Ron Pattinson's The Homebrewer's Guide to Vintage Beer

[DeGarre]

Thanks for the replies. My brew volume is 24L so not that far off. This book will compliment Pattinson's Bitter book nicely which is heavier going but very funny when he starts ranting. I won't start reading this until my 1st brew of the year has conditioned, then I'll have a pint or two and spend a nice evening by the fire browsing the book. Although it could be that the book requires an English bitter to read with...

Obviously the hops are pro rata and the total ibu is known so I don't mind that something is left for the avid reader to ponder, tinker and figure out.

[PhilB]

Hi DeGarre

For the recipes on his Shut Up About Barclay Perkins blog, Ron tends to scale recipes both for 5 gals/23 lts at 70% efficiency for Home brewers and 20 bbl and 20 hl at 90% efficiency for Craft/Micro brewers ... it looks like the recipes in this book are standardised to 23 lts @ 70%, but it would have been nice if that had been specified in the book somewhere, and it might be, but I haven't found that yet if it is ... the recipes do look great though

Cheers, PhilB

You're right it isn't specified in the book, or at least again I haven't found it either, however I have put the 1868 Tetley EIPA page 73, into Beersmith, It works out at 25 litres with that quantity of grain, although It came out at 1.063 not 1.061. He does talk about the recipes on page 34 for the purpose of home brewing them.

Hi Orlando, What efficiency did you specify when you entered the recipe in Beersmith? When I put the 6.8kg of Pale Malt specified in that Tetley EIPA recipe into GW's Beer Engine, with a brew length of 23 lts and an efficiency of 70%, I get a predicted OG of 1.062 ... like it says in Ron's recipe

Cheers, PhilB

[orlando]

I presume you mean total efficiency, which was set to 75% gives me 1.063, 70% gives me 1.059. Could be because I have altered the yield on my Crisp's Maris Otter, last years crop doesn't seem to perform to spec.

[PhilB]

Hi orlando

Could be because I have altered the yield on my Crisp's Maris Otter ...

... hmmmm, I imagine, were Ron Pattinson involved in this thread, his response to that would have been something along the lines of "Well! If you will go tw**ting about with the ingredients, you shouldn't be surprised when you make a different tw**ting beer!!"

I believe if you use a "standard" definition for 2-row pale malt (with a Potential of 1.036 in Beersmith, or 36 PPG or 301 LDK in other software) and add that 6.8kg specified in Ron's recipe to brew a 23 lts brew length with an efficiency of 70% (yes that's total efficiency or "Into Fermenter Efficiency" or "Brewhouse Efficiency" ) ... then you'll be able to reproduce Ron's recipe .. and you can go on from there to substitute the ingredients you have available to you and specify the brew length that you want to brew and the efficiency that you're able to achieve with your system ... now I just need to try to work out what AA percentages he's assuming for his hops

Cheers, PhilB

[orlando]

Hi orlando

Could be because I have altered the yield on my Crisp's Maris Otter ...

... hmmmm, I imagine, were Ron Pattinson involved in this thread, his response to that would have been something along the lines of "Well! If you will go tw**ting about with the ingredients, you shouldn't be surprised when you make a different tw**ting beer!!"

I believe if you use a "standard" definition for 2-row pale malt (with a Potential of 1.036 in Beersmith, or 36 PPG or 301 LDK in other software) and add that 6.8kg specified in Ron's recipe to brew a 23 lts brew length with an efficiency of 70% (yes that's total efficiency or "Into Fermenter Efficiency" or "Brewhouse Efficiency" ) ... then you'll be able to reproduce Ron's recipe .. and you can go on from there to substitute the ingredients you have available to you and specify the brew length that you want to brew and the efficiency that you're able to achieve with your system ... now I just need to try to work out what AA percentages he's assuming for his hops

Cheers, PhilB

"Twatting about", I'll have you know "precisely honed" is the phrase you are looking for. Anyway I would just make this one point. You WILL NOT make the beer as it was made back then because you are brewing with highly modified malts of a breed that I don't think existed back then. The base malt was most likely Chevallier, after 1826 at least, and I have no idea what before that, but almost certainly something that behaved differently in the Tun. It would be fun to get hold of some of the next crop of Chevallier and do a side by side brew to compare. I did a brew with some last year and got some surprising results, that are mentioned in the article.

[PhilB]

Anyway I would just make this one point. You WILL NOT make the beer as it was made back then

... errmmm ... I think you're missing the point I was making ... I'm not trying to make, or help you make, the beer "as it was made back then". That's what Ron's book does ... to do that Ron specifies recipes, using modern ingredients, as "interpretations" of those recipes ... Ron explains that in the book ... but if you, or I, can't interpret Ron's recipes for brewing in our brewhouses then those recipes are worthless ... and that's why the discussion about brew lengths started ... and that's why I was trying to help you, and anybody else reading this thread, with some information about Ron's assumed brew lengths and efficiency and an approach for interpreting the recipes for our own brewing methods/system.

It looks like you're more interested in scoring "smart @rse points" ... but you see, if you want to play that game, I'm really not interested. I concede. You are the champion, well done!! Feel better now?

Cheers, PhilB

[orlando]

Anyway I would just make this one point. You WILL NOT make the beer as it was made back then

... errmmm ... I think you're missing the point I was making ... I'm not trying to make, or help you make, the beer "as it was made back then". That's what Ron's book does ... to do that Ron specifies recipes, using modern ingredients, as "interpretations" of those recipes ... Ron explains that in the book ... but if you, or I, can't interpret Ron's recipes for brewing in our brewhouses then those recipes are worthless ... and that's why the discussion about brew lengths started ... and that's why I was trying to help you, and anybody else reading this thread, with some information about Ron's assumed brew lengths and efficiency and an approach for interpreting the recipes for our own brewing methods/system.

It looks like you're more interested in scoring "smart @rse points" ... but you see, if you want to play that game, I'm really not interested. I concede. You are the champion, well done!! Feel better now?

Cheers, PhilB

Oh for heavens sake Phil that's not what I was doing, I was just jogging the conversation along, I thought it was quite interesting, it's not a contest. I'm sorry if it came across like that. I think the book is great and look forward to making the beers with what I have and some Chevallier if I can get it. Now kiss and make up

[PhilB]

Now kiss and make up

... OK ... but you do realise I'm not interested in having sex with you ... I'm only here to talk about brewing

Cheers, PhilB

[orlando]

Now kiss and make up

... OK ... but you do realise I'm not interested in having sex with you ... I'm only here to talk about brewing

Cheers, PhilB

I will now cry myself to sleep

[DeGarre]

Surely all I need is the gravity and % of grist to get very close. Anyway, I'll use the book as an inspiration and will remember to add "inspired by..." to the label. Looking forward to some brave soul having a go with a recipe.

[orlando]

Surely all I need is the gravity and % of grist to get very close. Anyway, I'll use the book as an inspiration and will remember to add "inspired by..." to the label. Looking forward to some brave soul having a go with a recipe.

Next up. I'm calling it Tea For Two as it's based on a Tetley's recipe. Could post it as a Brew Day.

[PhilB]

Hi orlando

Next up. I'm calling it Tea For Two as it's based on a Tetley's recipe. Could post it as a Brew Day.

... is that that EIPA recipe you're planning to brew? ... with nearly 300g of Fuggles in for the whole boil? ... that should help you decide where you stand in the "any bittering hop will do" debate. It'll be interesting to see if it still tastes "fuggley" after all that

Cheers, PhilB

[orlando]

Hi orlando

Next up. I'm calling it Tea For Two as it's based on a Tetley's recipe. Could post it as a Brew Day.

... is that that EIPA recipe you're planning to brew? ... with nearly 300g of Fuggles in for the whole boil? ... that should help you decide where you stand in the "any bittering hop will do" debate. It'll be interesting to see if it still tastes "fuggley" after all that

Cheers, PhilB

No it's the 1868 Tetley IPA on page 73 and is all Goldings (284g) for 90 minutes an IBU of 146 (technically but, not sure it's possible to really calculate it over 100). I've read that experiments with beers claiming to have 100+ IBU seldom have. To hit that IBU with the alpha content I need circa 150g, which will make run off easier. BS2 gives this as 2.302 IBU/SG ratio. I therefore intend bottling and leaving for 6 months before I touch it, I don't like overly bitter beer but like the experiment, so will only brew 15 litres in case its cack.

[Belter]

You're making me want to buy this book so I can join in pointlessly arguing...

... Off to amazon

[orlando]

You're making me want to buy this book so I can join in pointlessly arguing...

... Off to amazon

"pointlessly arguing", how dare you sir, this is just the usual blather we enjoy, nothing wrong with that! It is an interesting book, but I think he should expand the history aspect of it which is far more interesting than the recipes, which as interesting to a brewer as they are the story behind them is much more interesting.