Examining possible solutions to issue of sulfur smell from Perlick 650ss faucets

[illmatija]

illmatija, have you actually experienced the sulfur flavour/aroma with your taps? Seems that some people don't encounter the issue at all, so I wouldn't bother with the treatment if you haven't had the issue. The procedure can be done to the taps at any point.

I'd also caution against long soaking of the taps in starsan as it seems this might cause or increase the amount of perceived sulfur.

I will try it first, I have to get appropriate shanks first since these don't fit some German ones I have. If I get sulfur I will passivate them.

The reason I asked is because I could return them before using them, and if after passivation, running StarSan or sourish beers would bring back the sulfur, I would probably prefer to just replace them.

 

[sctcts]

The reason I asked is because I could return them before using them, and if after passivation, running StarSan or sourish beers would bring back the sulfur, I would probably prefer to just replace them.

After the passivation, nothing, including starsan or sour beers, should bring back the sulfur if the protective layer is formed correctly. I haven't experienced any sulfur since treating my taps. But it may be possible that the sulfur could come back if the oxide layer somehow breaks down. I've only had the taps treated for a couple months now, and only had a Berliner weisse and a cider to really test with.

 

[illmatija]

Thanks sctcts I will go with passivation!

 

[caseyw]

Bought two 650SS faucets prior to finding this thread. Before installation, decided to go through with the passivation process. During the second bath (citric acid) I experienced an AWFUL sulphur smell. Here's to hoping that my passivation went correctly.

For reference: Both faucets have 1115 production date.

 

[gnef]

I guess I'm lucky. I have 16 of the 650ss faucets.

The only time I experienced anything close to sulfur smell was when I was first installing them, and allowed them to soak in star san for a bit. The bucket had the faintest whiff of sulfur.

Once they were installed though, I haven't been able to detect any sulfur at all, and I've tried pretty hard to look for it. I do have a cider and a couple of sours on tap too.

My plan is for when I need to clean, to run a heated penetrate cycle (a more concentrated BLC), and then a quick star san flush, and then directly to beer.

I just checked my lot numbers:
3 x A0615G
1 x A0815G
3 x A1214G
9 x A0115G

I have no plans of replacing these, as I need the flow control function (running 8 ft of 3/8 OD bev seal ultra due to the John Guest fittings I already had, so not nearly enough restriction), and I've already bought 16 of these things!

 

[opercularia]

Slightly off topic, but still dealing with 303 and passivation - I have been looking at the Intertap faucets and shanks and found the following on the shank description:

"It is a beer shank with 1/4" Bore made of 303 stainless steel. This is the perfect shank for fridge conversions, jockey box or a kegerator with a thick wall. Includes shank nut and black collar. This unit does not come with a Tail piece assembly.
This is a recessed Shank, as such it IS compatible with our Intertap Auto-Close Spring. Allowing you to turn your Intertap faucet set-up into an auto-close one.

My supplier says they are passivated, but still recommends the Taprite shank which is 304 and "The shank I linked works with the Intertap as well. The Perlick sulpher issue is not because of passivation. The perlick sulpher is because of 303SS being used on the lever of the faucet.​" Pressed further, he says "303SS reacts and causes the sulpher not passivation. I am recommending the 304. Both are passivated. Buy the 304 if worried that is my advice." He doesn't explain why they sell the 303 without giving assurances, but they are 30-40% cheaper.

Has anyone heard of or had experience with 303 shanks? Is normal passivation different in any way from the recommendations in this post or are the Perlick levers just not passivated at all? Do the Taprite shanks actually work with the Intertap spring?

Just a bit confused and looking for assurances from forum members who are often more knowledgeable than our suppliers!

 

[LBussy]

Pressed further, he says "303SS reacts and causes the sulpher not passivation."

Well your supplier is wrong. The 303 does not cause the issue, it is the passivation process used on it. Properly passivated the faucets do not emit the sulfur smell. I have had SP and Cider on tap since writing my article with no issues.

Sure if you buy 304 you won't have an issue, and as a supplier he's not going to have to worry about you returning parts, but the 303 properly passivated is fine too.

 

[opercularia]

Well your supplier is wrong. The 303 does not cause the issue, it is the passivation process used on it. Properly passivated the faucets do not emit the sulfur smell.

Thanks Lee. This has been a really long thread and I may have missed it - is the typical passivation process for 303 inadequate, or just Perlick's application of it? Will this be a typical 303 issue, or just in some cases?

 

[LBussy]

Thanks Lee. This has been a really long thread and I may have missed it - is the typical passivation process for 303 inadequate, or just Perlick's application of it? Will this be a typical 303 issue, or just in some cases?

There are accepted passivation processes for 303SS and that's all we really did to fix the issue. I suppose the best answer is: the suppliers Perlick uses for the parts do not passivate the parts correctly.

It's always possible this will happen to other brands. There are reasons to use 303; it's not a matter of using "cheap" parts. 303 machines very well and when doing more intricate work like flow control it's likely the right choice.

ETA: I re-thought the semantics of your supplier being wrong ... whatever. 303 does cause the issue but passivating SS is part of the machining process so ... chicken or the eg, ya know?

 

[opercularia]

Thanks again Lee. I'll order in the 303 shank and try it out. Manufactured by some one else, probably not the same issue. If I do find an issue with it, I'll definitely report back.

 

[Froyd]

I have been having the sulfur issue with my 650ss (sorry I did not write down the production code). The beer on tap now is a wheat beer with an orange zest tincture, so a little more acidic than your typical brew, but nothing crazy.

I have called Perlick yesterday and told them that while I planned to return the faucet (purchased through Amazon) I still very much liked the flow control feature. The customer care agent was aware of the 650ss "issue" though he certainly did not label it as such, giving me the line that this faucet is not recommended for high acidity beers or ciders. I asked if Perlick had improved performance of the 650ss in recent production batches and he told me that they are still being made the same way and he did not recommend buying another 650 in the hopes it would not have the same sulfur smell issues I'm experiencing now. I also asked if any other Perlick faucets with flow control offered better performance with higher acidity bears and the answer was negative, from which I gather the 690s are not any better in this respect.

I'll give the passivating procedure a go, and if I cannot do a good job of it, I'll return the 650 and go for the 630ss.

 

[LBussy]

Good luck @Froyd. I'm confident it will work for you. It's just a cooking endeavor at this point.

 

[Froyd]

I just called Perlick and spoke with a very nice gent. They are aware of the problem, have tested it and have reproduced the problem with low pH beers. He stated, as we suspected above, that there is one part, the flow control "nub" which is made of 303. They have plans to change it to 304 but as of yet have not been able to source a manufacturer to produce that part. He is going to talk with a sales manager to discuss next steps and call me back. Stay tuned.

The guy I talked with made no mention of an effort to change manufacturers of the "nub". Sounds like their communication team needs to decide what's the best way to spin this. The guy I spoke with made it sound like the 650 work the way way they were designed to work, and that if I wanted to serve anything with citrus in it (like the wheat bear referenced in the post above) I should switch to the 630.

 

[Froyd]

Lot's of views on this thread but few reports from people who have done the cook following Saint Bussy's wonderfully edited instructions.

My experience with the process was very good, though it felt like the process took forever. The results? Well, unfortunately I cannot do an apples-to-apples comparison because the beer I had on tap when I first used the 650ss was a wheat pale ale with a citrus addition (so fairly acidic). That beer really made the faucet stink. After the cook, I tapped a regular IPA, with much higher Ph. The faucet is not producing any smell now so either the passivation worked or the IPA is not acidic enough to cause a reaction...or both.

I'll make the wheat beer again soon, and I'll be able to see if the passivation really worked, but I'd love to hear about more success stories.

PS- I followed the instruction for the cook to the letter, opting to leave the o-rings on the flow control barrel.

 

[Johnny-O]

I'm not sure if this will help anyone, or even if this was just a fluke but I had the same issue with my Perlicks. I ignorantly left Star San in the lines overnight, thinking I was sanitizing them "real good" only to discover a horrible rotten egg smell in the first finger or two of beer poured from each of my taps. I couldn't seem to get around to ordering all the chemicals and going through the whole clean up process and I was more or less resigned to just needing to dump a little bit of beer any time I was pouring for the first time in 24 hours or so.

But then my kegs blew and I have somehow, accidentally solved the problem (at least for me). All I did was leave the lines empty for a week or so while I was getting around to cleaning them. Then I added a Liter of "Beer Line Cleaner" (by Brewmaster) - mixed to the recommended strength - in y keg and ran it through the lines. Held it there for 15 minutes to let it soak. Then washed the keg and ran warm water through the lines/tap. Then ran Star San through the lines/taps, letting it sit for just a couple of minutes.

I then added my beer and the sulfur smell is completely gone. No need to dump the first few fingers of beer anymore. It's been like this for a week or so and nothing has returned. Not at all sure why that would be, but this is what happened. And to give some perspective, when I first had the issue the Sulfur smell was so strong that it smelled like Rotten eggs in a Porter and a ESB that I had on tap. I know have a Cream Ale and a Best Bitter on tap and they couldn't be cleaner. If ever the sulfur was going to come through, it would be noticeably in the Cream Ale.

Anyway, maybe just a fluke, but I'm pretty stoked to have my taps back without the need for going through what seemed like quite an intense process. Something tells me that leaving the taps dry for a few days before doing this is important. But I have no idea why. Just thought I'd post it in case it worked for someone else.

 

[Claylang]

Commercial breweries never use starsan and I have not and nither have any of my Brewer friends experienced this problem. However we always run our lines before ever serving beer, because the best beer is the freshest beer. Don't serve the warm beer that sits in the faucet overnight.

 

[BrunDog]

The guy I talked with made no mention of an effort to change manufacturers of the "nub". Sounds like their communication team needs to decide what's the best way to spin this. The guy I spoke with made it sound like the 650 work the way way they were designed to work, and that if I wanted to serve anything with citrus in it (like the wheat bear referenced in the post above) I should switch to the 630.

Agreed. I was supposed he had admitted an issue because previous reports of calls to Perlick resulted in "no problems here" dead ends. That said, nobody ever called me back!

I think that there is a certain threshold of acidity that illicits the the sulfur, and unless you conduct a thorough passivation, any pH below the threshold will produce odiferous sulfur.

 

[Justintoxicated]

Just got 2 faucets and tossed them in starsan before installing them. Wow what a stink! Found this thread when googling. I guess I'll have to try the passivation process, but I have to order the stuff from amazon...

Are you guys doing the entire faucet? I smelled some sulfur coming from the body as well (I think) although it was not as bad as the rest.

looks like I just traded a spline problem with the intertaps for a sulfur problem with the perlicks. I thought thought the intertap would be more problematic but wow the sulfur thing is worse than I thought it would be

 

[LBussy]

Are you guys doing the entire faucet? I smelled some sulfur coming from the body as well (I think) although it was not as bad as the rest.

No, just the parts in the PDF:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showpost.php?p=7531682&postcount=104

looks like I just traded a spline problem with the intertaps for a sulfur problem with the perlicks. I thought thought the intertap would be more problematic but wow the sulfur thing is worse than I thought it would be

I love my Perlicks and bought more after this if that tells you anything. Giving them a quick bath is no trouble at all.

 

[Johnny-O]

Not sure if this will help anyone or not, but I had the sulfur problem in a big way. I had let Star San sit in my lines and taps overnight. All four taps were pure rotten egg after that. It was gross.

I never got around to buying all the chemicals, and frankly I was a bit daunted by the idea of it. Instead I resigned myself to dumping the first bit of beer before serving, as the beer was great. It was just whatever was sitting in the taps that tasted like sulfur.

However, I had a period where my kegs were all empty. I left everything to sit for a week or two and in that time they completely dried out. I then did a quick cleaning with PBW and star san. Needless to say, I didn't leave the star san in there this time. And for whatever reason, the sulfur smell completely went away and has not returned.

Not sure if I just got lucky, or if there was something to the combo fo letting the taps dry out and then using PBW. But whatever happened, the problem fixed itself. Hope that helps someone.

 

[LBussy]

Not sure if this will help anyone or not, but I had the sulfur problem in a big way. I had let Star San sit in my lines and taps overnight. All four taps were pure rotten egg after that. It was gross.

I never got around to buying all the chemicals, and frankly I was a bit daunted by the idea of it. Instead I resigned myself to dumping the first bit of beer before serving, as the beer was great. It was just whatever was sitting in the taps that tasted like sulfur.

However, I had a period where my kegs were all empty. I left everything to sit for a week or two and in that time they completely dried out. I then did a quick cleaning with PBW and star san. Needless to say, I didn't leave the star san in there this time. And for whatever reason, the sulfur smell completely went away and has not returned.

Not sure if I just got lucky, or if there was something to the combo fo letting the taps dry out and then using PBW. But whatever happened, the problem fixed itself. Hope that helps someone.

You did a slower version of the same thing really. PBW is a base, StarSan is an acid. Reproducing what you did might be an issue but it worked for you so you're golden.

 

[Johnny-O]

You did a slower version of the same thing really. PBW is a base, StarSan is an acid. Reproducing what you did might be an issue but it worked for you so you're golden.

Interesting, good to know. Cheers.

 

[Justintoxicated]

so i ordered three chemicals, now after i do the cook. will my taps still emit sulfer if i run starsan through them again or do i need to buy a new sanatizer?

 

[LBussy]

so i ordered three chemicals, now after i do the cook. will my taps still emit sulfer if i run starsan through them again or do i need to buy a new sanatizer?

They should not, but I would still not let them sit with StarSan on them. BLC is preferred for cleaning, and then rinse with clean water. While StarSan is advertized as a cleaner as well as a sanitizer, a caustic cleaner works better for this. You could also use PBW for cleaning but that's slightly more difficult to get it rinsed well.

This is what I use and recommend it highly:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0038NKDRG/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

I used that at the recommended dilution level in a Crag's List special a friend purchased. It was disgusting going into it but that stuff got everything squeaky clean after pumping through the lines for a while.

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

The best way to clean out your taps and lines is to run Beer Line Cleaner through them until the lines look clear again and the tap handles are easy to open and close. This usually takes 15-30 minutes depending on when they were cleaned last. Once the cleaner has been run through, flush the lines and taps by pumping water through them, then run StarSan through them; if you are not going to connect them to beer for a while.

This one simple cleaning step, when done regularly, eliminates stuck taps, excessive foaming and definitely keeps your beer tasting fresh and clean.

 

[BrunDog]

If you run Star San through these and not use them for a while - you will get sulfur. I clean my lines with a hot PBW flush, then Star San flush, and immediately connect to keg. If I am not going to use for a while, I rinse out the PBW with water, and let it sit. Then Star San flush and connect.

 

[Justintoxicated]

They should not, but I would still not let them sit with StarSan on them. BLC is preferred for cleaning, and then rinse with clean water. While StarSan is advertized as a cleaner as well as a sanitizer, a caustic cleaner works better for this. You could also use PBW for cleaning but that's slightly more difficult to get it rinsed well.

This is what I use and recommend it highly:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0038NKDRG/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

I used that at the recommended dilution level in a Crag's List special a friend purchased. It was disgusting going into it but that stuff got everything squeaky clean after pumping through the lines for a while.

Yea I have just been using oxyclean, let it soak for a while in the lines, then run starsan through them after to clean it out. I usually skip the water in between step as I find starsan removes oxyclean quickly (I just dump the first bit of the starsan).

However I am switching to homemade PBW over the oxyclean because I think it will work a bit better for general use (probably for beer lines too) oxy seems to work slowly.

I did buy that beer line cleaner but have not tried it yet (I think I paid $8 for a tiny bottle at the LHBS). Is the water rinse necessary? I don't clean with a pump but use a pressurized keg so the extra step seems painful enough that I would be better off just replacing the tubing lol. I'm using the amazon 12 cent a foot food grade 5/16th vinyl tubing and so far I'm very happy with it, its almost cheaper to replace it than to clean it lol.

But yea, right now my last step is to run starsan through the lines so I was just wondering if that would destroy the passivization. Sounds like I should be good to go, but just avoid soaking in starsan (quick dip should be ok?).

 

[LBussy]

I rinse mine with StarSan occasionally as well, and I have no yet noticed any negative issues.

The thing with the BLC is that sometimes it's necessary to recirculate for a while. That's why you see people with pumps setup. It's easier to set up a pump once than it is to keep replacing the lines. Just MHO of course but it does make sense. An expensive pump is not needed.

 

[fun4stuff]

Does anyone below what pH level you start to have problems with sulfur smell/taste?

 

[BrunDog]

I think it's around 3.

 

[fun4stuff]

I think it's around 3.

I want to buy flow control taps. Currently using picnic taps.

Should I wait awhile longer to see if perlick comes out with a new mode that doesn't have this problem or buy now? How big of deal breaker is this sulfur problem?

I have a pH meter. Wouldn't be a big deal to test my beer pH and just use a picnic tap or non flow control tap for beer with pH < 3.

 

[LBussy]

I want to buy flow control taps. Currently using picnic taps.

Should I wait awhile longer to see if perlick comes out with a new mode that doesn't have this problem or buy now? How big of deal breaker is this sulfur problem?

I have a pH meter. Wouldn't be a big deal to test my beer pH and just use a picnic tap or non flow control tap for beer with pH < 3.

All signs point to them not changing anything so there's no reason to wait. There's also no reason to worry if you passivate them first. It's really not a big deal. You brew beer, you can do this.

I would not give up my 650 taps no matter what - I just bought more.

 

[Justintoxicated]

my seltzer water ( home made la croix) has strong sulfur odor. I have to dump the first oz. I doubt the ph is that low but don't have a ph meter yet. I get heart burn from coffee etc but not from the water.

It's really unfortunate that they made these out stainless that reacts to low ph when they are made to serve carbonated beverages.

I have the chemicals to passivate them now, I just don't have a 2 hour block of time to do it . I feel like perlick should pay me for 2 hours of work lol.

 

[RevKev]

Has anyone actually ever done an analysis of the suspect 303SS parts to find out the true composition of the Stainless? I mean if they are not 304SS within industry standards Perlick will have no choice but to act upon these claims.

I will have access to some extremely powerful spectroscopy and spectrometry instruments as part of me joining a research group at my University (Analytical Chemistry Ph.D intention) and I have two 650SS taps (A0716G) which I haven't served from yet. Not sure if I wish to bother my advisors for some free time in the lab

Just wondering if anyone has thought or has actually done these analytical tests, as these are advertised as fully 304SS faucets and using a lesser grade product is inherently false advertising and fraudulent in nature. I feel like a report of quantitative means is much harder to dispute than a qualitative analysis based upon re-passivation.

 

[sctcts]

Perlick confirmed that certain components within the taps are 303, though not which ones specifically. But I think we pretty confidently determined which ones are 303, so I don't know if there's any benefit of doing a chemical analysis.

As far as I can tell they are not advertised as full 304 construction, just "stainless steel construction". Though they also say it "will not taint the flavour of beer"...

https://www.perlick.com/bar-beverag...apping-hardwarecomponents/beer-faucets/650ss/

 

[fun4stuff]

Perlick confirmed that certain components within the taps are 303, though not which ones specifically. But I think we pretty confidently determined which ones are 303, so I don't know if there's any benefit of doing a chemical analysis.

As far as I can tell they are not advertised as full 304 construction, just "stainless steel construction". Though they also say it "will not taint the flavour of beer"...

https://www.perlick.com/bar-beverag...apping-hardwarecomponents/beer-faucets/650ss/

The way I see it perlick owes you guys money for the passivation procedure and nice write up on how to perform it. I will probably end up buying the 650s but only because of your guys work. I'll try and avoid "low pH" beer/cider but at least I will be at ease knowing there is some way to fix it if I get the sulfur taste.

 

[andrewmaixner]

Perlick confirmed that certain components within the taps are 303, though not which ones specifically. But I think we pretty confidently determined which ones are 303, so I don't know if there's any benefit of doing a chemical analysis.

As far as I can tell they are not advertised as full 304 construction, just "stainless steel construction". Though they also say it "will not taint the flavour of beer"...

https://www.perlick.com/bar-beverag...apping-hardwarecomponents/beer-faucets/650ss/

Here is their literature:
https://www.perlick.com/files/3914/...ng_Faucets_Presentation_-_630ss_and_650ss.pdf

It clearly states, on page 3, "... 304 sanitary stainless steel for all parts that contact product. ..."




A press release: https://www.perlick.com/files/1914/0422/0235/Perlicks_New_Patented_650SS_Flow_Control_Faucet.pdf

"Additional features of Perlick&#8217;s new, patented 650SS Flow Control Faucet include: ... Every part that comes in contact with beverages is made from 304 sanitary stainless steel, protecting the fragile flavors of wine and craft beer. "


Another press release, says the same thing: https://www.perlick.com/files/1614/2366/2983/Perlicks_650SS_Forward_Sealing_Flow_Control_Faucet.pdf


YET ANOTHER one saying the same thing: https://www.perlick.com/files/1714/2650/9469/PRHighlight_BarBusiness_GOOD_DESIGN_2.2015.pdf



(Note: I'm not arguing about what it is made it, just clearly showing what Perlick very clearly advertised them as.)

 

[LBussy]

You can argue about it, you can not buy it, some people have even returned them. Short of a class action suit I don't know what else to do. I chose to passivate them and use them.

 

[sctcts]

Fair enough, I didn't dig into their old literature. I'm guessing the marketing department just copied the old press release from the 630SS and added bits about flow control, without actually asking anyone in engineering/manufacturing about materials changes. Their specifications are correct on the current webpage.

I think LBussy is right here, it's tough to force Perlick to do anything, especially when not everyone experiences the issue. I'd prefer for them to be more transparent about the issue, but that's just how business goes. Would be nice if they would do refunds/exchanges for people experiencing the issue (I think some homebrew shops may have?), but the cost of that likely outweighs the positive press it would get them among homebrewers. I still think the end product is great, they just need to work on their manufacturing process.

 

[andrewmaixner]

Fair enough, I didn't dig into their old literature. I'm guessing the marketing department just copied the old press release from the 630SS and added bits about flow control, without actually asking anyone in engineering/manufacturing about materials changes. Their specifications are correct the current webpage.
...

That first PDF I linked is from the current web page. They have not bothered to make sure their documentation and claims are updated to reflect the mistake. I attached a screenshot of the current page linking to the inaccurate documentation ( https://www.perlick.com/files/3914/...ng_Faucets_Presentation_-_630ss_and_650ss.pdf )


I am not attacking you at all, just making it very clear that Perlick is NOT doing their due diligence to correct their mistake, in any manner whatsoever -- whether mentioning pH issues in the documentation, or changing / exchanging the part, or changing their claims.