Whirlflock or not?

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

BREWERS DROOP

Landlord.
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
605
Reaction score
175
Location
Burton on Trent
Hi all
Got a question,5 mins before end of boil I add whirlflock tablets,but I use clarity ferm in my cooled wort,I'm thinking the tablet is not needed,what do others think.

Cheers
 
I think they do similar things and so you probably don't need to do both. They may target slightly different proteins at a technical/chemical level but the aim is similar. Whirlfloc or Irish moss would be a lot cheaper but other than that I'm not sure there's much difference. Others with more experience (I've never used clarity ferm) may disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Clarity ferm was made specifically to deal with chill haze, I'm not 100% on this but I would use whirfloc only or both as I don't think clarity ferm is up for getting rid of a huge amount of stuff than gets left in the boiler that whirfloc does its more of a finisher if its still not perfect.
 
Sorry I don't think I explained that very well, basically whirfloc makes beer clearer in a fairly all round sense while clarity ferm is specifically design to remove chill haze not as a general beer fining.
 
I use ultramos simular to irishmos (= salt mixed with chloride ions), it will reduce the amount sediment / protein mixing with your yeast and will give you a cleaner fermentation. Also your dead yeast cells will better go to the bottom (excuse my english). You will however get almost the same result with adding a little CaCl2 to your beer.

My opinion is better get the proteins out of your beer asap and therefore I use ultramos
 
Fortunately, I've managed to brew on the basis that "Gravity+Time Clears Beer" by using a Protafloc tablet, added for the last 10 minutes of the boil.

I've not seen a need to add anything else. :thumb:
 
The reason I use clarity ferm is because of gluten,but I have been using both which I'll probably not bother using the tablet and see the results,I always cold crash and don't have a problem with clarity,it's just one less additive.
 
If you want to remove gluten I would not skip the whirfloc as you want to get as much protein out of the beer as possible. Clarity firm is not a magic destroys all gluten product it just cleans up the last few proteins left.
 
I would use both they serve different purposes.
The whirlfloc helps to drop out proteins during the boil.
 
Fortunately, I've managed to brew on the basis that "Gravity+Time Clears Beer" by using a Protafloc tablet, added for the last 10 minutes of the boil.

I've not seen a need to add anything else. :thumb:

Finings make a lot of difference if you want a Lager depending on the yeast (WLP830) i guess. Saying that though if you left it long enough in the fridge would probably be the same. I just drink too much to hog my fridge up for 6 weeks.
 
Finings make a lot of difference if you want a Lager depending on the yeast (WLP830) i guess. Saying that though if you left it long enough in the fridge would probably be the same. I just drink too much to hog my fridge up for 6 weeks.

I did two identical (as near as I could manage) brews of Vienna Lager.

One was carbonated for a week then Cold Crashed for one week at one degree then conditioned for ten weeks.

The other was traditionally lagered for ten weeks at six degrees then carbonated and conditioned for four weeks.

I couldn't discern any noticeable difference in the clarity, looks, taste, aroma or mouth feel between the two brews; and they were both superb drinks. :thumb:

In future, I will Cold Crash all lagers for a week after carbonation and let them condition on the shelf. The conditioning will hopefully be for a minimum of four weeks, but longer if I can keep my hands off them. :thumb:
 
I did two identical (as near as I could manage) brews of Vienna Lager.

One was carbonated for a week then Cold Crashed for one week at one degree then conditioned for ten weeks.

The other was traditionally lagered for ten weeks at six degrees then carbonated and conditioned for four weeks.

I couldn't discern any noticeable difference in the clarity, looks, taste, aroma or mouth feel between the two brews; and they were both superb drinks. :thumb:

In future, I will Cold Crash all lagers for a week after carbonation and let them condition on the shelf. The conditioning will hopefully be for a minimum of four weeks, but longer if I can keep my hands off them. :thumb:

Sorry to be a bit thick Dutto but have i got this right, with your larger you say ferment it and then carbonate. Then you cold crash, I thought that cold crashing was done before carbonating to assist in clearing of brew?
 
I know, but I had two reasons for doing it that way:

1. Carbonating gets the yeast active again so I figured that Cold Crashing to clear the brew would be better after Carbonation.

2. I was running out of time (we had a ferry booked) and the fridge was already at fermenting temperature when I kegged the lager. Therefore, it was a lot quicker to Carbonate and then Cold Crash. It saved having to wait a day for the fridge to cool down and then wait another day for it to warm up again.

It may not be "Brewing as we know it!" but as I don't normally Cold Crash anything I was very happy with the result. :thumb:
 
Nice tip carbonate before conditioningwould never have thought of it:thumb:
 
Finings make a lot of difference if you want a Lager depending on the yeast (WLP830) i guess. Saying that though if you left it long enough in the fridge would probably be the same. I just drink too much to hog my fridge up for 6 weeks.

Would be interested how your Jaipur clone goes??
 

Latest posts

Back
Top