I’m starting to think there is something funky in my setup. I pitched starter from a 2nd gen slurry of Wyeast 1968 four days ago. I’m already to 80% attenuation. I mashed at 153 85% base malt 11% crystal 4% aromatic. I use a thermopen so I’m pretty sure its not a mash temp error. I’m doing 3 gallon batches in a 5 gallon cooler I typically lose 2-3 during the mash. Also im brewing on my stove so it takes a little while to get it up to boiling. Would those two thing be enough to be getting that type of attenuation or should I start to look into plastic gear
Couple thoughts on this one:
1.) Overpitching
2.) Fermentation temp control
153F was found to be the most attenuative by a Wyeast experiment.
When you say looking into plastic gear, do you mean looking into cleaning it or that you have an infection?
Mashout or not?
Im batch sparging no mash out but I sparge with 185-190 degree sparge water
80% attenuation out of 1968 is an heroic effort for that strain. Yeah, something is going on here.
Even if you ran just a straight base malt grain bill and mashed that puppy for absolute fermentability, 1968 would be lucky to get within five points of your observed 80%. I’m wondering if there’s something up with the way you’re measuring your attenuation?
How is it floccing? A good 1968 fermentation should be very fast, then suddenly fall nearly crystal clear. If the beer is reluctant to drop clear you may have something other than 1968 gobbling up that extra 10%.
[quote=“Cangrejo”]80% attenuation out of 1968 is an heroic effort for that strain. Yeah, something is going on here.
Even if you ran just a straight base malt grain bill and mashed that puppy for absolute fermentability, 1968 would be lucky to get within five points of your observed 80%. I’m wondering if there’s something up with the way you’re measuring your attenuation?
How is it floccing? A good 1968 fermentation should be very fast, then suddenly fall nearly crystal clear. If the beer is reluctant to drop clear you may have something other than 1968 gobbling up that extra 10%.[/quote]
That’s my fear that something else is going on. All the krausen fell but there are few tiny bits floating. I measured my attenuation using beer smith 1.048 OG 1.009 FG= 80.5 apparent attenuation
[quote=“beerme11”]
That’s my fear that something else is going on. All the krausen fell but there are few tiny bits floating. I measured my attenuation using beer smith 1.048 OG 1.009 FG= 80.5 apparent attenuation[/quote]
Don’t worry about the floaters on top, completely normal. Is the beer itself clear? Can you shine a flash light through your carboy? Or is it still light colored and opaque? If it’s not crystal clear after a week and a half, I’ll bet you’ve got something that isn’t 1968 in there.
[quote=“Cangrejo”][quote=“beerme11”]
That’s my fear that something else is going on. All the krausen fell but there are few tiny bits floating. I measured my attenuation using beer smith 1.048 OG 1.009 FG= 80.5 apparent attenuation[/quote]
Don’t worry about the floaters on top, completely normal. Is the beer itself clear? Can you shine a flash light through your carboy? Or is it still light colored and opaque? If it’s not crystal clear after a week and a half, I’ll bet you’ve got something that isn’t 1968 in there.[/quote]
Oh yeah the floaters look totally normal im not worried about that. Its in a bucket but the gravity sample wasnt exactly crystal clear granted its only been four days. I think ill just have to wait a week check gravity and go from there. Who knows I may have a mutated hyper attenuative version of 1968
Slap a patent on that Super '68 and send me a slant! 
Nuts, I’d forgotten that it had been in there for only a few days. Fortunately, 1968 is about as predictably lazy as yeast comes, so it’s a great yeast for identifying squatters. You’ll get your answer soon.
As a final note, I still wouldn’t discount something simple that you’re overlooking in your attenuation measurements. Last fall, my old hydrometer test jar finally gave up the ghost after twenty years and my fancy new jar started showing really low numbers. About midway through its first brew day I realized that the base needed to be screwed on tighter. Water from its cooling bath had been leaching into the sample jar and diluting my samples. It’s funny what can slip by right under your nose.
Whenever I have a run of over or underattenuated beers, I check my thermometer calibration.
That was my first thought but my thermopen is new and the readings match another digital thermometer I have I’ve also checked my hydrometer. I’m thinking about shortening my mash time to 45 minutes because it takes awhile to get my water up to boil on my stove. I’m using 185-190 water to sparge but its not bringing the grain bed up to 170. My theory is that I’m converting beyond what I intend. I don’t know much about enzymes and all that maybe you can tell me if that makes sense.
The theory makes sense, but I do the same thing and don’t run into the problem you have. Try mashing at 158 instead. Or adding some carapils to your recipes.
Did you change your aeration process? Switching to O2 injection increased my attenuation. Didn’t record the exact increase, but the flavor of the finished beer was significantly dryer.
With all due respect, if you didn’t measure it you don’t really know it increased your attenuation.
The theory makes sense, but I do the same thing and don’t run into the problem you have. Try mashing at 158 instead. Or adding some carapils to your recipes.[/quote]
How long does it take you to reach a boil, Denny? Same question to the OP.
I used to do a MO when I fly-sparged. Now I batch sparge with 190 water, but I’m not able to run off that fast.
As the wort is draining, though, it’s heating up.
Just curious if his wort is sitting at a lower temp longer stove top versus NG/propane. Assuming an electric stove.
The theory makes sense, but I do the same thing and don’t run into the problem you have. Try mashing at 158 instead. Or adding some carapils to your recipes.[/quote]
You brew on your stove?? Yeah… I hear you adjusting recipes but I wouldn’t be satisfied with my recipes not matching my procedure. I’m usually happy with the low FG’s except when I’m not.
The theory makes sense, but I do the same thing and don’t run into the problem you have. Try mashing at 158 instead. Or adding some carapils to your recipes.[/quote]
How long does it take you to reach a boil, Denny? Same question to the OP.
I used to do a MO when I fly-sparged. Now I batch sparge with 190 water, but I’m not able to run off that fast.
As the wort is draining, though, it’s heating up.
Just curious if his wort is sitting at a lower temp longer stove top versus NG/propane. Assuming an electric stove.[/quote]
Its on a gas stove, I’ve never timed it but I will next brew day for sure. I’d say its more than 30 minutes to come to a boil once the wort is on the stove.
It takes me a total of 15 min. for mash runoff, adding sparge water, and running off the sparge. I strat a very low flame during the sparge runoff and it takes me maybe 15-20 min. to get to a boil after the sparge is complete.
The theory makes sense, but I do the same thing and don’t run into the problem you have. Try mashing at 158 instead. Or adding some carapils to your recipes.[/quote]
You brew on your stove?? Yeah… I hear you adjusting recipes but I wouldn’t be satisfied with my recipes not matching my procedure. I’m usually happy with the low FG’s except when I’m not.[/quote]
Me? No, I use a propane burner.
With all due respect, if you didn’t measure it you don’t really know it increased your attenuation.[/quote]
Sounds a little like what I was told by a Colonel back about 1968: “If you didn’t document it, it didn’t happen.” I measured it and noted the decreased gravity as well as the dryer flavor, I just didn’t record it for posterity.
I’m a casual brewer and don’t enter competitions. I rely heavily on more disciplined brewers who take (and consult) their notes, research the literature, and give me good advice. From my limited experience, I’ve been assuming that increased O2 saturation will consistently produce increased attenuation. Does anyone have some documentation on the amount of change it produces?
