Unusually high efficiency (for me )

[MattGuk]

Hi all

I had been reading on the pro's and cons of thick vs thin mashing.
Some people reporting that they saw a difference and other saying it was negligable to none.
Anyhow, I decided to make a light lager ( bring on the critics lol ) and decided on a thin mash at 2 quarts per pound.
I have always had an average of 75% in recent batches, but this last batch I hit 86%, and the only thing I can put this down to is the thin mash.

Here is the recipe

4lbs pilsner malt
4 lbs flaked rice
1.5lbs lager malt

Mashed for 2 hours at 145f, 23 ltr batch size which was calculated at an og of about 1.041 @ 75% efficiency, this came out at 1.051 which king of messes with the light lager approach, ( not a bad thing some may say ).

Anybody had this experience with thin mashing?

Cheers guys

Matt

 

[golfduke]

I'd be more inclined to see that you mashed for 2 hours. Have you done this beer before with the same mash schedule? that beer is going to go real low too, I'll bet.

Did you buy your grains pre-milled? Crush has a ton to do with efficiency too, maybe a tighter crush is your culprit as well.

I've played around with grist ratios from 1.2-1.75, and have not really found a huge advantage in thinner mashes except when mashing with high quantities of wheat, rice, or corn, but even then it's just because it's easier to sparge in my opinion. That's just my experience though, so others' may vary.

 

[ajf]

I usually mash (English Pale Ales) at 1 US qt / lb, and get 75% Brewhouse efficiency. I've tried a few brews (American Pale Ales and IPAs) mashing at 1.25 US qt / lb, and have always got the same efficiency.
Back is 2010, I made a lager that I mashed at 1.75 US qt / lb, and my records show that I got 80% brewhouse efficiency. However, I measured the OG with a refractometer that had been calibrated for Pale Ales, and didn't check it against a hydrometer. I'm not saying that the refractometer was wrong in this case, but I also cannot say that it was definitely correct. I am trying some experiments to check the accuracy of the refractometer when brewing various different styles, but life has got in the way, and I haven't managed to get around to the lagers yet.

-a.

 

[MattGuk]

This is the only thing that changed in my shedule.
I have mashed low for 2 hours before also and still never got this high efficiency. My. Grains are always pre crushed though this did look a little finer than usual, but not a lot finer.
I will see what happens as I have another lager planned ( pilsner actually ) so I will if the efficiency is the same on that one.

 

[masskrug]

Wondering: Will a two hour mash really help efficiency over a 60-90 minute one? Is it worth the extra time?

 

[MattGuk]

As far as I know a long mash is needed at the low temp for a true lager so a lower fg is achieved because of much more fermentable wort?
I also read that I thinner mash will help with a more fermentable wort?
How correct the later statement is, I don't know but these are the only 2 factors that I have changed and wondered if that would contribute to more efficiency.