[denny]

Since I started doing mashout or no-sparge after a 90min mash I get a bump in efficiency but the wort isn't as fermentable because what was finishing at 1.010 will come out 1.015.  Part of me likes the efficiency but I don't always want that kind of FG.

I usually let the mash go for 90min, it doesn't really hurt anything as long as you have the time.  I also feel like the flavor compounds (Maillard compounds) might steep out better with a longer soak.  Its like making tea, you can get color with a teabag in a minute but it tastes more full after five.

That's really strange.  That regimen gives me a much more fermentable wort.

[tschmidlin]

Since I started doing mashout or no-sparge after a 90min mash I get a bump in efficiency but the wort isn't as fermentable because what was finishing at 1.010 will come out 1.015.  Part of me likes the efficiency but I don't always want that kind of FG.

I usually let the mash go for 90min, it doesn't really hurt anything as long as you have the time.  I also feel like the flavor compounds (Maillard compounds) might steep out better with a longer soak.  Its like making tea, you can get color with a teabag in a minute but it tastes more full after five.

That's really strange.  That regimen gives me a much more fermentable wort.

Yeah, I can't think of anything that would make wort less fermentable after more time.  For the one that finished at 1.015 instead of 1.010, what was the OG and change in efficiency?  I suspect it was something else that caused it to finish high, not the longer mash.

[tomsawyer]

I'm normally mashing at 150F and the temp may drop a few degrees over the course of an hour to 90min.  My theory is that the short (10-15min) rest favoring alpha amylase is chunking up new starch that doesn't have time to be chewed into mono/disaccharides before I run off and boil.  Its just a correlation though, it could also be the cooler ferm temps in my basement.  Plus some of my results are coming from altbier ferms @60F and I don't have a ton of experience with WY1007.

[tschmidlin]

Do it a few more times and let us know if there is a definite trend.  I suspect it's the other things(new recipe, cooler ferm temps), but you never know.

[Kaiser]

Lennie's theory is what I would be suggesting as well. If you get a serious efficiency bump from a "mash-out", or dextrinization rest" it will come mostly in the form of unfermentable sugars and shift the sugar profile in the wort toward being less fermentable, If you were to test fermentability before and after the dextrinization rest you would notice a decrease in fermentability but if you determine the actual amount of fermentable sugars you'll see that it did not decrease. It may have increase a little, but not as much as the unfermentable sugars.

If you don't get an efficiency boost from this rest you most likely converted all the starched before that rest and there will not be an increase in un-fermentable sugars. Just a slight increase in fermentable sugars wich does show up as slightly better attenuatuion.

Kai

[tschmidlin]

Oh - reading comprehension failure.  So he's adding a bunch of hot water at the end?  I focused on the "no-sparge" part and figured all of the water was already there.  So it's really the addition of hot water and essentially creating a step mash that you're talking about as the cause, not mashing for 90 minutes instead of 60.  That makes more sense.

[tomsawyer]

Right, 90min at 150F and then adding my "sparge" water to step up to 158F or so for a short period.  This is what I've been told was typical of no-sparge, and the bump in efficiency puts me very near what I get with a single infusion at 150F and a batch sparge.  What I haven't tried yet is a no-sparge with water that doesn't give me an alpha step.  Thats on my list since I'm brewing some dry beers and have gotten the upper end of style FGs a couple of times.

[tschmidlin]

You could do no-sparge with water that doesn't give you an alpha step, but why not just mash with all of the water to begin with?  There's obviously space in the tun.

[tomsawyer]

You could do no-sparge with water that doesn't give you an alpha step, but why not just mash with all of the water to begin with?  There's obviously space in the tun.

I generally stay between 1.5 and 2qt/lb, thats a nice consisntency for a mash.  I've heard of people (commercial operations mostly) mashing up to 3qt/lb, so I suppose I could.  I don't see a real benefit to it, other than only warming up water once.  I was thinking the step mash aspect would be nice but I just wasn't expecting as pronounced an effect as I saw.

[tschmidlin]

I's all about matching the recipe to your procedure.  If you like the bump in efficiency, you can adjust the procedure and recipe to get the fermentability you want.  Maybe mash a little lower for the first step, add a little sugar to dry things out, whatever you like.  Or not.

[Kaiser]

Yes, mashing lower at the first step is likely key to get your attenuation up.

Kai

[tomsawyer]

I's all about matching the recipe to your procedure.  If you like the bump in efficiency, you can adjust the procedure and recipe to get the fermentability you want.  Maybe mash a little lower for the first step, add a little sugar to dry things out, whatever you like.  Or not.

I used to add a little sugar to most recipes but I quit that in search of more malt flavor.  I may try mashing lower but starting at 150 and having it dropdown a couple of degrees during 90min, seems like a pretty attenuative way to go.  At least I was getting FGs around 1.010 with this method, before I tried the no-sparge step mash and/or mashout.

[Kaiser]

I think you'll need to check if this FG is really from mashing or if the yeast is not going all the way. The fast ferment test will show you that.

I can easily get attenuation levels in the low 80s by mashing at 145 F for 30-45 min and then mashing at 160 F for another 30-45 min. Conversion is also complete (close to 100% conversion efficiency) after the 160 F rest.

Kai