60 min vs 90 min boils

[The Baron]

30 minutes every time unless like is stated above I'm making something special that requires a longer boil, big beers, old ales etc.

I do 45 minutes but exactly the same for certain styles or bigger beers

 

[RichardM]

Sorry AG I've no idea what you're on about

He's teasing you, following on from the early posts that mention making beer and making the best possible beer.

 

[Tess Tickle's Brewery]

Oh I see!

Guilty as charged for not reading every post!

 

[Agentgonzo]

From what I can tell, most homebrewers boil unnecessarily hard. Industry guidance is to aim for a boil-off rate of 4-10%. With a normal 5 gallon brew and a 13A element, you can get 10-15% boil off easily. Those with gas burners get even more - as high as 20 or ever 25% from some .

Not everything is a function of power (isomerisation rate doesn't increase with a harder boil for example), but some things (protein coagulation, DMS boil-off etc, Mallard reactions) are. So whilst is not a perfect substitute, a shorter-and-harder boil is somewhat equivalent to a longer-but-gentler boil (not a simmer).

Some systems will easily get a 6-8% boil-off rate in 30-45 minutes. Provided you take this into account in your IBU calculations, then the objectives of the boil will have been achieved with the shorter boil.

 

[hoppyscotty]

From what I've read even Malliard reactions occur at higher than boiling temps, but its less clear what the contribution of time is to the process at lower temps, so the jury is still out on wether that is even a thing in the boil...seems to be more of a thing in the malting side, but it seems the science is far from settled on understanding exactly what is going on.

In the boil there are two things going on from what I can tell - time at temperature (obviously the temperature is static at whatever the boiling temp of wort is) and the vigorousness of the boil which obviously agitates the wort which help with moving the liquid around preventing stratification and affecting how solids move through the liquid that might help with certain things that are going on - does that agitation affect hop isomerisation? Does it help with flushing the heating elements preventing scorching and caramelisation? Does it help drive off unwanted compounds more quickly enabling a shorter boil time? Who knows. I tend to aim for something a bit more than a simmer and less than a spitting erupting boil. I'm sure all these things contribute specific and different things to the end result but I have no idea what. I guess all we can do is experiment and be lead by the results of our experimentation.

The thing here is there are no rules....its all about the results you get. You ask 10 pro brewers for their top tips and best practices and you'll bet 10 different opinions backed up by a whole host of justifications.

 

[Sadfield]

From what I can tell, most homebrewers boil unnecessarily hard.

I don't understand why people get so upset about what other people do.

 

[Donegal john]

I don't understand why people get so upset about what other people do.

I don’t. I boil until I get bored waiting.

 

[Sadfield]

I don’t. I boil until I get bored waiting.

I go for the 'watch road cycling on eurosport long relaxing boil' option.

 

[allotment_fox]

just a couple of things to ask as my brewing AG experience is on the low side
Q what is the main reason to reduce your boiling time moving away from usual practice, is it expense of boiling or overall time in the brewing session ?
Personally saving say 1-3 kWh in electricity say £1 -£1.20 and have an inferior taste just isn't worth it, consistent results would be my goal and using best practice for the recipe concerned should get better results for an home brewer

 

[foxy]

just a couple of things to ask as my brewing AG experience is on the low side
Q what is the main reason to reduce your boiling time moving away from usual practice, is it expense of boiling or overall time in the brewing session ?
Personally saving say 1-3 kWh in electricity say £1 -£1.20 and have an inferior taste just isn't worth it, consistent results would be my goal and using best practice for the recipe concerned should get better results for an home brewer

Some people prefer to go with the views of a prison psychologist and an accounts clerk in a wholesale brewing gear company than to go with the views of science and master brewers. Very sad.
Just continue with the attitude you have to produce the best beer you can consistently and you won't go far wrong.

 

[Weizenberg]

It depends on your expectations whats typical for the recipe you are interested in.

For Munich Helles, I prefer to not evaporate too high and have dialed in my boils to 4% evap rate.

There are dangers of excessive thermal stress, excessive decposition of proteins, excessive evaporation of flavour compounds, excessive DMS-P formation and Stecker aldehydes one ought to take into consideration. It depends on one's definition of quality and expectations for the recipe.

A lot of factors can damage beer before the wort even hits the fermenter.

Wrong boil is one of them when it comes to Munich Helles. I found the darker types more forgiving (ie Dunkel)

 

[The Baron]

Bitters/ Dark Strong Ales more of a regular boil time say 60 mins. Lighter ales/IPA's I would do a 45 Min boil. Some still do longer boils on Lagers because of the old style malts needed it to drive off DMS but modern malts are more forgiving.
There is not one real answer as you will get quite a few viewpoints and I am not going to say anybody is wrong it is down to your own process and views so just do what you feel comfortable with and maybe do some more internet reading on it to get the best way for you

 

[Agentgonzo]

There is not one real answer as you will get quite a few viewpoints and I am not going to say anybody is wrong it is down to your own process and views so just do what you feel comfortable with and maybe do some more internet reading on it to get the best way for you

This.
If there was one right answer, then there would be no disagreement in the first place.

Personally saving say 1-3 kWh in electricity say £1 -£1.20 and have an inferior taste just isn't worth it

. When people have done things that resulted in an inferior brew, they have openly said so, so listen and learn. But a shorter/longer time (and chill/no-chill) doesn't instantly mean inferior beer, despite what some loud zealots would want you too believe.

I've learnt far more from listening to a wide breadth of conflicting opinion and trying things for myself than I ever did just listening to the loudest person in the room.

 

[Agentgonzo]

consistent results would be my goal

My best advice would be take lots of notes on each brew, and only change one variable/independent part of your process each time.

I took very few notes at the start, and after 4-6 weeks of fermenting/conditioning, I couldn't remember what I did in one brew that turned out fantastic vs the other one that didn't hit the mark.

 

[marshbrewer]

I go for the 'watch road cycling on eurosport long relaxing boil' option.

I go for the "how long is this blooming teams meeting going to go on for?" length of boil.

Actually, I boil for a terribly unfashionable 60-90 mins (or longer).

 

[Sadfield]

When people have done things that resulted in an inferior brew, they have openly said so, so listen and learn. But a shorter/longer time (and chill/no-chill) doesn't instantly mean inferior beer, despite what some loud zealots would want you too believe.

Yet this is a viewpoint that only focuses in one direction.

The OP asked what factors are affected by different boil times, specifically 60 and 90 minutes. Somehow the responses completely ignoring this question, only chiming in to state they boil for a time less than asked about, aren't the zealots.

 

[Crappyfish]

I've dropped down to 45 minute boil and to be honest really no difference. Maybe because I make simple beers now.

 

[gavp1979]

There is nothing more certain in life than death, taxes and any thread mentioning shorter boils on this forum quickly degrading into a slanging match by the same people claiming that everyone else is doing it wrong and obviously have low standards

 

[Sadfield]

The thread wasn't about short boils though. The title is '60 min vs 90 min boils', but the 'same people' can help jumping in to extoll the virtues of their way of doing things. Without answering the question asked.

Laughable that they then get upset when challenged.

Brew what you want, how you want.

 

[foxy]

This.
If there was one right answer, then there would be no disagreement in the first place.

Well there is a right answer, but there are those who refuse to take any notice of the empirical evidence which supports a minimum 60 minute boil. The only ones who state otherwise are from the home brewing fraternity. If you are brewing it for yourself then it doesn't matter, boil or simmer it for as long as you like.
I would also guess that those advocating shorter boil times have never had their beers evaluated by a certified beer judge who would be able to point out any flaws in their process.
The thing that makes it wrong is advocating shorter boils because this is what they do! There are new brewers who don't just want to make beer, but want to make a beer they can enter into a competition and hopefully do well. One of the best learning curves is getting ones beer evaluated and taking note on the advice given on the score sheet.

From what I can tell, most homebrewers boil unnecessarily hard. Industry guidance is to aim for a boil-off rate of 4-10%. With a normal 5 gallon brew and a 13A element, you can get 10-15% boil off easily. Those with gas burners get even more - as high as 20 or ever 25% from some .

In the case of the boil, comparing industry guidance of an evaporation rate of 4-10% is comparing apples with oranges when trying to apply that to a home brew scale. Commercial kettles can achieve those figures easily because of the designs of the kettle and other equipment employed.
Those home brewers who want to save on money spent on the boil would be better off covering the kettle for 30 min with a gentle boil, then the final 30 mins a harder boil with the lid off.
Now it doesn't matter to me how long an individual would like to boil, its entirely up to them. All I will say to new brewers is research all aspects of brewing from those who are qualified to give advice.