First Custom Recipe - Rye IPA

[senfo]

I'm thinking about brewing this recipe this weekend. It's my first attempt at a custom recipe, so please feel free to critique away.

Batch Size - 5 Gallons

9 lb Pale 2-Row - 57.1%
4 lb Rye - 25.4%
0.75 lb Caramel / Crystal 60L- 4.8%
1 lb Flaked Rye - 6.3%
0.5 lb Vienna - 3.2%
0.5 lb Rice Hulls - 3.2%
15.75 lb Total

1 oz Chinook @ 60 min
0.5 oz Willamette @ 15 min
1 oz Chinook @ 2 min
0.5 oz Willamette @ 2 min
2 oz Falconer's Flight (dry hop after transferring to secondary)

FG: 1.022 ABV: 7.51% IBU: 50.26

I'm thinking I'll use some California Ale V Yeast WLP051 and put together a nice starter since I'm expecting OG to be around 1.079 if I reach 70% efficiency.

Thoughts?

Note: I made a last minute update before posting (added 1 lb of rye because I really love the taste) and I think I should have probably dropped the amount 2-row proportionally.

Updated to conform to Imperial IPA Style Guide

10 lb Pale 2-Row - 58.8%
4 lb Rye - 23.5%
0.75 lb Caramel / Crystal 60L- 4.4%
1 lb Flaked Rye - 5.9%
0.75 lb Vienna - 4.4%
0.5 lb Rice Hulls - 2.9%
15.75 lb Total

2 oz Chinook @ 60 min
1 oz Willamette @ 15 min
2 oz Chinook @ 2 min
1 oz Willamette @ 2 min
4 oz Falconer's Flight (dry hop after transferring to secondary)

OG: 1.085 FG: 1.020 ABV: 8.57% IBU: 83.07

Switched to California Ale Yeast WLP001

 

[LarryBrewer]

I'd personally go with Amarillo or Simcoe over the Willamette hops (if you can pick some up easily that is). Willamette adds a flat sort of herbal / spice. I prefer the piney notes from Simcoe and the citrus/grapefruit of Amarillo. I would also say, get the IBUs higher up around 70 - the rye malt can back that no problem and it blends well.

Rye malt has annoyingly undersized grain kernels. Make sure you adjust the gap on the mill when you crush it (and bag it separately when you pick it up). Wheat malt has the same problem. I forgot this when I bought grains last time. I have some wheat malt mixed in with a couple pounds of other specialty grains. Brew day tomorrow is going to be interesting - I'll probably just squeeze the gap down a bit and mill that part of the grain bill twice...

+1 on making a starter given the high OG.

 

[senfo]

You must have read my mind on the hops. I was trying to appease the IPA style Gods and was a little concerned with the batch getting too bitter, but then had the exact same thought in regard to rye. I agree; it blends very well.

I doubled the amount of hops and added another pound of 2-row to get my OG where it should be. I left the Willamette hops (for now) because I have them on hand. I'm all for experimenting, however, so I'll almost definitely take that advice the next time I head to the store.

Thank you very much for your input!

 

[LarryBrewer]

If you doubled the hops, what is your new IBU rating? You don't want it too high because you can over do it.

 

[Altbier bitte]

If you doubled the hops, what is your new IBU rating? You don't want it too high because you can over do it.

That's a myth.

 

[LarryBrewer]

Touche :lol:

 

[The Brew Mentor]

If you doubled the hops, what is your new IBU rating? You don't want it too high because you can over do it.

Overdo it in an IPA?
Naaaaa.
Just check out Bitch Slap. That wasn't overdone at all! :mrgreen:

 

[The Brew Mentor]

I would still reconsider the hop schedule.
10 oz of any type of hops can lead to some vegetal flavors.
You want this to be in the 70 + IBU range, correct?

Without tweaking it in the IBU calculator, I'd probably do something like this...
1 oz Chinook FWH
1 oz Chinook @ 90 ( this will help in 2 ways. Increasing your sparge amount will get more sugars and you'll get better/ more utilization from the 1st addition).
2-3 oz Falconers Flight divided and added @ 10, 5, 0 min
1 oz FF Dry Hop
1 oz Chinook Dry Hop

The Willamette will get lost if you use them.

Good Luck
Brian

 

[senfo]

Brewed a small (2.5 gallon) batch on Saturday and definitely think I got a vegetable taste. I'll have to play around with some of the other suggestions and see what I can improve.

Still hoping the taste improves after aging. I can't blame everything on the hops; I ended up with downright pathetic mash efficiency. Came in at only 50%. I'm having some serious problems with this and I'm not sure if it's my crush or if I just suck, but that's another topic entirely.

Thank you for the input!

 

[LarryBrewer]

Brewed a small (2.5 gallon) batch on Saturday and definitely think I got a vegetable taste. I'll have to play around with some of the other suggestions and see what I can improve.

Still hoping the taste improves after aging. I can't blame everything on the hops; I ended up with downright pathetic mash efficiency. Came in at only 50%. I'm having some serious problems with this and I'm not sure if it's my crush or if I just suck, but that's another topic entirely.

Thank you for the input!

Did you use the brew feature and did it tell you your conversion efficiency? Not sure if that is what you mean by mash efficiency. Conversion efficiency is the main number to look at (how well your grain converted to sugar inside the mash tun, before draining). Efficiency losses beyond that point are caused by dead space and absorption. A high gravity batch requires a lot of grains, which means extra grain absorption. On top of that, a hoppy beer has more losses due to extra hops absorption. Both of these in turn lower efficiency. On an imperial IPA I shoot for an efficiency around 55% if you can believe that, but that is just how the math works out! Nothing wrong with it. On my light beers I get closer to 80%!

 

[senfo]

Did you use the brew feature and did it tell you your conversion efficiency? Not sure if that is what you mean by mash efficiency. Conversion efficiency is the main number to look at (how well your grain converted to sugar inside the mash tun, before draining). Efficiency losses beyond that point are caused by dead space and absorption. A high gravity batch requires a lot of grains, which means extra grain absorption. On top of that, a hoppy beer has more losses due to extra hops absorption. Both of these in turn lower efficiency. On an imperial IPA I shoot for an efficiency around 55% if you can believe that, but that is just how the math works out! Nothing wrong with it. On my light beers I get closer to 80%!

Yes, sorry, I was assuming 70% efficiency with the recipe builder (based on recommendations; as this was only my second all-grain and I completely messed up the first), but the conversion efficiency tool calculated my actual conversion efficiency at slightly above 50%. I did a batch sparge that I'm estimating took 10-15 minutes per runoff (two runoffs and 3.5 gallons total in the kettle for the 2.5 gallon batch). That might have been a bit fast. I didn't account for mash tun dead-space in any of the calculations because it was too late to figure out what it actually was by the time I remembered I needed it, but the flow was slowing to a trickle by the time I reached my target kettle volume of 3.5 gallons.

I mashed for 60 minutes at about 152 degrees, which I think was decent for the style and should have (as I understand it) resulted in a decent conversion, but if you say you're estimating 55%, maybe I'm not too far off.

 

[LarryBrewer]

Conversion efficiency is different than kettle efficiency or brewhouse efficiency, and should be 90%+. The recipe was probably set to brewhouse efficiency (with the alternative being kettle efficiency). Brew house efficiency varies with the recipe (because of grain/hops absorption), but conversion efficiency should always be high.

See this FAQ for the different types of efficiency and how we define them:
http://www.brewersfriend.com/faq/#brewsessions5

For more details see our recent blog post on the subject:
http://www.brewersfriend.com/2012/11/30 ... finitions/

At 50% conversion efficiency, something is definitely in need of adjustment inside the mash tun. This would lead to a low brewhouse efficiency of closer to 25% or so.

Either the crush was not right, thermometer calibration is off, mash pH could have been off, or somehow the ingredients were spoiled. A proper crush of standard modern malts, mashed for 1 hour at 152F should give you 90%+ conversion efficiency.

 

[senfo]

Either the crush was not right, thermometer calibration is off, mash pH could have been off, or somehow the ingredients were spoiled. A proper crush of standard modern malts, mashed for 1 hour at 152F should give you 90%+ conversion efficiency.

Thank you very much for the reply. I'll read through the links in just a minute, but wanted to post this in case it's helpful.

Pale 2-Row - 5 lb
Rye - 2 lb
C-60 - .38 lb
Flaked Rye - .5 lb
Vienna - .38 lb
Rice Hulls - .25 lb (I realize rice should change the outcome, but posted in case it matters in some way)
Total - 8.51 lb

1st Running - 1.074
2nd Running - 1.032
Pre-Boil - 1.044
After-Boil - 1.060

Pre-Boil Volume - 3.5 gallons
Post-Boil Volume - 2.5 gallons

Water pH - 7.6

Based on those numbers, I'd guess I screwed up the sparge. Thoughts?

 

[chessking]

I did a batch sparge that I'm estimating took 10-15 minutes per runoff (two runoffs and 3.5 gallons total in the kettle for the 2.5 gallon batch). That might have been a bit fast.

Minor point.

When batch sparging, the speed of the runoff is irrelevant IMHO. When fly sparging, you run the wort out slow to maintain the proper PH range in the mash, however a batch sparge is only draining the sugar solution. The time you allow the sparge water to mix with the grains will effect the amount of converted sugars that go into solution. Mix the sparge water thoroughly, and let it set for about ten minutes, Vorlauf, then drain at whatever rate your equipment will allow.