WHC Bond

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Okey dokey, which is why my original post said "I thought Bond was just S-04? If it is, it isn't Whitbread Dry, that's an internet myth" There is also supporting evidence for this, such as CMLs website which says it's an S-04 equivalent (in bold letters, no less).

Look, I'm not slagging it off or criticising it in any way, I'm glad it works for you. I'm just saying, if it's S-04 then it isn't a historical Whitbread strain, which might be useful info for some.
 
it's an S-04 equivalent

Exactly, it's an equivalent which does not mean it is exactly the same same strain.

There are plenty of yeasts out there that are 'equivalent'. WLP-007, Wyeast 1098, Safale S-04 and WHC Bond are all considered equivalent and all have broadly similar fermentation characteristics.

I also see nothing on the CML site that says 'Bond is equivalent to S-04'. 🤷‍♂️

https://www.crossmyloofbrew.co.uk/yeast-specs
 
Last edited:
I've checked the info on origins that I was given for writing the TMM page, some of the info from WHC states Whitbread origin and some compare to S-04 which I believe is done so that its an easy comparison to something most people know or have used.
 
Packed into flip top bottles; batch primed with sugar calculated by ab online primary calculator.

The issue isn't the bottles didn't carbonate, just that they were slower than usual to do so.

The high flocculation rate was almost certainly part of it.
What temp was it stored at? And was that temp controlled, or was it just a warm place?
 
I've brewed with Bond (or 'British Pub Ale' as it's now called, presumably following some threatening letters) but not bottle-conditioned with it.

It is an aggressively high flocculator - I was shocked at how quickly it dropped out of suspension during fermentation (I have a conical so can easily take small samples on a daily basis).

I suspect what you're finding is that there is a scarcity of yeast left in suspension for a secondary fermentation. I know some breweries use specific bottle conditioning yeasts to get around this problem.
Like you, I don't do bottle conditioning anymore, I used bond for the first time just over a week ago and was surprised how quickly it drops. I would normally be adding some Brausol finings but it won't be necessary this time.
 
I've got a couple of packs on the way direct from WHC Lab along with some of their Saturated it'll be a couple of months before I get to use the Bond and even longer for the Saturated but I'm hoping that Bond isn't a clone of S-04 as I'm not a fan of the flavours I get from it.

Cheers Tom
 
I've got a couple of packs on the way direct from WHC Lab along with some of their Saturated it'll be a couple of months before I get to use the Bond and even longer for the Saturated but I'm hoping that Bond isn't a clone of S-04 as I'm not a fan of the flavours I get from it.

Cheers Tom
I've only brewed with S04 once - about 5 years ago - so very limited experience. Certainly the beer I made with Bond was a lot better and to my taste, although there are obviously many other variables in terms of recipe, method, my experience etc

I think Bond is a very good dry yeast for English styles. The slow carbonation- which doesn't seem to be a uniform experience - was my only reason to question re-using but it's not a deal breaker either.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top