Kit "bashing" and a question or two about diastatic power?

[Jeff Summerlin]

I recently got a brewer's best kit (that I like - Mexican Cervesa) and I got one that I don't usually look at - the imperial blond kit. I started poking around with the blonde kit in BF and realized that it calculated a zero diastatic. I thought that no matter what, you needed a 30 diastatic? Not in an LME/DME kit? I usually make all grain (BIAB) - these are great for a quick brewday, but I'm torn as to if I should toss in a lb of malterop 2 row and mash that with the honey malt to ensure conversion of sugar? Thoughts?

 

[Minbari]

LME/DME is already converted, no need to mash. there is no diastatic power left, since the enzymes are dead from being previously boiled and condensed/ powdered.

 

[HighVoltageMan!]

I'm torn as to if I should toss in a lb of malterop 2 row and mash that with the honey malt to ensure conversion of sugar? Thoughts?

I'm assuming the pound of specialty malt is honey malt, which has a DP of 50. You could mash it on the stove top by itself or with a bit of 2 row. You could just follow the instructions which I'm assuming is calling for steeping the grains.

I would mash the honey malt on the stove top to get as much out of it as I could if it were me.

 

[Yooper]

You can steep it, no need to mash specialty grains as a rule.

 

[Brew Cat]

this raises the question to steep specialty grains or add them in the mash
arguments for both
if Im doing a mash anyway I toss them in and and calculate as so
if I was doing an extract without a mash I would just steep them
If I was doing a kit I would follow the kit doing otherwise changes the result
someone designed and tested the kit already

 

[dmtaylor]

I always thought honey malt was just a special type of crystal malt, so I was going to say "just steep it", no need for enzymes.... but then I looked into it and some suggest that it should be mashed because it does have extra unconverted starches and even has some diastatic power of its own.

I now think you could go either way on this, and end up with good beer either way. Mash with a pound of base malt for at least 30-40 minutes, OR... just steep it, add your extract, and go. It's probably not going to make an enormous difference either way. The mashed version will end up thinner and clearer, with extra grain flavor from the extra pound of base malt. But you'll still make very good beer if you don't mash it. I might flip a coin, personally.

 

[Brew Cat]

I always thought honey malt was just a special type of crystal malt, so I was going to say "just steep it", no need for enzymes.... but then I looked into it and some suggest that it should be mashed because it does have extra unconverted starches and even has some diastatic power of its own.

I now think you could go either way on this, and end up with good beer either way. Mash with a pound of base malt for at least 30-40 minutes, OR... just steep it, add your extract, and go. It's probably not going to make an enormous difference either way. The mashed version will end up thinner and clearer, with extra grain flavor from the extra pound of base malt. But you'll still make very good beer if you don't mash it. I might flip a coin, personally.

My point is if you add more grain and the honey malt you add pts and and increase final ABV change may not make much of a difference but is it worth adding an hour to a brew day for probably no noticable difference

 

[dmtaylor]

My point is if you add more grain and the honey malt you add pts and and increase final ABV change may not make much of a difference but is it worth adding an hour to a brew day for probably no noticable difference

Oh, but don't you know... homebrewers LOVE to make things more difficult -- and more expensive -- for no noticeable difference!

 

[Dave Y]

Oh, but don't you know... homebrewers LOVE to make things more difficult -- and more expensive -- for no noticeable difference!

did someone say decoction?

:-D

<ducking>

 

[Brew Cat]

did someone say decoction?

:-D

<ducking>

Incoming