0.793.

Walt, it's been a few years since I had a Samichlaus; I remember it as being sweeter and having more body than an F.G. or 1.010 would seem to indicate. That seems quite reasonable for a strong Belgian ale but low for a doppelbock, even a huge one like Samichlaus.

On an only slightly related note, yesterday I tried Unibroue's Terrible for the first time. It's a big dark strong Belgian (10.5 percent by volume) with a lot of complex flavors and a smooth, sweet finish. It's perhaps just slightly too sweet but I thought it compared very favorably to Chimay blue, maybe even a little better. I highly recommend it if you can find it.
 

PaulK (68.32.217.196)
Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 11:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

This year's release of Samiclaus is cloyingly sweet. Actually tastes like it didn't finish fermenting. Had it on tap at the San Diego Strong Ale Fest.
 

Joe Alf (65.141.58.79)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 12:09 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Below 1.ooo.
Surely you're speaking hypothetically,
or have you seen this in your beers?
Joe
 

Chris Colby (66.25.196.39)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 01:44 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Many wines finish below 1.000 -- i.e there is enough alcohol to pull the gravity below one. I'm not aware of any beers that end up this low, but I wonder if it would be possible with a strong lambic-style beer.

Chris Colby
Bastrop, TX
 

Doug Pescatore (141.232.1.10)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 01:37 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

B-52 finishes around 1.004 with 2 pounds of honey. Add another .5 to 1 pound of honey or other highly fermentable and you will be at or below 1.000

-Doug
 

Beerboy (81.134.148.158)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 02:10 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I had a 3 year old bottle of Samiclaus last night and it was absolutely delicious.

Sweet but not too much. Dangerously drinkable, I had to hold myself back so I didn't gulp it down.
 

Ken Anderson (24.55.255.75)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 03:40 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

PaulK, I was wondering the same thing. Maybe he used a steam beer lager yeast, good up to 65F.
 

Bill Pierce (24.141.63.119)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 03:44 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Doug, you are exaggerated about the effects of a relatively small amount of honey on the attenuation of the beer. It is true that mead, for example, will typically finish at about 0.997 if the O.G. is not excessive (say, 1.080). That's an apparent attenuation of 104 percent, but that that is with pure honey.

There are still a relatively large amount of dextrins in malt. In another example, a braggot I brewed had 50 percent of its fermentables from honey and was fermented with Wyeast 1318, an average attenuating strain, typically 71-75 percent in an all-malt beer. The O.G. of the braggot was 1.063 and the F.G. was 1.008, for an apparent attenuation of 87 percent.

Using two pounds of honey, B52 has 20 percent of its fermentables from honey. The last time I brewed it the O.G. was 1.060 and the F.G. was 1.008, for an apparent attenuation of 86 percent. It was fermented with Danstar Nottingham; typically I achieve about 77 percent attenuation with an all-malt beer if I use this strain.

My experience would lead me to believe that if I added another pound of honey to the B52 recipe, it would raise the O.G. to 1.068 and the resulting F.G would remain at 1.008, for an apparent attenuation of 88 percent.

The bottom line here is that it is all but impossible to achieve an O.G. of 1.000 or lower with any recipe that uses a significant portion (say, 20 percent or more) of malt.
 

Doug Pescatore (141.232.1.10)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 04:48 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The bottom line here is that I wanted to raise the awareness that a huge beer like this one can have a significant amount of unfermented sugars and still have a FG of 1.010.

But, on to your comments about adding another pound of honey to B52. What makes you believe based on your experience that your FG would still be 1.008? Your use of apparent attenuation is a moot (not mute-should type slower) point because it is "apparent" instead of absolute.

But, if you are lead to believe that getting a beer at or below 1.000 is all but impossible, who am I to argue. I have not nor will I ever try.

-Doug
 

David Woods (63.95.170.150)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 05:34 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Doug,
I think Bill means that the known unfermentables (dextrins) from the original recipe stopped the fermentation at 1.008 the first time. Honey being almost 100% fermentable would raise the OG, but the known dextrins in the recipe would still be there. Beer yeast cannot ferment these, so the FG would remain the same.

Adding another pound of malt instead of a pound of honey would have resulted in a higher OG and a higher FG, since malt (no matter what temp you mash it at) will have unfermentables in it.

Fementables like grapes and honey do not normally contain these unfermentables and could lead to a possible FG below 1.000.

This is the way it seamed to me, please correct me if I am wrong.

David
 

Doug Pescatore (141.232.1.10)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 05:40 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

David,
Assumming the dextrins stay the same, the increased amount of alcohol (SG 0.793) should bring the FG closer to 1.000.

-Doug
 

Bill Pierce (24.141.63.119)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 05:43 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Doug, there's nothing wrong with a spirited discussion. I certainly agree that big beers can have a relatively low O.G. Walt's measurement of the F.G. of Rochefort 10 at 1.012 is a good example.

Clearly the use of brewing sugars can lower the F.G. of the beer and increase attenuation (apparent or real doesn't matter, as long as you are using the same measurement throughout). The consensus, however, is that Samichlaus has only a small amount of added sugar, no more than 5 percent at most. This would not be sufficient to increase the attenutation and lower the F.G. by more than a few points.

Accurately estimating attenuation (and F.G.) requires some experience with a particular recipe and ingredients. My calculation that an extra pound of honey in the B52 recipe would raise the O.G. by 8 points and the honey from 20 percent to 28 percent of the total fermentables is based on the recipe and the extract potential (1.039) of honey. My estimate that the F.G. (1.008) would remain at 1.008 is based on the fact that honey is roughly 100 percent fermentable in terms of apparent attenuation.
 

Doug Pescatore (141.232.1.10)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 05:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I see. Mead down to near 1.000 (100% apparent attenuation). Apple juice would be more fermentable as ciders finish in the .999 to .990 range.

My point was the Samichlaus would need any sugar added to get to 1.010 because it is very big and that much alcohol would give a deceptively low FG. A lot of people associate FGs below 1.010 as dry or thin, but in this case it could be full bodied and on the sweet side.

-Doug
 

Bill Pierce (24.141.63.119)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 06:09 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Actually, the apparent attenuation of dry mead is frequently greater than 100 percent, as I mentioned in my example above with an O.G. of 1.080 and an F.G. of 0.997. The lowest F.G. I have seen with mead is 0.995. As you mention, it can be even lower for cider, which would lead to the conclusion (as seems to be demonstrated by the dry finish) that apple juice is even more fermentable than honey.

The relationship between the perceived dryness and the F.G. is inexact. At least with wine, cider and mead, if the O.G. is below about 1.005 it is generally considered dry, and if it is above about 1.020 it is considered sweet. Those with the F.G. in the intermediate area range from being called semi-dry to medium to semi-sweet.

I think (and this is a matter of opinion as opposed to fact) that the perception of dryness in beer is more subjective. Other ingredients such as hops and/or spices are also factors. I can think of Belgians, Orval for example, that are higher in F.G. but still have some dryness in the finish. I presume that the dry hops are the reason.

You are correct that if Samichlaus indeed has an F.G. of 1.010 (I don't have one to measure), then it is extremely likely to have some sugar added. It would be almost impossible for an all-malt beer with that high an alcohol content to finish that low.

As I said, my memory of Samichlaus is that it has a malty, sweet finish typical of doppelebocks, which would lead me to conclude that the F.G. is higher than 1.010. I don't recall a lot of hop character that would skew the perception.
 

Walt Fischer (24.221.196.114)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 06:15 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yea.. 62 sounded a bit high to me as well.. but thats what the recipe said....
2 weeks at 57-62, 6 weeks at 47-52, then back up to 65 n pitch champange yeast to finish it... then keg/bottle and lager at 47-52 for 10 months...
I used a 5 gallon starter of WLP885 for this bugger.. :)

Walt
 

Walt Fischer (24.221.196.114)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 08:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yea. Bill.. there is some sugar, but not alot..
For a 5 gallon batch, its 25.25 pounds of grain(23.75 of it is Pils base, then 1 lb of 60crystal and .5 Vienna), then 1 pound of candi sugar..
1.25 oz of northern brewer for 60, 5 oz of Tett for 12, then .5 oz Hall for 2
Sooo mostly base grains, with alittle hops...
And yup.. the 2002 bottle i had was 1.010, still with a nice sweetness and malty feel n taste...not much hop presence...

Im anxious to see how this monster comes out.. right now the taste is very simular to Sami, but obviously still too sweet..but i can tell its gonna be a close taste :)
If i hit below 1.030 ill be pumped :)
But im gonna try for 1.010 :)

Walt
 

Joe Alf (65.139.148.217)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 10:35 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I wonder how much these big beers "dry-out" in the bottle over time,in respect to gravity.
Maybe this years batch is .010 higher than a bottle thats 3-4 years old?
Does'nt carb level get absorbed or resede over time,this could explain why they don't become gushers,or do they? Some Belgians are gushers.
I didn't use sugar in my recipe and incorporated alot of other malt/hop stuff from things I read searching the web.
Here's a look;
17lb Belgian Pils
16lb Belgian Pale
2lb Munich
2lb Vienna
1lb CaraMunich 60l
1lb KilnAmber
1lb Flaked Barley "Toasted" American
Collected almost 8 gal 1.111
Boiled fierce 1 hour then;
.75 oz Magnum 14%AA @ 60
.50 Perle @ 30
.50 Hall Hersbrucker Whole 4.5% @15
.50 styrian Goldings @ 15
1.0 Saaz @ 2

O G 1.129 IBU 44.6
WLP885
Fermenting well but that yeast clumps together like snowflakes,not that I know Anything about snowflakes;Florida boy.
 

Chris Colby (66.25.196.39)
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 10:41 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Bill Pierce says:
"The bottom line here is that it is all but impossible to achieve an O.G. of 1.000 or lower with any recipe that uses a significant portion (say, 20 percent or more) of malt."

I agree if we're talking about pitching only beer yeast. However, I bet if you made a high gravity, highly fermentable wort and pitched yeast plus the typical lambic microorganisms you could ferment below 1.000.

Lambics typically finish between 1.006 and 1.010, but starting gravities are rarely above 1.055. With a little higher OG and a more fermentable wort (with say 20-30% flaked corn in the mash), I'll bet you could get an FG at or below 1.000. (You might not want to drink it, but that's another story 8-)

Come to think of it, what gravity does chicha terminate at?


Chris Colby
Bastrop, TX
 

Bill Whittaker (216.106.105.78)
Posted on Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 05:09 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I found this disscusion on the F.G of high gravity beer interesting as I am making my first attempt at a high gravity beer in 3 years of A.G brewing.
I used 15 # of grain and 1# of demerara sugar.Got 4 g. of 1.090 wort.I pitched 2 packets Nottingham dry yeast.After 8 days gravity is 1.010 ! This is about half what I expected.Still tasted somewhat sweet though.

Bill Whittaker
 

don price (65.32.41.166)
Posted on Thursday, December 18, 2003 - 03:47 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Sounds like it is time to issue the big beer fermentation challenge! Who can brew what that starts at >1.075 and finishes <1.005 without tasting like paint thinner?

My data point - Chimay blue clone 1.090 OG, 1.010 FG. Must have been 3.3 lbs of demerara sugar (11 gallons) and that 149 F mash...

Don
 

PaulK (68.32.217.196)
Posted on Thursday, December 18, 2003 - 04:04 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

> I used a 5 gallon starter of WLP885 for this bugger

That raises a question. Are you saying you threw in the yeast cake from a 5 gallon starter or you added 5 additional gallons (i.e. the whole starter) to your batch? That is not an insignificant amount and i would be concerned about changing the character of the beer.
 

Jeremy S (205.188.208.75)
Posted on Thursday, December 18, 2003 - 08:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hey Walt...are you concerned about the fact your Sami won't give you good head? ;) You gonna use a heading liquid or just let it go? And I am serious I WILL max out my hydrometer at 1.170 to beat you! :) How many short tons of malt will I need to do that...I'm guessing, what 200 lbs of grain for a 5 gallon batch? Gawd...just thinking of the amount of DME...recipator says 19 lbs of DME will get me an OG of 1.171 for a 5 gallon batch...that's about 19% ABV...that's IF I could get it down to 1.020! I can just see the recipe:

OG-1.170+
FG-1.020
Final Words-Good Luck!
 

Walt Fischer (24.221.196.114)
Posted on Thursday, December 18, 2003 - 06:04 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hehe..
Hey Paul.. i just used the cake from a 5 gallon starter.. so there was no additional liquid added..
Yoo Jeremy..It'll give whatever head it gives, cause i wont add any 'heading' liquid... :)
Hitting the 1.170 OG is the easy part.. its reaching the FG thats the tough part..heh
Its now sitting in the cooler at 52 and happy as a clam!
Just checked and its down to 1.060...

Burn baby burn... :)

Walt
 

craig white (152.163.252.67)
Posted on Thursday, December 18, 2003 - 06:44 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

beano will bring it below 1.000

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.