Efficiency difference from different suppliers of malt - advice please

shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
timtoos

timtoos

Regular.
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
234
Reaction score
25
Hi all,

I usually purchase my brewing ingredients from online supplier no1, and find that I get a total efficiency of 70% in beersmith. I maybe 1 point low on my OG now and again after the boil but usually I am spot on.

Recently I have started to buy grains from another major online supplier, no2, and I now find I am low on my OG by about 5-6 points after the boil. To get round this I have to reduce my beer smith from 70 to 65.

I brew with a braumeister 20L.

Any thoughts? Anyone else found this? The thing is, supplier no2 has a far better delivery service :-/

I have brewed the same beer using the same kit and followed my usually procedure.

Advice?

TIA
 
There may be a difference in freshness between suppliers, and perhaps the actual brand they are selling.

Like any crop, success will depend on a list of variables (soil, sunshine, rain etc). If your suppliers are sourcing their grain from different malt houses, who get their grain from different farmers from different parts of the country, then this may account for the difference too.
 
Possibly fineness/courseness of crush of grain? as this can effect efficiency. Although I dont know how much effect this has with a braumeister (but it does with BIAB)
 
the grain crush and age since milled will both have an impact, a finer crush is more suited to your usual biab brews but with a BM i wouldnt have thought that would have had made much difference as the recirc/rest cycles should expose all the grain to a rinsing flow of liquor??

Also were they both grains from the same maltings? comparing Crisps against Fawcetts for example could also explain the difference..
 
I'm getting way, way higher efficiency from Hook Head malt than anything I've ever used, to the point where I'm using much less base malt. Incredible thing is, the beer is turning out as good as ever. Even more incredible is that right now it's about the cheapest there is!
 
Gunge said:
I'm getting way, way higher efficiency from Hook Head malt than anything I've ever used, to the point where I'm using much less base malt. Incredible thing is, the beer is turning out as good as ever. Even more incredible is that right now it's about the cheapest there is!
Click to expand...



Same here, my 5% ish beers are ending up 5.5% or so. Last one ended up 5.8%. Trouble is you can start to taste the alcohol a little bit as the bitterness was based on 5%. I’m not complaining tho [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Is it exactly the same grain? I found that when I switched from the GEB Irish base malts to their Crisp malts my efficiency jumped.

Also, the crush as people have said
 
You will find that even from the same supplier every time you buy a new bag of grain it could have a different efficiency. Presumably they're buying it in bulk so the bags at the back could have been there quite a long time, especially if they buy in new batches and stack it on top of the older stuff.
Only way round it is to work out the efficiency on the first brew from a new bag and adjust subsequent ones either by adding more base malt to the recipe or, gasp, chucking in a bit of sugar.
 
Good observation here. if you take OG readings and believe in them, temperature adjusted, to make your beer better, then adding a spoonful of sugar might well help the medicine go down and your beer world go around.
 
I think its the crush more than anything else and it can vary alot even in the same batch from the same maltster.
 
I've just worked with a different base malt, and where I'd expect the result to have come out 1.066, it came out 1.058. Simpsons instead of my usual Warminster. But before I jump to the conclusion that Simpson's doesn't extract as well as Warminster's ... this was also the first time I'd crushed my own grain.

Crush looked the same, but I've also used Simpson's before and had no dramatic change of extract. I'm brewing with Warminster whole grains next time, so I'll use the same crush and see what the result is. But after reading these posts I'm sure I'm not going to get a great extract.
 
peebee said:
I've just worked with a different base malt, and where I'd expect the result to have come out 1.066, it came out 1.058. Simpsons instead of my usual Warminster. But before I jump to the conclusion that Simpson's doesn't extract as well as Warminster's ... this was also the first time I'd crushed my own grain.

Crush looked the same, but I've also used Simpson's before and had no dramatic change of extract. I'm brewing with Warminster whole grains next time, so I'll use the same crush and see what the result is. But after reading these posts I'm sure I'm not going to get a great extract.
Click to expand...

Interesting thread, and I don't think there is any definitive answer.
The same variety of malt could come from different parts of the country, on different soils and totally different climatic conditions. take the crush into play and ones home-brew practice, one can see that so many variables will soon start playing tricks on the mind. At the end of the day, it is why small breweries have been buying their grain from the same farmer for hundreds of years and even then submit each delivery to laboratory analysis so that their beer is consistent every time.
 
All I can say is get Hook Head from HBC and be done with it. Just finishing sack no.3 now and they've all been exactly the same... amazing efficiency and beer as good as any, and dirt cheap! Nope, I don't work for or take any benefits from either of them.
 
Gunge said:
All I can say is get Hook Head from HBC and be done with it. Just finishing sack no.3 now and they've all been exactly the same... amazing efficiency and beer as good as any, and dirt cheap! Nope, I don't work for or take any benefits from either of them.
Click to expand...



Certainly agree. Have had some really good results with the Hook Head malt from HBC.
I bought a 25kg sack for £18.95. Excellent value.
 
Malt is an organic product, and the starch and sugar content is going to differ from crop to crop and location to location, depending on sunshine, rainfall, soil, and all the other things that farmers have to think about. The exact process followed by the malthouse is bound to have an effect too.

Unless your two bags of malt were from the same crop grown by the same farmer in the same field and processed in the same batch by the same malthouse, they were always going to be different to some extent. I'd have been amazed if they were the same.
 
I have had a similar experience recently. The funny thing is that in my case it was a swap from using the 2 big Irish suppliers to Baird's/Brewers Select.

As a result I currently have 100 litres of 6% Kolsch fermenting!.

The great thing is that the grain only cost £12.40 for 25kg (I used 20kg in the above brew). The ordering process is a little more clunky than the usual home brew suppliers, but worth it for the saving. They were nice people too, even loaded my 50kg of grain in the car for me.
 
Gunge said:
All I can say is get Hook Head from HBC and be done with it. Just finishing sack no.3 now and they've all been exactly the same... amazing efficiency and beer as good as any, and dirt cheap! Nope, I don't work for or take any benefits from either of them.
Click to expand...

I've always fancied trying this one but was put off by the description of it being drenched in salt spray from the sea. Didn't fancy the idea of salty beer. You're obviously impressed by it though. How does it compare to something like Maris Otter for you?
 

Similar threads

Brewshed
Interesting observation on mash temperature monitoring
Replies
3
Views
211
dmtaylor
dmtaylor
DominicRL
OG Higher than expected - thoughts?
2
Replies
21
Views
649
MashBag
MashBag
Twostage
92% Efficiency
Replies
4
Views
422
Empty bottle
Empty bottle
hoppyscotty
impact of mash temp on mash extraction / efficiency
Replies
1
Views
436
dcbrookes
dcbrookes
peterpiper
Should a thin, or a thick mash, give higher mash efficiency?
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
4K
Slid
Slid

Latest posts

Back
Top