G'day, I've been trying to create a spreadsheet to replicate the Gyle Calc - just for fun and to better understand the functions involved. I've got it pretty close, but it returns a different enough result to your calc that I thought I'd ask ... So... I take the wort OG and FG and convert from SG to Plato p=259-(259/sg) I take the desired vol CO2 and convert to g/l - vol co2 x 1.96 I take the fermentation temp and find the existing CO2 on a table - 20c gives 0.86 - which is then converted to g/l 1.69 and subtract that from the rqd CO2 - so for 2.4vol (4.7 g/l) the required extra g/l is 3.02 Then (0.24*vol*CO2 rqd) / (OG-FG) which spits out the amount of gyle required. but for 20 litres of 1.040 - 1.010 at 20c I get 1.96litres required, while your calc get 2.3l required. So.. what am I missing? Thanks for your help if you can! Rhys

Mate I think I need another beer after trying to figure that out might go stick me head in the freezer as well!

I rarely visit these forum pages after consuming a few to many beers whatever i write im sure wouldnt make much sence to anyone. Youd have to put a anti pisshead decriptor on to decode it ha ha . Sorry to surry this thread its above and beyond me serge marx.

yep. drink beer, then think beer, then try math. bad combo. essentially, gyle priming. BF calc gets a different result to me, though i thought i used the same method (there are article links on the BF calc) so wondering where i went wrong. Or if I did. Haven't tried it yet, but the lure of just saving some wort then using it prime the bottles is pretty strong. There are a few "near enough" equations out there, but the BF one seems the most dialed in. Essentially i need to know how many mls of a given wort per 500ml bottle will give the co2 vols i want in that beer. Next brew, I'll try it for the first time. Decided to do some at BF value and some at mine and see how they compare in the finished product. Then I shall drink it and get on forums and the cycle will continue ad-nauseum,

Im not sure why anyone would even want to, first wort is a complex sugar and yeast will eat it last and also will multiply more with wort than with sugar making it a cloudy and long carbonation, a cup of sugar is cheap why not use it

Only reason I see not to use it, as a homebrewer, is so you can say that your beer is just beer, no adjuncts. Yes, I know that reason is arguable, but it is a valid point. File that under our non-motto of "To each his own."

You're right - sugar is heaps easier and well understood. And yes, part of the attraction is making a beer all from malt and hops and yeast and water,, but I've never been precious about that. I wonder though how a gyle primed beer vs a sugar one may be different, so I want to try it. If the answer is "not at all" then I guess I wont bother.

No harm in trying ive done it. True i saved some wort from brew day in a coke bottle and added it to fermentor before bottling. I cant remember how i worked it out but i was doing 12 lt batch back then and.im sure it was like 10% so 1200ml per 12liters cool thing is it increases your final product some!

yes its going to multiply and ferment just like regular beer and thats not what you want, you want carbonation, just carbonation

Nothing wrong with an old fashioned (as in they used to do this regularly) exbeeriment. Don't some still do this for cask carbing beer?

?? Fermentation creates CO2. Sugar is being fermented in the bottle. not sure I understand your point here?