Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum
General Category => Yeast and Fermentation => Topic started by: Richard on February 28, 2017, 03:50:06 AM
-
I have an old (Oct 2015) spec sheet for US-05 that states the optimum fermentation temperature range is 59-72 F. I just downloaded a new one (Nov 2016) and it says the optimum range is from 64-82 F. This is a substantial change. Did the yeast change at all, or did someone just re-write the data sheet? Everything else on the sheet seems the same, so my guess is that someone re-defined the optimum range and that the yeast is the same. Why would they do this? What would cause them to re-define what is optimum? Have people's tastes changed in the course of a year?
-GF
-
Fascinating! I would contact the company...it's possible they either have revised their specs, or maybe it's even a typo. I wouldn't imagine that 82F is terribly great for most beer styles.
-
Must be a mistake on the English-version PDF of the US-05 stats sheet on the Fermentis website. The English version does indeed say "fermentation ideally at 18-28°C (64-82°F)", but the French and Spanish versions have it at 15-20°C (59-68°F).
-
I contacted Fermentis and they acknowledged that this is a mistake and will be correcting it "very soon".
-
Yeah, regardless of the stated range, several people here (myself included) will attest that S05/1056/001 ferments well in the upper 50s. It's rumored to be descended from a lager strain.
-
Upper 50's? It will effectively ferment into the lower 50's.
-
Upper 50's? It will effectively ferment into the lower 50's.
Yeah, I've actually fermented it more into the mid 50s, Martin. Anecdotally , I've heard lower. It definitely wants to ferment!
-
I've done 55 F. It gets more peachy.
-
Upper 50's? It will effectively ferment into the lower 50's.
I once had a valve fail on a glycol loop (it stayed open) and crashed a fermenting batch of 1.090 beer to 45 degrees on US-05 and the yeast was chugging along like nobodies business. It eventually warmed up into the lower 60s on it's on once I got the glycol shut off. Attenuation was right where I wanted it and taste was clean, no off flavors at all.
-
Upper 50's? It will effectively ferment into the lower 50's.
I once had a valve fail on a glycol loop (it stayed open) and crashed a fermenting batch of 1.090 beer to 45 degrees on US-05 and the yeast was chugging along like nobodies business. It eventually warmed up into the lower 60s on it's on once I got the glycol shut off. Attenuation was right where I wanted it and taste was clean, no off flavors at all.
I thought I remembered a story like that, Keith. Wow! Kinda bears out Mark's theory on it being used in American lagers at some point.
-
I'm glad to hear about the lower temperature ranges for US 05 and the good results. I've been fermenting from 64 F to 68 F. Now, I'll try it a b it lower.
Thanks
-
I fermented US-05 @ 59 with no D-rest and didn't pick up any peach flavors. Sierra via Ballantine via Germany? IDK, but this yeast is one of my favorites.
-
US-05 is definitely some stuff yeast, I almost prefer the taste compared liquid yeast.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
-
I did a mid 60's APA a couple weeks ago at 50 degrees with US-05, it was the only time I've ever had such vigorous fermentation that it overflowed the fermenter, with 1 1/2 gallons of headspace in a 7 1/2 gallon Fast Ferment. I'm thinking 05 is some pretty resilient stuff.
-
In my honest opinion, just ignore the "recommended temp ranges" on the yeast packages.
If you are unsure of a good fermentation temp you want for your beer, just look around the forums and see what folks have been recommending for the yeast/style you are brewing.
-
In my honest opinion, just ignore the "recommended temp ranges" on the yeast packages.
If you are unsure of a good fermentation temp you want for your beer, just look around the forums and see what folks have been recommending for the yeast/style you are brewing.
Totally agree.
-
In my honest opinion, just ignore the "recommended temp ranges" on the yeast packages.
If you are unsure of a good fermentation temp you want for your beer, just look around the forums and see what folks have been recommending for the yeast/style you are brewing.
Good point!
In my opinion US05 has an optimum range of about 58F-75F. People report "peach" and other flavor differences depending on temp but I have never detected that...
-
In my honest opinion, just ignore the "recommended temp ranges" on the yeast packages.
If you are unsure of a good fermentation temp you want for your beer, just look around the forums and see what folks have been recommending for the yeast/style you are brewing.
This is the best advice. And find out for yourself. People here report they like us-05 at low temps, I don't at all. Doesn't make them wrong or me right. Just preference.
FYI I like us-05 and find it cleanest at about 66-68 degrees
-
In my honest opinion, just ignore the "recommended temp ranges" on the yeast packages.
If you are unsure of a good fermentation temp you want for your beer, just look around the forums and see what folks have been recommending for the yeast/style you are brewing.
Good point!
In my opinion US05 has an optimum range of about 58F-75F. People report "peach" and other flavor differences depending on temp but I have never detected that...
I find the peach so objectionable that I've dumped batches of beer made with 05 and will not use it any longer.
-
In my honest opinion, just ignore the "recommended temp ranges" on the yeast packages.
If you are unsure of a good fermentation temp you want for your beer, just look around the forums and see what folks have been recommending for the yeast/style you are brewing.
Good point!
In my opinion US05 has an optimum range of about 58F-75F. People report "peach" and other flavor differences depending on temp but I have never detected that...
I find the peach so objectionable that I've dumped batches of beer made with 05 and will not use it any longer.
That's cool. Glad that hasn't happened to me. Maybe I don't know what peach tastes like...
-
When the peach is present, it's unmistakeable. It's happened to me only when I've fermented below 55 F.
-
When the peach is present, it's unmistakeable. It's happened to me only when I've fermented below 55 F.
I got it at 65F.
-
In my honest opinion, just ignore the "recommended temp ranges" on the yeast packages.
If you are unsure of a good fermentation temp you want for your beer, just look around the forums and see what folks have been recommending for the yeast/style you are brewing.
Good point!
In my opinion US05 has an optimum range of about 58F-75F. People report "peach" and other flavor differences depending on temp but I have never detected that...
I find the peach so objectionable that I've dumped batches of beer made with 05 and will not use it any longer.
Do you also get peach from the liquid equivalents?
-
Personally I haven't used WLP001 or 1056 in many many years so I can't speak to that. In fact I'm on a quest to find the best 21st century dry yeast for every beer style under the sun.
-
Do you also get peach from the liquid equivalents?
Nope, not at all. And you bring up something Marshall and I have been discussing today....I don't really find all 3 to be equivalents. I find 1056 to be drier and crisper than 001. And 05 isn't even in the game.
-
Do you also get peach from the liquid equivalents?
Nope, not at all. And you bring up something Marshall and I have been discussing today....I don't really find all 3 to be equivalents. I find 1056 to be drier and crisper than 001. And 05 isn't even in the game.
hmm, might need to revisit some things and check it out. Any experience with some of the new guys "chico" strain, i.e. imperial and gigayeast?
-
hmm, might need to revisit some things and check it out. Any experience with some of the new guys "chico" strain, i.e. imperial and gigayeast?
Tried the Imperial A07 Flagship. IMO it's just like 1056.
-
It's funny, Denny, I've always liked WLP001 just a tad better than Wy1056, because I thought it produced a cleaner, drier beer. I gave US-05 a good shot, probably made about 8 or 10 batches with it, but I'm just not a fan. I like both of the liquid Chico strains better.
After a while, I started to use the James Bond yeast WLP007 (which I also like better than Wy1098) for my IPAs and APAs because I find both of the American strains were almost too clean. I still occasionally go back to 1056 and 001 though.
-
It's funny, Denny, I've always liked WLP001 just a tad better than Wy1056, because I thought it produced a cleaner, drier beer. I gave US-05 a good shot, probably made about 8 or 10 batches with it, but I'm just not a fan. I like both of the liquid Chico strains better.
After a while, I started to use the James Bond yeast WLP007 (which I also like better than Wy1098) for my IPAs and APAs because I find both of the American strains were almost too clean. I still occasionally go back to 1056 and 001 though.
I've brewed back to back bitters with WY1098 after a few years of WLP007. I also think these are a bit different and I'm going back to WLP007.
-
It's funny, Denny, I've always liked WLP001 just a tad better than Wy1056, because I thought it produced a cleaner, drier beer. I gave US-05 a good shot, probably made about 8 or 10 batches with it, but I'm just not a fan. I like both of the liquid Chico strains better.
After a while, I started to use the James Bond yeast WLP007 (which I also like better than Wy1098) for my IPAs and APAs because I find both of the American strains were almost too clean. I still occasionally go back to 1056 and 001 though.
I've brewed back to back bitters with WY1098 after a few years of WLP007. I also think these are a bit different and I'm going back to WLP007.
I'm in the minority and prefer 1098. I'll say I use it to be fairly clean, with only a slight ester. I've gotten away from brewing most British beers (just decided I don't care for the fruity esters), so I can't judge its estery character at higher levels. I use it for my Arrogant Bastard-ish American Strong Ale because Stone allegedly does.
-
I once had a valve fail on a glycol loop (it stayed open) and crashed a fermenting batch of 1.090 beer to 45 degrees on US-05 and the yeast was chugging along like nobodies business. It eventually warmed up into the lower 60s on it's on once I got the glycol shut off. Attenuation was right where I wanted it and taste was clean, no off flavors at all.
Early on in my career I was working in a brewery with no air conditioning, so in the winter I'd have to knock out in the 70s and by the time fermentation was wrapping up the beers were in the 40s. I won a couple awards for a "lager" brewed with that schedule and S05. :o
-
Upper 50's? It will effectively ferment into the lower 50's.
I once had a valve fail on a glycol loop (it stayed open) and crashed a fermenting batch of 1.090 beer to 45 degrees on US-05 and the yeast was chugging along like nobodies business. It eventually warmed up into the lower 60s on it's on once I got the glycol shut off. Attenuation was right where I wanted it and taste was clean, no off flavors at all.
You may have created the first "lagale"! Glad it worked out. WY1056 and US-05 seem to be very hearty and flexible. I have never had a bad brew with either.
-
Personally I haven't used WLP001 or 1056 in many many years so I can't speak to that. In fact I'm on a quest to find the best 21st century dry yeast for every beer style under the sun.
+1. I'd like to get your notes.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
My experience is US-05 is a very forgiving and dependable yeast no matter what I do.
-
I pitched -05 in Yooper's Fizzy Yellow Beer at the new 64*F. It turned out great.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Does anyone here re-use their US-05? I have never re-used it before but thought about doing it after it's done with the APA it's currently working on.
-
Does anyone here re-use their US-05? I have never re-used it before but thought about doing it after it's done with the APA it's currently working on.
Sure, go right ahead.
-
My reuse of dry yeasts is diminished in the warmer months. The higher potential for contamination (airborne microbes here in the Midwest) and the lower cost of the dry yeasts makes it worthwhile to just buy more during the warm months. I re-use my liquid lager yeasts, but I am meticulous in the warmer weather regarding harvest and sanitation of those strains. Last year I abandoned the use of virtually all liquid yeasts in the summer and pitched S-189 for my lagers. My LHBS gave me a good deal by agreeing to split a large order of S-189 with me at a reduced per packet price (I think it was a 20 sachet package that we split).
YMMV, of course and if you can keep it clean, it re-pitches pretty well.
-
Does anyone here re-use their US-05? I have never re-used it before but thought about doing it after it's done with the APA it's currently working on.
I have reused it many, many times.
-
I've never gotten "peach" at low temps with US-05, but I have gotten peach from it once, when fermenting at ambient during a freak heatwave. I didn't know the difference between fermentation temp and ambient temp at the time and figured 72F was a find fermentation temperature... of course ambient ended up being over 80F the next day in my south-facing 4th-floor apartment.
Now, I have had inconsistent US-05 lately, and I think it comes from how well the packs were stored. With 001 or 1056, the starter I build usually mitigates that inconsistency.
-
hey! hello...i was looking for any experimental data on US05 fermented above 70°F so i got here... i read a few interesting things and i want to share an experinece that happened to me few years ago; I was using a chico straing (blend of 2 Chico´s) and happened this phenomena in which Temperature control got crazy and super cooled the FV, so the unitank was around 35°F (1.6°C) and the yeast was still fermenting!!!! bubling a lil bit but it was alive! incredible.... after that, it raised temperature so slow but diacetyl was still there on finished beer....American Butter Amber Ale...............
cheers!
-
Yup I fermented several batches in the 80’s and I get the peachy taste but I also hit FG in a week so there are benefits.
-
Yup I fermented several batches in the 80’s and I get the peachy taste but I also hit FG in a week so there are benefits.
To me, there is no benefit to fast fermentation if I get a subpar beer.
-
To me, there is no benefit to fast fermentation if I get a subpar beer.
[/quote]
Fast fermented isn’t subpar it’s just different. People really enjoy the peachy taste if they like peachy tastes. I imagine I would never win a competition
with it, but plenty of high end beer drinkers have really enjoyed those batches.
-
To me, there is no benefit to fast fermentation if I get a subpar beer.
Fast fermented isn’t subpar it’s just different. People really enjoy the peachy taste if they like peachy tastes. I imagine I would never win a competition
with it, but plenty of high end beer drinkers have really enjoyed those batches.
[/quote]
Yeah, that's what I hate about 05. But if that's what you're going for....do you get a lot of fusels from doing that?
-
Four years on from the OP, the Fermentis data sheet still has 64 - 82F.
Did they decide it was upwardly flexible, or never get round to correcting it?
-
Four years on from the OP, the Fermentis data sheet still has 64 - 82F.
Did they decide it was upwardly flexible, or never get round to correcting it?
I suspect the latter, but have no evidence.
-
Four years on from the OP, the Fermentis data sheet still has 64 - 82F.
Did they decide it was upwardly flexible, or never get round to correcting it?
I suspect the latter, but have no evidence.
I think so too. I wonder how many have been fooled into fermenting at 80F?! 😃
-
Four years on from the OP, the Fermentis data sheet still has 64 - 82F.
Did they decide it was upwardly flexible, or never get round to correcting it?
I suspect the latter, but have no evidence.
I think so too. I wonder how many have been fooled into fermenting at 80F?! 😃
Something I've decided after years of dealing with yeasty companies is that temp ranges seem to be based on performance, not beer quality
-
Their current web site ideal range is 64-82f.
https://fermentis.com/en/product/safale-us-05/
Their current "technical data sheet" link has an ideal range of 64.4-78.8f.
The same discrepancy was found on their other yeasts.
The US-05 packets I have with a date 09/2023, has a temperature range of 53.6-77f.
An ideal range of 59-71.6f.
According to Fermentis's own currently found temperatures (above)
US-05 has ranges 53.6 - 82f, that's a mid range of 67.8f.
-
with the increased availability of Bry-97 I am having trouble understanding why brewers still use us-05. Bry-97 seems to do everything a little better than US-05
-
with the increased availability of Bry-97 I am having trouble understanding why brewers still use us-05. Bry-97 seems to do everything a little better than US-05
Can't speak for others, got a good deal on S-04, US-05, and it had years till expiration.
Focusing on procedures, malts, and hops, haven't focused on yeasts much, yet.
When S-04 & US-05 is depleted, it will be replenished with different yeasts.
-
with the increased availability of Bry-97 I am having trouble understanding why brewers still use us-05. Bry-97 seems to do everything a little better than US-05
My local store doesn't carry that brand. I have to mail order BRY-97 and Diamond Lager yeast.
-
with the increased availability of Bry-97 I am having trouble understanding why brewers still use us-05. Bry-97 seems to do everything a little better than US-05
Lots of people get a much longer lag time with 97 and it makes them nervous.
-
with the increased availability of Bry-97 I am having trouble understanding why brewers still use us-05. Bry-97 seems to do everything a little better than US-05
Lots of people get a much longer lag time with 97 and it makes them nervous.
Which I don't understand. I get fermentation in 24-36 hours with it.
-
I use BRY97 all the time and it usually kicks off in about 8 hours, HK in about 36. 2.5 gal batches, 1 full pack. Data point.
-
I get about 16-18 hours with 05 and about 24-36 with 97 like denny mentioned. I don’t have a preference and usually go with 05 because it’s easier and cheaper for me to get.
-
Based on recommended pitch rates on packets=
US-05 one packet = 5.2 gallons to 7.9 gallons
BRY-97 one packet = 2.9 gallons to 5.8 gallons
*US-05, 11.5 gram packet (pitch rate 11.5g in 20-30 Liters)
*BRY-97, 11 gram packet (pitch rate .5 - 1g per Liter)
This would explain longer lag times using one packet BRY-97 for larger batches,
and shorter lag times in smaller batches. One US-05 yeast packet covers more
gallons per packet than BRY-97, according to their own stated pitch rates. Which
also accounts for longer lag times using BRY-97 vs US-05, in same sized batches.
This is if both yeasts have the same viability, and I'm not sure how lag times
affect the fermentation/beer.
-
I use Lallemand products, and specifically Bry-97, a lot. I prefer to use the pitch rate calculator on the Lallemand site vs the generic package recommendation because it takes into account the strain, volume, and specific gravity of the wort. By using the pitch rate calculator recommendation I get very consistent lag times with Bry-97 across the spectrum of wort density.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
I use Lallemand products, and specifically Bry-97, a lot. I prefer to use the pitch rate calculator on the Lallemand site vs the generic package recommendation because it takes into account the strain, volume, and specific gravity of the wort. By using the pitch rate calculator recommendation I get very consistent lag times with Bry-97 across the spectrum of wort density.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
What is your usual gallons per batch ?
Do you use 2 packets for 5 gallons ?
Thanks
-
Based on recommended pitch rates on packets=
US-05 one packet = 5.2 gallons to 7.9 gallons
BRY-97 one packet = 2.9 gallons to 5.8 gallons
*US-05, 11.5 gram packet (pitch rate 11.5g in 20-30 Liters)
*BRY-97, 11 gram packet (pitch rate .5 - 1g per Liter)
This would explain longer lag times using one packet BRY-97 for larger batches,
and shorter lag times in smaller batches. One US-05 yeast packet covers more
gallons per packet than BRY-97, according to their own stated pitch rates. Which
also accounts for longer lag times using BRY-97 vs US-05, in same sized batches.
This is if both yeasts have the same viability, and I'm not sure how lag times
affect the fermentation/beer.
My experience is that lags up to 72 hours have no effect on beer quality at all
-
I use Lallemand products, and specifically Bry-97, a lot. I prefer to use the pitch rate calculator on the Lallemand site vs the generic package recommendation because it takes into account the strain, volume, and specific gravity of the wort. By using the pitch rate calculator recommendation I get very consistent lag times with Bry-97 across the spectrum of wort density.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
What is your usual gallons per batch ?
Do you use 2 packets for 5 gallons ?
Thanks
It depends on gravity. For 1.049 I'd use one. For 1.070 I'd use 2.
-
I have found the Lallemand pitching rate calculator to be a very worthwhile tool. I was surprised a few months ago with the higher pitch rate of some of the newly released yeast strains, and the calculator makes it simpler for me.
However, in this case, Denny's numbers for this particular strain are very close. The pitch calculator shows you need 11.59 grams of BRY-97 for 5 gallons of 1.049 gravity wort. So a single 11 gram sachet would be close enough for me.
I learned about this calculator on this forum (thanks Brewbama) and have been using it since.
-
with the increased availability of Bry-97 I am having trouble understanding why brewers still use us-05. Bry-97 seems to do everything a little better than US-05
yup, finally used BRY97 this year and i am now very happy with the results. would have to brew a subtler beer with it to really describe a good tasting of it, but i prefer it to S05 for sure. I also can't imagine ever using S05 again.
-
I have found the Lallemand pitching rate calculator to be a very worthwhile tool. I was surprised a few months ago with the higher pitch rate of some of the newly released yeast strains, and the calculator makes it simpler for me.
However, in this case, Denny's numbers for this particular strain are very close. The pitch calculator shows you need 11.59 grams of BRY-97 for 5 gallons of 1.049 gravity wort. So a single 11 gram sachet would be close enough for me.
I learned about this calculator on this forum (thanks Brewbama) and have been using it since.
In the interest of full disclosure, I don't always use 2 for 1.070 and it hasn't seemed to matter. But thats fo4 my beer and I'm willing to do it. For others, my advice above stands.
-
with the increased availability of Bry-97 I am having trouble understanding why brewers still use us-05. Bry-97 seems to do everything a little better than US-05
Lots of people get a much longer lag time with 97 and it makes them nervous.
Which I don't understand. I get fermentation in 24-36 hours with it.
I do too, but compared to the 4-5 hours or less with some other yeasts it makes some folks nervous.
I like it and it is in a recipe I plan to brew soon.
-
I use Lallemand products, and specifically Bry-97, a lot. I prefer to use the pitch rate calculator on the Lallemand site vs the generic package recommendation because it takes into account the strain, volume, and specific gravity of the wort. By using the pitch rate calculator recommendation I get very consistent lag times with Bry-97 across the spectrum of wort density.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
What is your usual gallons per batch ?
Do you use 2 packets for 5 gallons ?
Thanks
I ferment 5.5 gal so I’ll have 5 gal in a keg after loss in the cone. It depends on the OG for the pitch rate:
1.042 they recommend ~11 grams (1 pack)
1.050 = 13 grams
1.056 = 14.5 grams
1.070 = 18 grams
1.085 = 22 grams (2 packs)
Etc…
Etc…
I consistently get 16 hr +/- 2 hr lag. …but mostly 14 hrs. (In my brewery, “lag” is defined as the first registered ‘blip’ on the Tilt hydrometer.)
https://www.lallemandbrewing.com/en/united-states/brewers-corner/brewing-tools/pitching-rate-calculator/
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Thanks for the replies.