Reiterated Mash, In the December BYO Options

[smokey]

I just got my first BYO and was reading the article on "reiterated" mashing for making high gravity light colored beers (Imperial Pilz!). I've been wanting to make an imperial pilsner, but my experience with all my high gravity brews is that the longer boil times give me darker wort and the hint of caramalized taste you tend to get with long boils. It's been something I anticipated and made work in the recipe, but it has steered me away from a straw blonde imperial pilsner.

Has anyone read the article and/or tried the process? It looks like it would make for a long brew day, but it would be worth it if I could make a really dry fermented blonde imperial pils, instead of the slightly amber beer with a little too much caramelized flavor going on.

[dirt_mcgirt]

Very interesting idea. I'm having a little trouble getting my head around why it works though. It sounds like you do basically a no sparge on 10 lbs of grain, then take your wort and do another no-sparge (or small sparge) on 10 more lbs of grain, and supposedly that gives you around 65 % total efficiency... (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/scratch.gif)

I might have to try it with a light colored DIPA.

[dagomike]

I haven't read it yet, but what's the run down? Is it like brewzalot said, doing a double no-sparge mash? I'd think that would work. While not as much fun, you could also boost it with Pils extract.

[dirt_mcgirt]

I haven't read it yet, but what's the run down? Is it like brewzalot said, doing a double no-sparge mash? I'd think that would work. While not as much fun, you could also boost it with Pils extract.

I might be confused on the sparging this, but basically you:
Mash 10 lbs of grain for like 20 minutes at 150
Top off with the water you need to get a full 6 gallons (or whatever pre-boil you are shooting for)
Drain wort into another container with 10 more lbs of grain
Mash that for up to 90 minutes at 140, do a rest at 154 and another at 168
Drain, sparge with as much water as you need to get back up to your pre-boil volume (to account for absorption of 2nd mash)
Boil for 60 minutes

You can also do a 3rd mash before the mashout. According to the article you can get an OG of 1.095 with only 20 lbs of grain and no long boil this way.

[Oldfart]

Dang Chris Colby stole my idea!

I've been talking off and on to kysmith for a couple months now about doing this. The general plan is that I'll mash ten pounds of grain, take six gallons of wort to his place, he'll mash some larger amount of grain using my wort plus some water, he will use the first runnings to make something pretty strong, probably a barleywine, I'll come back home with the second runnings. Then I'll use the second runnings to mash another 10 pounds of grain. The net result will be two pretty strong batches of beer from three mashes.

If we ever stop talking about this and actually do it, I'll try to remember to dig up this thread and let you know how it turned out. (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/cheers.gif) OF

[smokey]

From my reading, it sounded like


A) Mash a quick "first mash" for 20 minutes. You won't get total conversion

(IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/cool.gif) Sparge enough to collect enough wort for a 60 minutes boil.

C) Stir your "second mash" grains into the kettle... hold at 140 for a while.

D) Move the whole mess back to the mash tun (with the first mash partially converted grain)

E) Mash for 90 minutes

F) Sparge enough to collect wort for 60 minute boil.

G) Repeat C-F if you want to do a third

I'm going to re-read it, but I wasn't sure how he calculated for a predicted OG. I think I could reverse engineer the attached recipes to try to get some figures. The difference between his method and just using a ton of grain is that you supposedly get better extraction with less grain. I'm not sure if it's worth the saved time. My method for big beers is usually just a long boil, but I have the associated negatives that go along with that, too.

The cool thing was the potential to get 1.1+ OG wort with only a 60 minute boil and using all grain. I think CJ was on a thing a while ago trying to brew the biggest beer he could without using extract or sugar. This might help him out.

[dirt_mcgirt]

C) Stir your "second mash" grains into the kettle... hold at 140 for a while.

D) Move the whole mess back to the mash tun (with the first mash partially converted grain)

E) Mash for 90 minutes

This isn't what the article says to do (I'm looking at it now). It says to mash for 90 minutes in the kettle and to clean out the spent grains from your mash tun while you are resting. Then you go back to your mash tun just so you can clean your kettle. That's what confused me - it seems like you effeciency from the fist 10 lbs of grain would be low. I'm thinking of another version where you would do the first 10 lbs like a regulary batch sparge instead of draining the whole thing at once.

This post has been edited by sirbrewzalot: Nov 15 2007, 12:58 PM

[Stuster]

I read that article, but honestly I can't see the advantage over parti-gyle brewing (sorry Chris). Seems like an inventive procedure, but I think it's a lot more mucking about than parti-gyle, with no advantages I can see. (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/shock.gif) Am I wrong?

[Oldfart]

Well, Stuster, I wanted to try this because I only have a five-gallon mash tun and a seven-gallon kettle. Also, I'm not very interested in kegging the weaker half of a parti-gyle; with this method I can turn the weaker parti-gyle into something I'll like better. So I guess the advantage simply depends upon one's equipment and taste. (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/cheers.gif) OF

This post has been edited by Oldfart: Nov 15 2007, 05:20 PM

[Lagerdemain]

I didn't read the entire article, but...it seems to me the efficiency estimate is somewhat high. Remember that in the second mash, the strike "wort" will already be partially saturated with sugars and will not be able to absorb as much sugar as were absorbed during the first mash. I'd be pretty surprised if actual efficiencies reached with this technique were much higher than 50%.

[Stuster]

Fair enough, OF. That makes sense then. I'm always happy to have a lighter beer from the second runnings, so that's why I do a parti-gyle if I'm doing a strong beer, but if that's not what you want, then this approach might make sense for you. (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/smile.gif)

[hiddendragonet]

I read the article too. But Randy Mosher has already written about this technique in "Radical Brewing." He has a recipe/process called Doble-doble where you mash, run off, then use the wort to mash again.

Now that said, Chris Colby's technique is less wasteful because you actually are fully sparging all the mashes, whereas IIRC Randy Mosher had you taking the first runnings and then discarding the mash. Or maybe it was a no sparge. Anyway, Chris' is less wasteful and I like the idea.

The interesting parts to me where the changes in calcium/pH that you needed to be in tune with.

[Chris Colby]

Very interesting idea. I'm having a little trouble getting my head around why it works though. It sounds like you do basically a no sparge on 10 lbs of grain, then take your wort and do another no-sparge (or small sparge) on 10 more lbs of grain, and supposedly that gives you around 65 % total efficiency... (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/scratch.gif)

I might have to try it with a light colored DIPA.

The efficiency you get will depend on your own milling, water chemistry, lauter tun efficiency, etc. For the first mash, you mash at a normal liquor-to-grist ratio, but then add a bunch of water and run it all off quickly like a no sparge mash. (You could run this first wort off normally, but the first mash doesn't need to be completely converted and the no-sparge-like runoff justs saves time.) So, you should get your usual extract efficiency for the first mash.

For the second mash, you'll get a slightly lowered efficiency -- but you'll be shocked at how small the difference really is.


Chris Colby (Editor BYO)
Bastrop, TX

[Chris Colby]

Dang Chris Colby stole my idea!

Actually, I stole (and adapted) the idea from the Hurlimann brewery -- the guys who brew Samiclaus. They use the second runnings of another beer for their mash liquor when brewing Samiclaus.


Chris Colby (Editor BYO)
Bastrop, TX

[Chris Colby]

I read that article, but honestly I can't see the advantage over parti-gyle brewing (sorry Chris). Seems like an inventive procedure, but I think it's a lot more mucking about than parti-gyle, with no advantages I can see. (IMG:style_emoticons/brewboard/shock.gif) Am I wrong?

In parti-gyle brewing, you make two beers from one mash. It reiterated mashing, you make one beer from two (or three) mashes.


Chris Colby (Editor BYO)
Bastrop, TX