Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Try some of these great recipes out, or share your favourite brew with other forumees!
Post Reply
pottolom

Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by pottolom » Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:04 am

Recipe advice

I recently brewed a batch of Mysterio's Sierra Nevada clone (recipe here: http://www.themaltmiller.co.uk/index.ph ... oductId=74)

This was my first all-grain brew and it turned out really well. I'd like to brew it again, but with a couple of modifications:

- It didn't have much of a head on it. Could I add some wheat malt to improve this - if so, how much and when? Is there any risk of introducing cloudiness/haze to the beer by going down this route?

- I'd quite like to increase its hoppiness a wee bit, so I was thinking of trying dry hopping with some more Cascade. Any tips here on quantities and when to add the dry hops? I'd like a strong, citrus flavour.

Admittedly this is moving it away from a straightforward Sierra Nevada clone, but it seems like a good base to start experimenting, given that I'm a beginner in this home-brewing lark :)

Thanks!

Matt12398

Re: Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by Matt12398 » Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:00 pm

It's good to experiment with something you know you like.

Wheat malt can add a bit of head. If you use quite a high percentage you may get some haze but it shouldn't have too much impact in small quantities. Otherwise torrefied wheat, which is unmalted, is a common ingredient to add head and adds very little in the way of flavour. 100-150g in a 25 litre brew should help. Otherwise regular porridge oats will have a similar effect but perhaps with a bit more mouth feel.

Dry hopping will provide you with aroma but very little in the way of flavour. If you want flavour you need to add it to the boil. If you do dry hop it's best to do it when primary fermentation has died down because an active fermentation will drive off some of the aroma you want to keep in your beer. I find 30-50g is a good amount for dry hopping but some people will add a lot more. There's a lot of arguement around dry hopping time but a lot of people will say 3-5 days. Much more than that you won't get much more out of them and if you leave them in a long time you'll get some grassy notes. I've left some in just over a week before and started to notice it but others will tell you they've left them in for weeks with no problems.

pottolom

Re: Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by pottolom » Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:34 pm

Thanks for the reply, Matt.

I must admit, I hadn't realised that dry hopping had little effect on taste, so that was useful.

After reading your post, I did a Google search, which threw up this article: http://www.mrmalty.com/late_hopping.php, which says that "Several homebrewers have reported that after switching a recipe to all late hops", it "reinforces the huge hop flavor and aroma" and "also results in a much smoother, less harsh bitterness".

So, I'm now wondering whether to make some changes to that Sierra Nevada recipe based on this. The original is:

5450g Lager Malt
450g Pale Crystal Malt
Mash @66c for 90 mins

30g Northern Brewer for 60 mins
30g Cascade last 10 mins.

70g Cascade Last 1 Min

Starting Gravity approx. 1053

1 x NBS West Coast Yeast , Ferment at 19c


I'm thinking that perhaps I could remove the Northern Brewer entirely, and then increase the Cascade additions at 10 minutes and 1 minute.

I have just tried the calculator at http://www.brewersfriend.com/ibu-calculator/, and the total IBUs for the original recipe comes out at 42.17. I then tried removing the Northern Brewer, and then multiplying the two Cascade additions up to achieve the same IBUs. I found I needed 4x the Cascade, i.e. 120g at 10 minutes, and 280g at 1 minute. That's a lot of hops! Does that sound right?!

YeastWhisperer

Re: Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by YeastWhisperer » Tue Jun 10, 2014 5:00 am

Sierra Nevada does not use Northern Brewer in SNPA. The original recipe used Perle (bittering) and Cascade (aroma/flavor). The current recipe uses Perle and Magnum along with Cascade. Perle and Magnum provide much cleaner bitterness than Northern Brewer, which allows Cascade to shine. If you would like to try a slightly different type of grapefruit, I would dry hop with 20 to 30 grams of Centennial in addition to finishing the beer with Cascade. Centennial is like Cascade on steroids and then some. It has a nice floral component that is missing from Cascade. Sierra Nevada finishes their seasonal IPA (Celebration Ale) with Cascade and Centennial. Centennial pairs well with most hops.

Matt12398

Re: Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by Matt12398 » Tue Jun 10, 2014 1:05 pm

If I were you I'd do something between the two and rather than completely ditching the bittering addition, just reduce it slighlty and up the later hops. The amount of bitterness you're going to extract froma 1 minute addition is very little so whilst you're getting loads of in your face cascade aroma it's costing you a lot of money. Also bear in mind that the more hops you add, the more of your final wort they will absorb.

User avatar
Cpt.Frederickson
Hollow Legs
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:54 pm
Location: BIAB in the Shed, Maidstone, Kent

Re: Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by Cpt.Frederickson » Tue Jun 10, 2014 1:07 pm

An oldie but a goodie. Mysterio's was my fourth AG brew (my first full size one too).
I've brewed a few versions of this, each opting for a heftier hop schedule.
My latest incarnation will bitter with Magnum, then Perle at 30 mins and 20 mins. Cascade at 15, 10, 5 and 0 and then another 100g of pellets for dry hop.
My first version used northern brewer and was ok, bitterness is clean and neutral so does the job. I've started to allow the Perle to play a larger part, mainly because I like it. Its probably not true to the original now, but is a very good APA.
Personally, I found that one batch was particularly good and this one was fermented with san diego super yeast. Just ensure it gets enough oxygen (pure o2 preferably) as it can throw off diacetyl. In my batch, it took quite a while before it was drinkable because of this, but once the yeast had cleaned it up it was by far the best version yet.

As to the hop flavour thing; this is a difficult one. As mentioned above, dry hopping doesn't contribute 'flavour' per se, but aroma perception plays a huge role in the way we taste foods and drinks. Don't underestimate the power of the dry hop! I've dry hopped a couple of recent brews with t90 pellets and it has made a notable contribution to perception of hop 'flavour'. Pellets were certainly more effective than previous experiences with whole hop flowers too, even when the hop flowers were shredded in the food processor.
The Hand of Doom Brewery and Meadery
Fermenting -
Conditioning - Meads - Raspberry Melomel yeast test, Vanilla Cinnamon Metheglyn, Orange Melomel.
Drinking - Youngs AAA Kit; Leatherwood Traditional Mead, Cyser, Ginger Metheglyn.
Planning - Some kits until I can get back to AG, then a hoppy porter, Jim's ESB, some American Red.

micmacmoc

Re: Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by micmacmoc » Tue Jun 10, 2014 3:49 pm

I've messed about with mysterio's recipe endlessly. I began to reduce the crystal and replace with larger and larger quantities of munich. It was never as nice as the original. Its a surefire winner is SNPA, and I love it! I also use the original recipe as a basis for trying new hops out occasionally as its the beer I brew most often I can usually tell whats what.

Aaron

Re: Sierra Nevada clone recipe modifications

Post by Aaron » Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:49 pm

I've brewed this one a few times too. It's a great beer. Last time it was a little too sweet though, which i'm putting down to my scaling up to a bigger brewlength and using too much crystal.
In the past I've brewed it using 50g Cascade plus 50g Amarillo for the 1 minute addition. Each to their own taste, but I considered that to be an improvement on the original because there was some additional apricot-like flavour coming through.

Post Reply