Author Topic: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout  (Read 1277 times)

Offline kgs

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
  • San Francisco, CA
    • View Profile
1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« on: December 04, 2010, 05:19:11 AM »
Brewed McQuakers Oatmeal Stout from Brewing Classic Styles on Thanksgiving Day. Sampled it last night and it tastes delish but at 1.022 (from 1.060) I'm wondering if it's done. I used Safale 4 and fermentation seemed good if not spectacular (versus the way it is with my ales when I use Safale 5 or make a starter with liquid yeast). It was initially in a closet at 60f but I moved it to a closet at 62.

I mashed at 154, per the recipe, and assume the intent of that is a creamy mouthfeel (check!) but wonder if 152 or lower would dry it out a little. I really like this style, so tips on optimum fermentations would be most welcome.
K.G. Schneider
AHA Member

Offline a10t2

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 3163
  • Ask me why I don't like Chico!
    • View Profile
    • SeanTerrill.com
Re: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2010, 09:21:46 AM »
Was this all-grain? What's the grist like? Oats will add more unfermentables than an equivalent quantity of barley. Is there anything else (lactose, large amount of crystal malt) that would boost the FG?

At 9 days it's possible it isn't done yet. If you can I'd move it to ~70°F and rouse the yeast a few times over the next several days. Check your hydrometer calibration and temperature correction too.
Beer is like porn. You can buy it, but it's more fun to make your own.
http://seanterrill.com/category/brewing/

Offline gisbrewmaster

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2010, 03:20:07 PM »
Hi,  Mine finished at 1.022 also and I checked for 3 days straight after a 14 day fermentation at about 68 degrees and it didn't move at all.  There was a nice trub ring and a large yeast cake so I bottled today.  It may just be done.  I bottled it today so we will see what happens.

Matt

Offline kgs

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
  • San Francisco, CA
    • View Profile
Re: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2010, 05:26:30 PM »
gisbrewmaster, interesting indeed. What yeast did you use?

My grain bill for a 3-gallon all-grain batch:

UK Pale Ale Malt    5.00 lb    70.9 %    5.0    In Mash/Steeped
US Flaked Oats    0.75 lb    10.6 %    0.8    In Mash/Steeped [1/4 lb. was first lightly toasted]
US Chocolate Malt    0.40 lb    5.7 %    46.7    In Mash/Steeped
US Victory Malt    0.40 lb    5.7 %    3.7    In Mash/Steeped
US Caramel 80L Malt    0.25 lb    3.5 %    6.7    In Mash/Steeped
US Black Barley    0.25 lb    3.5 %    41.7    In Mash/Steeped

On brew day I hit all numbers right on target and had no hiccups/abnormalities. Certainly didn't underpitch with one sachet of yeast in 3 gal. BeerAlchemy predicts 1.015 SG, which I strongly suspect ain't gonna happen.

It's a bit sweet, but on the positive side, would lend itself to doctoring with coffee and/or vanilla at bottling time. I'm pondering making a different recipe next weekend and pitching on that yeast cake, but fermenting in a slightly warmer room.
K.G. Schneider
AHA Member

Offline gisbrewmaster

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2010, 08:11:38 PM »
I did mine AG and i don't have the grain bill in front of me but I just followed the book for the AG modification and I was in a hurry due to work and an upcoming vacation so I missed taking the SG.

I did a 5 gallon batch.

Matt

Offline gordonstrong

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1355
    • View Profile
    • BJCP
Re: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2010, 08:35:28 AM »
That's not really out of line.  Good comments so far: rouse, warm up a bit, see if it has any more to go.  Give it another week on the yeast.

Mashing at 152 vs 154 isn't going to give you seven points worth of FG difference; I wouldn't really worry about that too much.  It's a lot of oats; they're going to give you unfermentables.

Good ideas about enhancing it with other flavors, if those appeal to you.  Founder's Breakfast Stout is a favorite; look at its profile.

If you find that your oatmeal stouts finish a bit sweet, you can do a few things in the recipe to balance it.  Boost alcohol and/or roast to help provide a counterpoint.  Try a scaled up version in the 8% range.  Look at the profile for Bell's Double Cream Stout.
Gordon Strong • Beavercreek, Ohio • AHA Member since 1997 • Twitter: GordonStrong

Offline beersk

  • Senior Brewmaster
  • ******
  • Posts: 1878
  • In the night!
    • View Profile
Re: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2010, 12:22:34 PM »
I've heard that S-04 doesn't do well with fermentation temps under about 64F, so that may have been part of the problem.  Like others have said, warm it up a bit, rouse the yeast and you should be fine.  Love me some oatmeal stout, gettin' to be about that time of the year to start drinking lots of those.
Watch out for those Cross Dressing Amateurs!

Offline kgs

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
  • San Francisco, CA
    • View Profile
Re: 1.022 versus on 1.016 on an oatmeal stout
« Reply #7 on: February 11, 2011, 07:07:46 AM »
Update: even finishing higher than anticipated, or maybe because of it, this stout has turned out wonderful. A couple weeks in the bottle it had a very pronounced coffee flavor (which I actually liked; I had used a cold extract of fresh-ground, recently-roasted Peet's French Roast decaf) and the body wasn't quite there. Now the coffee is in the background and the mouthfeel is terrific. I may use a starter based on a liquid yeast next time just to see where it takes me, but I certainly would do this again with the dry yeast, high finishing gravity and all.

Thanks for the observation about the oats providing a lot of unfermentables--when adding oats I hadn't factored that in.
K.G. Schneider
AHA Member