Jump to content
Rick II

Best can to use for lager.

Recommended Posts

G'day, 

I'm currently cold crashing a coopers lager tin that I made into a mid strength. I added 600g of LDM (kegging), and used W34/70. 

Its been cold crashing since Thursday night and I tasted it just now to see if that sulphur smell had gone yet. The smell is still present but is definitely better then when I took the FG samples. 

The beer however tastes like very slightly bitter water. 

Is this because I have tried to make a mid strength or is the lager tin just not great? I don't really see how adding another 400g of LDM would make it that much better. 

 

Which would be a better can to use? Probably won't try to make a mid strength again. 

Edited by Rick II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's the OS lager then it is pretty boring apparently, as it's designed to turn out a beer like the mainstream megaswill beers. The Euro lager kit or the pilsner kit would probably make a better beer with more flavour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hear what you say Kelsey, but would differ a little. I'm actually drinking a Coopers OS Lager as I write this, and I'm not about to tip it down the sink. As a moneyless pensioner, I don't always have a lot of choice. But I do use BE2 in it along with the yeast on the tin. IMHO, it certainly tastes better than megaswill, I'm a bit biased of course. But it does have a slightly better mouth feel than mega. In fact I had some XXXX heavy at a mates place today around lunch time and whilst it is better than the mid strength products, it is still flavoured water at just under 5%. When you then move to the Coopers Lager, the difference is noticeable.  But it's all personal tastes. But I must add Rick, I wouldn't be bothered trying to reduce the strength of it. If you do it again, make it full strength and think about a box of BE2 to go with it and just use the yeast provided. I know it's not a real lager yeast, but it does the job pretty well.

Cheers

Bill

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree it probably turns out better than real megaswill, plus you can always add hops to it as well. 

I guess it depends what sort of lager you want. My taste is all the traditional Euro and Czech lagers and pilsners, so that's what I always brew. I did a fourex bitter clone just to see if I could, which turned out close to the original. Mine had slightly more hop flavour, maybe more like the bitter of old. I don't mind it on the wooden kegs at the brekky creek hotel, it's better there than the normal stuff, but overall I'd prefer a more flavourful lager.

Edited by Otto Von Blotto
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rick.

I've brewed both the Coopers European Lager & the fairly recently released Coopers Golden Crown Lager as midstrength beers for my father who only drinks light to midstrength beers these days.

Of course I sampled numerous glasses of each. ?

I thought both kits produced lovely lager flavours & represented their specific type of lager very well even at a midstrength level.

I give the edge to the European lager kit though, as I was very impressed with it's flavours & my brewing of each had this kit deliver the better head retention of the two.

Just my 2 cents.

Lusty.

Edited by Beerlust
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really liked the Pilsner kit on the couple of times I used it. You could hop it up a little like a new world pilsner if you want to make it a little more exciting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Hairy said:

I really liked the Pilsner kit on the couple of times I used it. You could hop it up a little like a new world pilsner if you want to make it a little more exciting.

I did 3 of these last winter (TC Pils kit + 1.5kg light LME made up to 21 litres) with a flameout addition and dry hop with 3 different varietals (Topaz, Summer and Centennial). All 3 were nice, with the Summer batch standing out for its gentle lychee flavour. The pils kit made a great base, so I can also recommend it. 

Cheers,

John

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2018 at 7:10 AM, Hairy said:

I really liked the Pilsner kit on the couple of times I used it. You could hop it up a little like a new world pilsner if you want to make it a little more exciting.

I like the Pilsner kit too, but we're talking about a lager here aren't we? ?

Cheers,

Lusty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Rick

A big plus one for the Euro Lager kit. I've only brewed a handful of true lagers but the most memorable was the Euro Kit. 

I have to say that the Euro kit was better than the All Grain Lagers that I have made. 

I did the Coopers Oktoberfest https://www.diybeer.com/au/recipe/oktoberfest.html and it had everyone talking about how great a beer it was. Later on I did a Partial Mash using the Euro and it was just as good.

 

Cheers & Beers

Scottie

Valley Brew

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

Pilsner is lager ya clown ?

A Pilsner shares a common yeast, but that's pretty much where the similarities end.

If you ever sign on to be a beer judge Kelsey, make sure to take a big, long pair of floppy shoes with you on the day. ?

A lager is a lager. A pilsner is a pilsner.

Cheers,

Lusty.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m with Kelsey. A Pilsner is a Lager.

And it is more of a Lager than the OS Lager ?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats like saying a stout isn't an ale because all it shares is the yeast. You obviously haven't done much research into lagers. Pilsner was the first ever pale golden lager brewed in the world, with lager yeast smuggled into Prague from Germany. 

Just as you have many sub categories of ale, you have many sub categories of lager. Pilsner is one of them. It just happens to have originated in Plzen, hence its name.

Cheers

Kelsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

Thats like saying a stout isn't an ale because all it shares is the yeast.

To the contrary, we both know it is because (in most cases) it shares the same strain of yeast.

But if I walk into a bar & ask for an ale, I certainly don't expect a stout to be placed in front of me. Just as if I ask for a lager, would I expect a pilsner to be placed in front of me.

9 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

Pilsner was the first ever pale golden lager brewed in the world, with lager yeast smuggled into Prague from Germany. 

Beer styles have moved on from the simplistic classifications of the 1800's. ?

Cheers,

Lusty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been a while since I looked at the BJCP Style Guidelines but I just did and noticed the following:

1. There is no beer style called 'Lager'.

2. The old Bohemian Pilsner is now referred to as 'Czech Premium Pale Lager' (Style 3B)

I wasn't aware of point 2 above until just now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does it? There are numerous strains of ale yeast just as there are numerous strains of lager yeast. That means nothing. A stout, or any other ale could be fermented with any one of them. The pilsner yeast strains are still lager strains. Even the names of them say that e.g. 2001 Urquell Lager. Other than specialty yeast the main two are ale and lager yeast.

Beer styles may have evolved but it doesn't change the fact that pilsner was the first pale lager ever brewed. Lager is simply a category of beers fermented with lager yeast and cold stored for longer periods before consumption. There are only two main categories being ales and lagers. There's no separate one for pilsners. Pilsners fall under the lager category as that is how they're brewed. Just because they didn't originate in Germany doesn't mean they're not lagers. 

You should research things a bit more before making baseless claims mate ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

How does it? There are numerous strains of ale yeast just as there are numerous strains of lager yeast. That means nothing. A stout, or any other ale could be fermented with any one of them. The pilsner yeast strains are still lager strains. Even the names of them say that e.g. 2001 Urquell Lager. Other than specialty yeast the main two are ale and lager yeast.

Beer styles may have evolved but it doesn't change the fact that pilsner was the first pale lager ever brewed. Lager is simply a category of beers fermented with lager yeast and cold stored for longer periods before consumption. There are only two main categories being ales and lagers. There's no separate one for pilsners. Pilsners fall under the lager category as that is how they're brewed. Just because they didn't originate in Germany doesn't mean they're not lagers. 

You should research things a bit more before making baseless claims mate ?

No offence meant mate, but in a commercial sense, I've worked in the industry for around 18 years & been present for more information & tasting sessions than I can remember across a wide range of alcohol types & categories. I don't need to research much at all these days, I've lived it for 18yrs. ?

From a home brewing standpoint, the currently accepted 2015 BJCP guidelines Hairy just referred to that have been re-classified from the 2008 guidelines are a very true representation (IMHO) of the various styles created from TWO, yes TWO strains (being Ale & Lager) yeast (in all their diversities).

Having drank the Urquell numerous times, I'm not the least bit surprised that it has been re-classified as a Pale Lager (as Hairy mentioned).

The combination of predominantly malt grists, & to some degree the hops used & in isolated cases the mash methods, define the title of the beer you are drinking, not ENTIRELY the yeast strains used to ferment them.

Is a Pilsner style beer brewed with a lager yeast, yes it is. Is a Pilsner a Lager in the modern interpretations, NO it is NOT for the reasons I have outlined.

Given your affinity for the ex-Czech Pilsner style, perhaps a more thorough read of the current style guidelines might be worth your time.

I stand by my previous comments.

Cheers & good brewing,

Lusty.

 

Edited by Beerlust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None taken, and I stand by mine as well. Whether they want to rename Bohemian pilsner a "pale lager" or not, the wording in the guidelines remains exactly the same as it was in the 2008 edition. I have read it. Nothing's changed other than its name. It was, is and always will be a pilsner. But a pilsner is just a style of lager, just like Munich Helles, dunkel or Dortmunder export are styles of lager, and stout, pale ale or IPA are styles of ales. There is no seperate category for pilsners that suggests that they're not lagers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to leave our disagreement here & accept this is one of the very few topics that you & I just disagree on.

Not bad for 6 odd years of us both being on the forum. ☺️

Cheers & good brewing mate.

Lusty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be contradicting yourself. You keep trying to pretend that pilsners aren't lagers yet cite the very style guidelines that specifically say that they are. 

Stella Artois is brewed with saaz hops and lager yeast and malt, and rightly considered a lager. Why would a traditional pilsner which uses practically the same ingredients and process not be?

I'll concede that pilsners taste different to other lagers, but that's the whole point. They were the original pale lager, all others are simply regional imitations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...