Problem with nottingham/batch recall

[delboy]

I brewed a pale ale yesterday, i pitched a sachet of nottingham into it (about 24 hrs ago), zero activity, normally any dried yeast would be well under way, becoming a bit concerned i got another sachet of yeast out of the freezer and tried proofing it, zero activity yet again.

I had a quick gander on the net and found a 17 page thread on an american forum talking about a nottingham recall, seems they switched their packaging and now they have viabiltiy problems.

I checked my lot and its isn't in the original recall but it seems the problem is bigger than a rogue batch and some people reported failed fermentations with the lot number i have.


From the forum
'1080360088v this was a dud for me and I pitched 05 on it just a bit ago. I'm hoping that if the Notty does have any life in it, the 05 will eat the sugars before the notty decides to work and it'll just settle out before potentially affecting the flavor.'

This is the same lot number i have, im away to rehydrate some us-05 before this is ruined, just thought i would let others on here now about the issues with nottingham, i got this lot from barley bottom, not his fault but if anyone else has got some nottingham from BB (or anyother supplier for that matter) it might be worth checking the lot number before potentially screwing up a batch of beer.

[mysterio]

Interesting. My last beer had a long lag time using Nottingham but I did over-chill the wort somewhat so I put it down to that. The beer turned out fine and no problems with off flavours or attenuation. I'll check the lot number.

[delboy]

Interesting. My last beer had a long lag time using Nottingham but I did over-chill the wort somewhat so I put it down to that. The beer turned out fine and no problems with off flavours or attenuation. I'll check the lot number.

Did you proof it mysty, what sort of lag did you experience. The first sachet i rehydrated and pitched without paying it any attention, thinking back though it didn't froth up like you'd expect but i think i put it down to not being left long enough at the time. The second sachet i was ultra careful with, it did nothing.

It does seem that it will eventually get going (probably the yeast viability is a fraction of what it should be) at least thats what seems to be reported on the american site, but your open to other nasties getting a foothold first and if they get in you've got an expensive batch of drain cleaner.

[mysterio]

Yeah I did but I don't pay any attention to how the yeast froths up. Some yeasts froth up more than others and I can't be certain it has anything to do with viability/yeast health. From memory SO4 seems to really react to being mixed with water.

[delboy]

Yeah some seem to froth more than others when hydrated, the second sachet had some wort added to it after hydrating which normally gets any yeast going but even after a few hours it was like a millpond.

I'll check it before i head to bed tonight and if its still doing nothing then i think it'll be US/UK (stroke05) to the rescue.

[delboy]

Just found another post on irish craft brewer reporting similar problems with the same lot number 088V of nottingham.

I doubt v. much i'll be getting anymore nottingham in a hurry if this is par for the course, im sitting at the moment drinking a lovely flavoursome beer made with windsor which was virtually finished fermenting at this stage (24 hrs).

[mysterio]

I have two of the Nottingham 088V batch. Bummer.

[delboy]

There's next to no flavour difference between the two anyway, why don't you just chuck the US05 in and be done with it.

I get a peachy type ester from nottingham that i like with cascade, and it tends to flocc better than US-05, as i said before though if it doesn't kick in before beddy byes the yanks are going in.

[delboy]

I thought last night there was the faintest beginning of something so i held my nerve until this morning, its finally kicked in, the best part of 36 hrs to get there though.

[PPPales]

I also had a problem with Nottingham taking 10+ days to primary ferment at 20 C. This was the one and only time I have used it. But I had bought 2 packs so I still have one - and yes the lot number is 088V! Into the bin. Thanks

[BarnsleyBrewer]

Hi,
I brewed with this yeast 2 weeks ago, just checked the batch number and it's the same as yours with a use by of 08/2010. (bought from paul at BarleyBottom)
I did notice though it got off to a slow start, around 30hrs before it was showing a normal fermentation...... The brew turned out great, no off tastes or weird smells!!

John

[JayBee]

Last brew I put on I wanted to use Nottingham. Got the brew going and went thru the usual re-hydrating process that I always use. Sprinkled the Nottingham on to the water in the Pyrex jug and when i turned round a few minutes later it had just sank to the bottom as if I`d just poured a spoonful of sand in.
That`s the second time that`s happened to me with this yeast in the last few months. The reserve pack of S04 was used and as usual it did its customary reliable job. Its a bit frustrating though when you decide on a particular type of yeast and end up using something else.

[mysterio]

I won't be using my two packs of Nottingham because of this, even though the beer turned out fine. Getting some US-05 in.

[Manx Guy]

Hi!

I used Nottingham in my recent Sarah Hughes Ruby Mild...

There was a lag of about 30-40 hours but it fermented it down from 1056 to 1016 in 7 days and has almost settled out...

Not sure what the BN/Lot #: is.. I have it written down at home (I'm at 'work' now)

I will report back on twhether this is from the affected batch, although it doesn't appear to have affected the beer in any way (at this early stage) as I racked it to secondary last night and the SG sample tasted pretty good!

Slainte!

[delboy]

Seems a trend is developing, long lag but everything works out ok in the end, as long as you don't get an infection during the v. long lag phase.