Lager vs ale malt mash efficiency

[Sandimas]

A follow-up to my recent posting about lager yeast.

I brewed my Bohemian Pilsner yesterday and way overshot the OG. I usually get 68% mash efficiency BIAB with Maris Otter ale malt, it's been consistent in over 100 brews, and this is what I used to construct my Pilsner recipe. However using Bohemian Pilsner malt I got 77% efficiency, OG 1055 vs planned OG1048.

Is this normal with Pilsner malt? Must admit that the mash seemed a lot more "smoothe" than with Maris Otter so I'm not surprised more sugars were extracted from the grain. This is my first AG Pilsner.

 

[foxy]

If you made a SMASH with just 2 row ale malt I would think you would get higher efficiency than the Pilsner, or at least the same. I presume it was 100% Pilsner malt in the recipe. Then again it does depend on who the maltster is

 

[An Ankoù]

I always found pilsner malts to yield a bit less than pale ale malts. In the days when I used to use "extra pale" pale ale malts, I found they would yield less, too. I always thought that they were kilned less to keep the colour low and therefore contained a little more moisture.

 

[Sandimas]

Hmm interesting. I usually use Maris Otter for my ales, from a variety of sources, and always get 68% with BIAB.

This was my first lager using Weyermans Bohemian Pilsner malt with a bit of Carapils in there too. I guess I need to do another to see if my 77% was a fluke, but as I've not got a brewfridge the house is unlikely to be cold enough to do another until next winter. It's currently sat on the floor of my north-facing loo with the radiator turned off at 13C, it's usually only possible to keep it that cool Jan-Mar.

 

[2Beers]

A follow-up to my recent posting about lager yeast.

I brewed my Bohemian Pilsner yesterday and way overshot the OG. I usually get 68% mash efficiency BIAB with Maris Otter ale malt, it's been consistent in over 100 brews, and this is what I used to construct my Pilsner recipe. However using Bohemian Pilsner malt I got 77% efficiency, OG 1055 vs planned OG1048.

Is this normal with Pilsner malt? Must admit that the mash seemed a lot more "smoothe" than with Maris Otter so I'm not surprised more sugars were extracted from the grain. This is my first AG Pilsner.

Did you step mash? I always get an increase in og if I do.

 

[The Baron]

I find Pale malts yield more than lager malts IMO

 

[2Beers]

I agree monsieur Baron. I usually worry so much more about pils/lager mashes that I end up with higher efficiencies by virtue of the extra effort I indulge in these exotica.

 

[Bolsover Brewer]

I would have thought you would get better efficiency with MO as the DP is higher than the Pilsner malt.

 

[foxbat]

A follow-up to my recent posting about lager yeast.

I brewed my Bohemian Pilsner yesterday and way overshot the OG. I usually get 68% mash efficiency BIAB with Maris Otter ale malt, it's been consistent in over 100 brews, and this is what I used to construct my Pilsner recipe. However using Bohemian Pilsner malt I got 77% efficiency, OG 1055 vs planned OG1048.

Is this normal with Pilsner malt? Must admit that the mash seemed a lot more "smoothe" than with Maris Otter so I'm not surprised more sugars were extracted from the grain. This is my first AG Pilsner.

My last 3 BIAB mash efficiencies with Weyermann Bohemian Pils: 76.5%, 76.3%, 74.5%
And with Crisp Maris Otter: 81.8%, 81.9%, 90.7%

All recipes had at least 80% of the stated base malt. No idea why I got 90.7% with one of the MO recipes. The only difference with that one was that it was from a different harvest year to the two others. It was also 97.5% base malt.

 

[peebee]

I would have thought you would get better efficiency with MO as the DP is higher than the Pilsner malt.

No it's not. Or what I should say; depends on the source of your figures.

Not so long ago I was trying to use DP to predict mash outcomes in a marginal situation, and it just wouldn't predict what could be expected at all. A lot of maltsters just don't make that information available, so I had done what many might and searched on the Net (or used settings in a recipe builder). Many of the recommendations (and recipe builders) were coming from the States. Here's what Graham Wheeler had to say (over 11 years ago for obvious reasons):

Even today, the difference in nitrogen or protein content between American and British malt is huge:

Briess pale malt - protein 11.7% - Diastatic power 85
Briess two-row - protein 12% - Diastatic power 140
Briess six-row - protein 13% - Diastatic power 160

Compare with British malt:
Fawcett pale malt - protein 9% - Diastatic power 50

The higher the protein content the more enzymes there are and the higher will be the diastatic power; kilning destroys some of the enzymes, so malt colour also comes into the equation. As you can see, Briess six-row has more than three times the diastatic power of poor old British malt. So the six-row will convert much faster than the Fawcett, presumably three times faster, or will convert a good deal more adjunct, or a combination of both.

Don't we wish we had six-row barley to compete? Oh, that's right, we do have six-row barley and we do with it what's best for the stuff ... feed it to cattle.

(Full forum thread from Mr Wheeler here: Old recipes from Shut up about Barclay Perkins - Home Brew Forum (Warning: Needs a strong constitution to read it).