[a10t2]

FWIW, the lauter efficiency for a no-sparge that thin (5.9 lb, 8.5 gal) will be ~88%.

[HoosierBrew]

The 2-3 qt/lb range will work perfectly well for a mash thickness. I'd wager to say you may even see a bit of an efficiency boost. Don't be afraid of a thin mash.

+1

[trapae]

So I don't need to decrease my efficiency for no sparge?

[a10t2]

So I don't need to decrease my efficiency for no sparge?

You do, but it becomes negligible for a beer this small. The no-sparge lauter efficiency is 88%; for two equal runnings it's 91%.

[klickitat jim]

Thats not to say that no matter what you do, its always magically that percentage. Right?

[morticaixavier]

It actually should be if you get every last drop out of the tun.

[euge]

But not magically. Scientifically, proven by math.

[morticaixavier]

But not magically. Scientifically, proven by math.

geesh, take all the fun and mystery out why don't you

[erockrph]

So I don't need to decrease my efficiency for no sparge?

You do, but it becomes negligible for a beer this small. The no-sparge lauter efficiency is 88%; for two equal runnings it's 91%.

Conversion will be slow, and potentially incomplete if you no-sparged this one. You're up over 5 qt/lb if you mash with the full volume, and that is thin enough to cause issues in my experience. If you mash and sparge with equal proportions of liquor, then you should be in a good spot.

[trapae]

That would definately be easiest.  I was originally worried that doing it that way would cause troubles because the highest ratio I've ever done was 2quarts/lb.  I haven't really learned about affect of thin mash on ph etc...