Crash cooling and/or separate secondary FV?

[magick777]

I have 2 kits on the go, both started just over a week ago and fermentation is slowing down. I don't have a usable hydrometer, so my normal procedure in the past has been to leave it alone until there are no bubbles from the airlock for a while, plus a day or two, then rack it into another bucket, batch prime and bottle. That's worked fairly well for a few batches, but the bottles do take a long time (3 months plus) to come into condition.

I note that a number of people here seem to favour racking the beer once the primary fermentation has finished. Does this offer any clear advantage over leaving it alone? What is the expected impact (on flavour, clarity, or conditioning period) as compared with just letting it finish in primary, then racking it before bottling?

And a similar question regarding crash cooling; I have previously survived without but I observe that it seems to be the accepted wisdom among many. The limit to what I can achieve is to move the fermenters from kitchen to garage, which will cool them somewhat but not by any spectacular amount. Is this likely to offer any benefit? Comments invited... the kits in question are a Brewferm Pils and a Bulldog Hammer of Thor, if that makes any difference.

 

[thebarnsleybrewer]

I always just leave my brews in the Primary for 3 weeks, transfer to another vessel for batch priming and bottle from there. but then again all I've done so far is Ales and IPA's etc. my next one in the pipeline is a Czech Pilsner, and seen as Clarity is King for something like that I'm planning 2 weeks in Primary, 1 week in secondary, Crash for a couple of days (when i say crash I mean move to the garage like you) then bottle from there.

I think that more involved process depends on what beer you are brewing, and not necessary in the majority of cases.

the 3 weeks primary and bottle from there (foul proof method) has never let me down anyway.

 

[magick777]

Yup, 3 weeks in primary then straight to prime & bottle is what the last few brews have had (including 2 Czech Pilsners as it goes... both slow to condition but came out fine using pretty much exactly the same method you describe). Never let me down, either.

I'm wondering when (and if) these other methods represent any improvement on the above. I can't see an obvious point in racking it to a secondary when I'm not (apparently) getting off flavours from beer left on the trub for three weeks, but http://morebeer.com/content/homebrew-off-flavors suggests that it can be the cause of some problems. Problems that I'm not apparently experiencing in the finished brew, but I wonder if the conditioning time might be reduced by racking the beer off the trub. My gut feeling is that it increases the risk of problems and I don't want to do so unless and until I understand what the dead yeast is doing to my beer and when is the right time - if there is one - to rack it.

Cold crashing makes sense to me if it works, putting clearer beer into the bottles can only be a good thing. Might try two weeks indoors, a week outdoors, then prime and bottle. Wonder if a night outdoors makes any difference? The temperature is probably less stable outside than inside, so I wonder if it makes any sense in my situation... tempted to try it and see what happens.

 

[DethApostle]

Mine is 2 weeks in Primary, 3-5 days crashcooling (still in primary), rack to bottling bucket and bottle.
(then condition for 2 weeks in the warm and a minimum of 3 in the cool)

DA