Mash Temperature Question

[Craigerrr]

My personal taste for beer is to have a full flavor, the higher ABV is a bi-product of having more grains in the recipe. I don't necessarily need, or even want the higher ABV. I would prefer to have all of the taste, with lower ABV if I could...
I recently read a Brulosophy exBmnt, and it has me wondering. Could I just mash at higher temperatures to lower ABV but keep the full flavor? The key sentence I took from the exBmnt: Despite their difference in ABV, the beers tasted nearly identical, which was a good thing seeing as I thought they were particularly tasty!
Here is a link to the exBEERiment.
http://brulosophy.com/2018/08/13/mash-temperature-147f-64c-vs-164-73c-exbeeriment-results/

 

[GFHomebrew]

Yeah either that or choose a lower attenuating yeast. Also adding crystal malts to grist should help create some unfermentables sugars that the yeast can't then convert into alcohol.

 

[BOB357]

I'm with Ben on using a lower attenuating yeast. A few degrees in mash temperature doesn't make much difference in perceived body when using todays highly modified base malts. When I want a medium to full bodied beer I use English Ale yeast. Mangrove Jack's Empire Ale works well for me. I consistently get 67% attenuation with it as opposed to around 80% I get with their New World Strong Ale.

 

[Nosybear]

My personal taste for beer is to have a full flavor, the higher ABV is a bi-product of having more grains in the recipe. I don't necessarily need, or even want the higher ABV. I would prefer to have all of the taste, with lower ABV if I could...
I recently read a Brulosophy exBmnt, and it has me wondering. Could I just mash at higher temperatures to lower ABV but keep the full flavor? The key sentence I took from the exBmnt: Despite their difference in ABV, the beers tasted nearly identical, which was a good thing seeing as I thought they were particularly tasty!
Here is a link to the exBEERiment.
http://brulosophy.com/2018/08/13/mash-temperature-147f-64c-vs-164-73c-exbeeriment-results/

Short answer, yes. You'll get sweetness from the additional dextrines.

 

[J A]

There's a limit but, yes, mash higher for fewer fermentable sugars. Yeast strain is part of the equation as well, but if you mashed low enough, you'll still get conversion and attenuation that will boost the ABV more than you may prefer.
The difference in just using a lower-attenuating yeast is that you may leave fermentable sugars untouched and leave a sweeter, potentially cloying finish. By using the higher mash temp, you increase the proportion of dextrin sugars that don't ferment. They add to the body and enhance flavors. Look at the ingredient list of most any processed foods - maltodextrine is very common. On their own, they're not necessarily sweet, but as Nosy points, they'll add to the perception of sweetness because of enzymatic action as saliva breaks down the sugars that the yeast didn't want to bother with.

 

[Bubba Wade]

When I’m looking for a bit more body, I add about 5% CaraPils to the mash. It doesn’t really change the color or flavor, but it does improve mouth feel on some on the lighter beers. As a bonus, head retention also improves.

 

[Mase]

Would flakes oats help out with “body”, and not contribute to sugars whether they’re fermentable or not?

 

[Nosybear]

Would flakes oats help out with “body”, and not contribute to sugars whether they’re fermentable or not?

Flaked oats add both sugar and glucans, the contribution to body is generally described as "silkiness". They are commonly used to increase body.

 

[Yooper]

Would flakes oats help out with “body”, and not contribute to sugars whether they’re fermentable or not?

Not really- but they give a silky mouthfeel.
If you want body, flaked barley is the way to go. It can cloud a beer, so it's not commonly used in lighter colored beers, but it's the "secret" ingredient in my oatmeal stout. It gives a great mouthfeel, a rocky persistent head, and a bit of body.

And yes, they are fermentable.

 

[Hawkbox]

While we're on flaked "things", is there an actual difference between white wheat and flaked wheat?

 

[Nosybear]

While we're on flaked "things", is there an actual difference between white wheat and flaked wheat?

Yes. Flaked wheat has been pressed through steamed rollers and is gelatinized. White wheat has not and needs to be crushed. BTW, the type of wheat that has been flaked is generally not specified so it could actually be white wheat.

 

[BOB357]

To add to what Nosy said, "White Wheat" generally refers to a malted white wheat variety. The same holds true for "Red Wheat". You'll usually see wheat that hasn't been through the malting process referred to as "raw" or "unmalted". Also, flaked wheat has no diastatic power, while White Wheat is generally higher in diastatic power than malted barley.

 

[Hawkbox]

Ok so me using white wheat any time they called for flaked wheat made it higher SG. I didn't realize flaked wheat hadn't been malted.

 

[Group W]

Craigerrr, I have been working on a 4.9% Session IPA and have similar concerns. The comments so far are spot on. Mash temp is only one variable. It seems to me that brewing a session beer requires attention to all the little things together. Water treatment, quality ingredients, body builders like Munich, Crystal and flaked grains, yeast, etc. all require attention. I figure it will take me more than 3 attempts to make headway. 2 failures down, next attempt in a couple weeks.

 

[BOB357]

Whether or not a grain is malted has no affect on it's extract potential per se, but White Wheat does appear to have a slightly higher potential than flaked wheat. A couple of gravity points that can vary from lot to lot.

 

[BOB357]

Craigerr, I have been working on a 4.9% Session IPA and have similar concerns. The comments so far are spot on. Mash temp is only one variable. It seems to me that brewing a session beer requires attention to all the little things together. Water treatment, quality ingredients, body builders like Munich, Crystal and flaked grains, yeast, etc. all require attention. I figure it will take me more than 3 attempts to make headway. 2 failures down, next attempt in a couple weeks.

Just going through that with my 2nd attempt to clone Guinness' Rye Pale Ale with a similar ABV. Modified the recipe to include more C-75 for color, a higher mash temp and less attenuative yeast strain for body, more base malt to retain the alcohol level and another early hop addition to balance it all out. Thought of using some Carapils for a little more body, but figured that would be overkill when going from ~80% to ~67% attenuation. Hoping to nail it on this, the second try. Good luck with yours too.

I've got Jen Talley's book on Session beers if you want me to mail it to you.

 

[J A]

Ok so me using white wheat any time they called for flaked wheat made it higher SG. I didn't realize flaked wheat hadn't been malted.

The starches in flaked wheat will convert but it's using up the enzymes from the barley. When you use white wheat (malt) it has it's own diastatic power (higher than barley) and converts starches more efficiently. I would always expect a higher conversion percentage when using white wheat vs any flaked adjunct grain. That higher conversion percentage would give you a higher SG for any particular grist.

 

[BOB357]

The starches in flaked wheat will convert but it's using up the enzymes from the barley. When you use white wheat (malt) it has it's own diastatic power (higher than barley) and converts starches more efficiently. I would always expect a higher conversion percentage when using white wheat vs any flaked adjunct grain. That higher conversion percentage would give you a higher SG for any particular grist.

Guess I should have qualified in my reply to Hawkbox that my comparison was predicated on the grist having sufficient diastatic power to convert the flaked wheat. Unless you push the lower limits of diastatic power or rest time you should expect a very simalar conversion from either. One thing I have found is, even though it's common not to mill flaked grains, it does increase extraction and your OG. Maybe that's the difference you see. Or maybe you missed the "per se" at the end of: Whether or not a grain is malted has no affect on it's extract potential per se

 

[Group W]

Just going through that with my 2nd attempt to clone Guinness' Rye Pale Ale with a similar ABV. Modified the recipe to include more C-75 for color, a higher mash temp and less attenuative yeast strain for body, more base malt to retain the alcohol level and another early hop addition to balance it all out. Thought of using some Carapils for a little more body, but figured that would be overkill when going from ~80% to ~67% attenuation. Hoping to nail it on this, the second try. Good luck with yours too.

I've got Jen Talley's book on Session beers if you want me to mail it to you.

Our club has that book I think. No dumpers at least. After my first try I had to back off on the hops. After my second try I need to back down the so4:CL ratio from 3:1 to about 1:1 and reduce total CA to around 50 ppm. Been getting into water chemistry lately. Every calculator is different.

 

[BOB357]

Interesting .I have noticed that 50 ppm seems to be the normal Ca level for water profiles based on color, but never really thought about why. With few exceptions, I use about 80 ppm, mostly to promote clarity. Probably why I usually hit the high end of attenuation too. The Calcium does help with conversion, so can make for a more fermentable wort. Something you really don't want in a Session IPA.

I'm guessing that you've been using a hoppy pale ale water profile for your IPAs and automatically tried that for the session IPA. Thanks for stimulating what's left of my brain at this early hour. Now I'll need 2 glasses of cider to get back to sleep