Yet another thread about racking to secondary vs. bottle conditioning

[YeastintheEast]

Hi all,
There seem to be lots of information about this out there, but I was hoping for some opinions straight from experienced brewers. I'm drinking my first homebrew (and it's awesome!), and I have my second in the fermentor at the moment. It's a Black Rock Nut Brown Ale LME kit which I tried to flavor up a bit with some steeping grains. I've got my third brew planned out and was hoping to brew in a couple days. My nut brown ale has been in the fermentor for two weeks and I was planning to leave it for three, but I want to free up the fermentor to get this other beer going. I'm debating whether I should move the nut brown ale to a secondary fermentor or just bottle it. I'm pretty sure it's reached FG but I'm going to check the reading again to be sure. Would there be any advantage to letting it condition for one more week in a secondary fermentor vs. finishing up in the bottles? Also, the secondary fermentor has no airlock, but I see no activity at all from the beer, so I was thinking it might be ok? Hope that's all clear. Thanks all!

 

[honreth]

The title says it all. I have spoken with several brewers who do and several who do not. I just started kegging my first two beers and I put one through a two week secondary and the other through no secondary. They are both carbing up right now but I haven't noticed a discernible difference other than the fact that they are indeed two different beers.
I understand that the beer type has something to do as to weather or not to secondary but I could be very misinformed/wrong on that.:cross:

 

[tme001]

You should be good bottling it. Secondary may help clear everything up a bit but you could just cold crash it, rack it to secondary to bottle, and then let it condition.

 

[RM-MN]

If you leave it in the primary fermenter on the yeast cake longer it speeds the maturity of the beer. If you aren't in a hurry to drink this batch, as long as it is at FG, you can bottle it but expect it to take longer to mature in the bottles. For around $15 you can buy another bucket fermenter......

 

[progmac]

my preference would be to move it to a secondary to improve clarity and reduce bottle sediment.

 

[duboman]

If the beer is at FG and has dropped clear there is really no need to secondary, simply package it. remember that it will be bottle conditioned for at least 3 weeks as it carbonates as well and it's not really a huge beer that might need more time.

 

[JLem]

At 2 weeks, given you've reached terminal gravity, you are good to bottle. Three weeks in primary is not necessary. Nor is a secondary for most beers. I think the whole 3 weeks in primary idea came more out of advocating patience and emphasizing that beer can sit in primary longer than most (outdated) directions say. However, most ales, given a healthy fermentation at the proper temperatures, will be done in 4-7 days. Another week on top of that gives the yeast plenty of time to "clean up" and drop out (depending on the strain)...so most beers can probably be bottled after 2 weeks.

Of course, under-pitching, unhealthy yeast, inadequate aeration, sluggish fermentation, poor temperature control will need more time to be ready.

 

[YeastintheEast]

Thanks all, great input. I think I'll go ahead and just bottle this time, doesn't sound like there'll be as much to gain this time around with this particular beer from holding it in a secondary. Now I just have to find a few more bottles, lol

 

[BrewPharm]

I'm with progmac. I have done it both ways now. And i like using the secondary. It has worked out well for my process. I recently made two batches of a spotted cow clone. Used a secondary for one and three+ weeks in the primary on the other. Flavor I felt was the same. Some friends thought they noticed more of a citrus aftertaste on the batch that was only in primary. My clarity was definitely better with the secondary.

 

[elatowski]

If I were you, I'd go a whole different route. I'd get a second primary fermentor!

 

[Upthewazzu]

Personally, I use a secondary. My goal is a clearer beer that resembles a BMC, where possible.

 

[241]

I only secondary if I dry hop. No need otherwise

 

[ronsky]

Hi all,
There seem to be lots of information about this out there, but I was hoping for some opinions straight from experienced brewers. I'm drinking my first homebrew (and it's awesome!), and I have my second in the fermentor at the moment. It's a Black Rock Nut Brown Ale LME kit which I tried to flavor up a bit with some steeping grains. I've got my third brew planned out and was hoping to brew in a couple days. My nut brown ale has been in the fermentor for two weeks and I was planning to leave it for three, but I want to free up the fermentor to get this other beer going. I'm debating whether I should move the nut brown ale to a secondary fermentor or just bottle it. I'm pretty sure it's reached FG but I'm going to check the reading again to be sure. Would there be any advantage to letting it condition for one more week in a secondary fermentor vs. finishing up in the bottles? Also, the secondary fermentor has no airlock, but I see no activity at all from the beer, so I was thinking it might be ok? Hope that's all clear. Thanks all!

If I read that right, and you don't have a second airlock for if/when you transfer to a secondary ; you might want to pick one up before using it to keep anything nasty out of it. Might not be too dangerous if using a lidded bucket for the secondary, but you definitely want to limit risk of exposure.

 

[RM-MN]

I only secondary if I dry hop. No need otherwise

Have you tried dry hopping in the primary? Works the same way and no transfer to secondary involved.

 

[iamchrisdube]

Hi all,
There seem to be lots of information about this out there, but I was hoping for some opinions straight from experienced brewers. I'm drinking my first homebrew (and it's awesome!), and I have my second in the fermentor at the moment. It's a Black Rock Nut Brown Ale LME kit which I tried to flavor up a bit with some steeping grains. I've got my third brew planned out and was hoping to brew in a couple days. My nut brown ale has been in the fermentor for two weeks and I was planning to leave it for three, but I want to free up the fermentor to get this other beer going. I'm debating whether I should move the nut brown ale to a secondary fermentor or just bottle it. I'm pretty sure it's reached FG but I'm going to check the reading again to be sure. Would there be any advantage to letting it condition for one more week in a secondary fermentor vs. finishing up in the bottles? Also, the secondary fermentor has no airlock, but I see no activity at all from the beer, so I was thinking it might be ok? Hope that's all clear. Thanks all!

I'm very anxious to drink my first brew! I bought a Brewers Best 5 Gallon Starter Kit and my local brew supply advised me to start with the Brewers Best Summer Ale to get my feet wet. My brother lent me his carboy, so I figured I would rack to secondary as I wanted to be as involved and hands on as possible. As for leaving it open, all information sources I have read emphasize on sanitation and keeping it covered. I have also read people having situations where they forgot to put the airlock on, and everything ended up fine. In my opinion having no airlock doesn't mean you will necessarily have contamination issues, but it does increase the risk. I tend to research multiple threads on this site as well as books to get the real deal. There is a plethora of amazing information on this website and also a lot of personal opinion being stated as fact by some people, which isn't really anything new to the internet Why not try Secondary with 1 Batch and Just do primary with another? Find what you like more. I hope this helps/Contributes. Cheers

 

[241]

Have you tried dry hopping in the primary? Works the same way and no transfer to secondary involved.

I have, but I usually do it because it frees up my larger fermenter so I can continue the pipeline.