[Joe Sr.]

I didn't mean to imply incivility. I was thinking more along the lines of opposite but complimentary.

[klickitat jim]

I didn't mean to imply incivility. I was thinking more along the lines of opposite but complimentary.

I read it over, you weren't implying,  and mark was just adding on, not insinuating that you were implying .

[HoosierBrew]

I guess that we are like the yin and yang of the homebrew world.  However, that does not stop us from having a civil conversation in person. 

And, in a nutshell, that's what separates this forum from many (or all) of the other ones - civility. Common theme? That there are lots of ways to make good beer. so therefore there is no need for it to get dickish. A healthy debate is a good thing.

[S. cerevisiae]

I didn't mean to imply incivility. I was thinking more along the lines of opposite but complimentary.

No offense was taken by your comment.  I was trying to highlight that two people with very different approaches to brewing can still learn from each other.  That's what is good about this hobby, and more so, this forum.  I have seen brewing topics discussed on this forum that would erupt into take no prisoners flame wars on a large home brewing forum whose name will remain anonymous.

[denny]

I guess that we are like the yin and yang of the homebrew world.  However, that does not stop us from having a civil conversation in person.  Maybe, it's because Denny is so darn likable in person.    It's difficult to find someone with a more "glass is half full" attitude than Denny. However, then again, Denny is retired while the rest of us are still doing the grind.
[/quote

Just becasue my experience often disagrees with Mark's science doesn't mean I don't respect his point of view.  I greatly enjoyed hanging with him at NHC and look forward to Baltimore.  I think it proves a couple things....first, that there's more than one road to the same destination.  Second, malted barley want to become beer and even if you don't do it the way that science says you should, you can still make great beer.

[denny]

I guess that we are like the yin and yang of the homebrew world.  However, that does not stop us from having a civil conversation in person.  Maybe, it's because Denny is so darn likable in person.    It's difficult to find someone with a more "glass is half full" attitude than Denny. However, then again, Denny is retired while the rest of us are still doing the grind.

Just because my experience often disagrees with Mark's science doesn't mean I don't respect his point of view.  I greatly enjoyed hanging with him at NHC and look forward to Baltimore.  I think it proves a couple things....first, that there's more than one road to the same destination.  Second, malted barley want to become beer and even if you don't do it the way that science says you should, you can still make great beer.

BTW, although I've been involved in some flame wars over homebrewing in the past, I've come to realize how silly that is.  It's a goddamn hobby...do what works for you!

[dzlater]

I switched from using a five gallon round to a large rectangular cooler.
The larger rectanglar cooler didn't drain near as well. It just seemed like over kill to me. Plus the smaller one is easier to tote to the compost pile.
I went back to the round one unless I'm doing a high gravity batch that won't fit in the 5 gallon.

How large?  I respect your experience, but mine was different.

I'm pretty sure it's the 52 quart.
With the round cooler there is less floor space and in my experiance it drains better. With the rectangle cooler I'd always have to tilt it to try and get all the wort out. The round one I just open the valve and it drains itself dry.

[kgs]

I too brew batches around the 3 gallon size. I used a 5-gallon cooler just fine when I was sparging. About a year and a half ago I adopted a no-sparge model that works for me. Think of it as BIAB without the bag (no lifting, gravity drain into the kettle, etc.). That's when I went to a 9-gallon rectangular Coleman Xtreme, which works great for me for this purpose.

I kept the 5-gallon cooler just in case I want to sparge a batch for any reason, and it would be a three-minute job to swap out the ball valve and modified plumbing supply line. But if I were not using the no-sparge model, I would have stayed with the 5-gallon. It worked well for that purpose, and even with no-sparge there is enough space in my 9-gallon mash tun that I lose temp faster than I did in the 5-gallon. (I throw a blanket over the tun, which seems to help.)

Regarding equipment cost, I found that 5-gallon cooler on sale for $15 -- but the Home Depot version is $20 today, which seems like a good deal.

[Alchemist]

What's the highest gravity that can be mashed in the 5 gallon round cooler?

[Stevie]

What's the highest gravity that can be mashed in the 5 gallon round cooler?

That will depend on batch size and mash thickness. At 1qt/lb (fairly thick), a 5 gallon cooler can handle 15lbs of grain.

[HoosierBrew]

What's the highest gravity that can be mashed in the 5 gallon round cooler?

http://www.rackers.org/calcs.shtml         Scroll down to "Can I Mash It".


EDIT - When you find out what size cooler can be used for a given grist weight, just run that info through your software to see what OG that correlates to.

[jmitchell3]

I agree with the others, you can always upgrade later.  I brewed over 30 batches of 3-3.5 gallons finished in a 5 gallon igloo cooler.  It was very easy to handle sparge water volumes, etc without pumps.  If you see that you will want larger batches in 6-12 months, go ahead and get the larger cooler, otherwise stick with what works for you today.

[Alchemist]

One problem I have is I do not have software or know how to do fancy conversions for OG calculations. I would like to brew 5 gallon batch Imperials and can't see myself brewing anything above the 1.100 mark. A little more help with be much appreciated! Not sure what kind of grain I'll be using either, as I'm preparing myself to get into all grain. Lots of people recommend 10 gallon cooler over the 5 gallon, but I'd just like to know how big of a beer (with an actually number to show how "big") can a 5 gallon mash for 5 gallon batches

[Slowbrew]

1.100 will be tough in a 5 gallon cooler.  Using just grain, that is a very large grain bill.  It would not leave much room at all for mash in and sparging.

Paul

[a10t2]

Lots of people recommend 10 gallon cooler over the 5 gallon, but I'd just like to know how big of a beer (with an actually number to show how "big") can a 5 gallon mash for 5 gallon batches

OG estimates are basic math. Take the potential extract of the grain in "point-gallons per pound" and, as you can see from the units, multiply by grain weight and divide by wort volume, then multiply by mash efficiency. Since you don't know your base malt yet, I'll assume a potential extract of 37 pg/p and efficiency of 70%:

0.7 * 37 point-gal/lb * 15 lb / 5 gal = 78 -> 1.078 OG

This isn't the most precise way to do things, but it's certainly good enough for first-order estimates.

So no, you can't brew 5 gal of 1.100 all-grain wort with a single mash in a 5 gal tun. Working with a mash that's thin enough to stir, and some room to actually stir it, you'd top out at around 1.060.