Stainless Steel Barrel Fermenter 42L

[wazzamcg]

Hi

Newbie here getting started again.

I have brewed before about 25yrs ago. I am going to give it another shot. I have had a kegerator for just over a year now and want to have a go at brewing again. 

I was wondering if anyone thinks the following stainless steel barrel is a good idea? I see a few pluses for it.

It's 42L so will make 2 @ 18L kegs.
The boiler is the fermenter - no poring, less cleaning, less contamination
Stainless steel is a big tick, cleaning - no scratches etc
Lid can be sealed 
It may be possible to put enough pressure in the barrel to transfer the brew into kegs via CO2.
30cm Diameter Base - good for stove top
60cm Height - should be able to fit 2 in a upright freezer
Reasonably priced at $129
The dude in China I may buy this off will throw in a extra food grade seal and lid - I want the 2nd lid for transferring into my kegs...maybe.

What are your thoughts?

Cheers,
Warren

[Otto Von Blotto]

Only disadvantage I can see is with it being a boiler and fermenter in one unit. You'll be fermenting on the hot break which is not very good practice, unless you are able to drain the trub out after the boil and leave the wort behind. 

[PXR-5]

Looks Cool, but what about the weight. Moving it to a fridge would be a 2 man job.

I use a 60l FV, but can fill it while it sits in the fridge. It stays there until I keg it. I only have to lift about 12KG in total.

 

John

[Otto Von Blotto]

I don't think 42 litre capacity will give you two kegs worth if you use it as a boiler and fermenter in one either, or even if it was transferred to another fermenter. I'd also be surprised if a standard stove top would bring that much wort to a decent rolling boil at all. I use a 40L urn and if I really push it I could probably get 28-29 litres of wort out of it but that'd be about the maximum. The pre-boil volume will have to be a few litres less to prevent boilovers, maybe more with the short and fat shape of it, and with that shape you'll probably boil off more than an urn or Robobrew etc. as well as there's a larger surface area on top for it to evaporate off. Then you've got kettle trub loss and fermenter trub loss which would probably be around 6 litres all up. You may only end up with 20 odd litres of beer by the end of the whole process.

I honestly think there are better options out there that are more geared towards brewing and will ultimately deliver you a better outcome. I don't see any advantage in using the boiler as a fermenter partly for the reason I wrote above (premature staling can be caused by that) and partly because if your cleaning and sanitising regime is done properly, along with pitching a decent amount of yeast in each batch, you won't end up with infections anyway. There's plenty of us brewing all grain on various set ups that use a separate boiler and fermenter and producing excellent beers without problems.

[Mikes15]

How much is the 35L one would make a nice FV if nothing else, & surely that's not $129 inc shipping?

[wazzamcg]

MIKES15

 

[wazzamcg]

Otto Von Blotto seems I need to research a tad more before I ask my next few questions back to you  - I appreciate your experience and guidance.  

As a guideline for what I want to do - I am not ready to mash etc - just wanting to do the boring Malt, dry hop, yeast thing - does the equipment I am suggesting get me over the line to do that or can you suggest better equipment in mind to do that job?

Waz 

[Mikes15]

If you mean your just doing kits / extract brewing then yup, drill a couple of hole, fit a tap & air lock an your laughing, just not to hard when you have a hernia from trying to pick up a metal barrel with 42kgs of beer in it mind

Not sure what else you can get to do a 42L batch at a better price.

Don't see why you couldn't set up a pressure kit to brew & transfer to the legs.

Given the price of actual SS fermenters, let alone conical ones the 28l ones have to be a option worth looking at to replace a standard plastic FV.

[Otto Von Blotto]

If you're just doing kits or extracts without boiling anything then it will work although so would using a much cheaper option for a fermenter. That choice is up to you. If you do small hop boils then an 8-10 litre pot would work. You only need to boil about 5 litres. I used to use a 12L stock pot.

If you ever do get into all grain brewing then you definitely want a separate boiler and fermenter. 

[wazzamcg]

I will be doing extracts/ dry hopping etc initially, I still want to boil for minimum 45 minutes or will that be off track?  MIKES15 - you have talked me into getting the  2@ 22l or 28L,  which do you guys think is the better size if I'm brewing to make a 19L Keg?  I'm thinking 28L to allow for trub and krausen?  They are $83 here.

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AU-22-28-35L-Stainless-Steel-Barrel-Drum-Wine-Beer-Whiskey-Storage-Oil-Rice-Tank/222983270860?_trksid=p2485497.m4902.l9144

I was also after your thoughts on a J shaped Dip tube to miss the trub - this is the reason why I want the spare lid.  I am hoping I can force the good beer out using C02.  Is it remotely possible that it could be a boiler/fermenter and keg with a change of lids?

[Otto Von Blotto]

If you're doing extracts and dry hopping you don't have to boil it at all. 

22 litres might be a bit small, I'd go the 28 to allow for krausen. If you put a tap in high enough at the bottom you won't need a J shaped tube, but that would work as well if the flow was slow.

You can use the boiler as the fermenter, probably not a problem with extracts but if you do any all grain brewing, be aware that you will be fermenting on hot break, which is poor brewing practice and could well result in a less than desirable outcome, especially if the beer is aged for a period of time.

 

[porschemad911]

Hello, 

You will get all sorts of dire warnings on the internet from people about things they've never tried themselves. 

Have a listen to this for someone's personal experience fermenting in the kettle: http://traffic.libsyn.com/basicbrewing/bbr03-09-17kettlefermenting.mp3

I've never done it myself, but I wouldn't rule it out without trying it at least once. 

Cheers, 

John

[Otto Von Blotto]

That's because brewing science has shown that fermenting on hot break is bad for the beer. One personal experience doesn't debunk the science. Probably fine if the beer is consumed early but otherwise not worth the risk. Better to use good practice on every batch.

Besides, it's counterproductive to boil it for an hour or more to separate the wort from the break and then just leave it all in there anyway.

[Wobbly74]

We have to be careful about taking science as an absolute. Science doesn't prove  anything. The scientific method itself can only disprove things and postulate theorems. Once a theorem goes without being disproved for long enough it eventually becomes accepted as reliable, but always subject to being disproven. 

"No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right;
a single experiment can prove me wrong."

Albert Einstein

The problem we have is the amount of reliable research done at a homebrew level, so we rely on a mix of commercial research and less formal 'trials' done by groups on enthusiasts. Take them for what you will, but there are a number of these trials that go counter to the postulated theorem about fermenting on hot break, particularly around head retention, clarity and fermentation performance. There is also a distinct lack of data on long term storage. 

Part of the problem is that some of the findings relate to non-empirical observations eg taste which are highly subjective and not reliable. But even practitioners known for their less than well respected methods found effects on stability with fermenting on hb. 

But maybe over time we will actually come to think that there are some forms which lend themselves to it that favour some of the potential up sides (eg hoppy beers that are consumed before other aspects of their make up affect their effective shelf life such as hop flavour / aroma stability), and many which do not (such as lagers, dark beers, barley wines, sours etc that require of benefit from long term storage). To get to this point needs us to remain open to considering these avenues though. 

As an anecdote, what I brewed yesterday ended up with a lot of trub in the fermenter. Not from design but because of a screw up with the new lauter helix I'm trying. Will be interesting to see how it fares and ages, though it's a pale ale so I'll no doubt just add to the litany of anecdotal findings which don't include shelf life...

[Otto Von Blotto]

I've done it before as well not intentionally, but I did drink the beer quite early. It was ok, but nothing great. Another time I forgot kettle finings and the beer was shit by comparison to the same ones brewed with them. Again anecdotal so doesn't mean a whole lot, however, I wouldn't expect commercial breweries would spend the time and money separating hot break if there wasn't a damn good reason behind doing it.

[wazzamcg]

They probably do it for consistent results by removing variables.

[Worthog]

A lot of science going on here for a newbie who wants to boil and ferment in the same container.. The process can/should be as simple as King Ruddagers youtube videos on here 

Minimal expense, basic process, good beer.

Cheers

 

 

[Otto Von Blotto]

They do it because of stringent quality standards and striving for the best beer possible (I know a lot are boring but they are very well brewed), and allowing break material into the fermenter creates a chance of the quality being inconsistent. Same reason I keep as much out of the fermenter as I can.

The process is simple even without fermenting in the boiler. It's not really that difficult to drain wort to a fermenter, is it? 

Anyway, I'm not saying nobody can do it, all I'm saying is fermenting on hot break is not best practice and may cause problems in the finished beer. I'd rather not take the chance but if someone else wants to that's their call. That doesn't change the fact that it is poor practice. 

[Wobbly74]

One man's poor practice may be another's experimentation though. I'm not for or against, but what is considered to be good and bad practice does change so I'm not sure it's as black and white as that. People said the exact same thing about no-chilling. 

[Otto Von Blotto]

I am against fermentation on hot break, but I'm not telling that they can't do it, just noting the risks involved. There are better ways to improve fermentation performance, clarity and head retention than chucking all the hot break into the fermenter.

Personally I want the best beer I can brew so I try to use the best practices I can at home to negate those risks as much as I can. It's worked out well so far. 

I have read about the shock horror around no chilling when it first became popular, most of it seemed to be about it causing botulism rather than producing a lesser quality beer.

[joolbag]

How about the old "to create the happiest pale ales and IPA you must chill wort below 80C and hopstand. Impossible without a chiller".

 

Well THANK YOU To the bright spark who suggested cube hopping to me. I agree that a hopstand is the way to get insane amount of hop flavour and aroma into a beer without adding bitterness.  Hopstanding in a cube works totally fine from my experience!

[Otto Von Blotto]

I do think chilling would be the best option for pale ales and IPA etc. but I also think cube hopping is a viable method with no chilling to achieve a similar outcome. It's never gonna be the same, but it does work and I've noticed improvement in my pales from doing it. I'll be trying increased cube hop additions in future batches, perhaps reducing the late boil and flameout additions a bit to compensate.

However, there is a difference between improvising the hop additions for no chilling and adopting a process that the general consensus is that it's not a good one. No chilling doesn't really affect the quality although some say you don't get a good cold break, whereas the hot break has the potential to cause problems.

[wazzamcg]

I am pretty well convinced to get rid of the hot break, therefore, will be draining the wort into a fermenter.  Not sure on fermenter now, but all good.

Have you heard any bad reports about these suckers?  or do you a recommended Stainless steel urn of your choice?

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Apuro-Manual-Fill-Hot-Water-Urn-Stainless-Steel-40-Ltr-50-Available/222996875835?hash=item33eba64a3b:g:P34AAOSwN2VbBfec

In Brisbane local pick up.

 

 

[Otto Von Blotto]

No experience with those ones sorry mate. I have a 40L Crown urn that has been faultless in the 6 years I've had it. It is more expensive though. They were $250 I think when I bought mine but have since gone up in price to near on $300. I always recommend them but of course budget has to be considered too.

Any fermenter will work, a Coopers one or a Bunnings water drum or one from a brew shop. I have a brew shop one which is fine. Or you can go all out with shiny stainless steel conicals. Choice is entirely yours. You'd probably want it around the 30L mark which most of them seem to be anyway.

If you're doing extract you don't need to boil the entire volume of wort anyway, so you could grab the fermenter first and then when you get to doing full volume boils invest in an urn of some sort. Again up to you though.

[wazzamcg]

My long term strategy has changed, I am pretty sure I will get the 40L Urn - get some Bunnings 25L drums - but make sure I can fit 3 to 4 in my standing fermenter/freezer.  Thanks for all the advice on the journey.