malt vs sugar vs dextrose

[harryup]

Hi all,

I'm new to the brewing game, (never put one down), but got a Coopers kit and gonna have a go.

Tried a mate's Coopers draught and it's quite OK but I like a maltier beer with a better "kick" to it so my questions are:

Can I add malt extract to the brew and if so, do I have to reduce the amount of sugar?

I don't want to buy the Coopers adders in tins, rather do it myself.

I've read that adding dextrose instead of sugar to the bottles adds a creamier head. T or F?

How can I get the alcohol content up to around 4 - 4.5%?

Which brew can would be best for a first crack at it bearing in mind I like a malty beer?

Thanks for any input (-;

 

[RonaldW2]

I would say don't or it is better to not use sugar. Use dextrose or malt it makes a better beer.

You can use just malt with the kit or a 50/50 malt dextrose.

But there are more experienced then me.

By the way welcome.

woodie

[Beerlust]

G'day harryup, & welcome to the forum.

Can I add malt extract to the brew and if so' date=' do I have to reduce the amount of sugar?[/quote']

That depends on a couple of things. 1. The ABV% you are looking for, & 2. What sort of flavour you want in the beer itself. Given you enjoy malty beers, try to use more malt based fermentables & limit the amount of detrose/sugar you use to smallish amounts.

I've read that adding dextrose instead of sugar to the bottles adds a creamier head. T or F?

F. To the best of my knowledge head development & head retention are a combination of sufficient carbonation combined with having sufficient remaining body in the beer.

How can I get the alcohol content up to around 4 - 4.5%?

I'm pretty sure most (if not all) of the Coopers 1.7kg kits combined with 1kg of dry malt extract & 100gms of dextrose/sugar will produce a beer at approx. 4.5%ABV when brewed to 23 litres.

Which brew can would be best for a first crack at it bearing in mind I like a malty beer?

What sort of commercial beers do you like to drink?

 

I hope that helps.

 

Cheers' date='

 

Lusty.[/size']

[Scottie]

Hey harryup

Welcome to the forum you are in dangerous territory now.

Good to see straight up that you are looking to malt. As you can see by Ronald and Lusty's quick response you'll find no shortage of helpful advise.

Personally I don't use any simple sugars, Corn or Cane.

 

I will say that Australian cane gets a bad rap, I think I read somewhere that it is actually more complex than Dextrose (Corn sugar) ,although I am going to try priming with malt soon. Anyway when I bottle I prime with (Caster) Sugar, I find Dextrose to be a PITA as it creates too much foam in the bottling phase. I agree with Lusty, as most will, that the creaminess of the head has nothing to do with the priming sugar.

 

As for a Malty beer, may I suggest English Bitter. Get the Coopers English Biter Kit and 1 kilo of Coopers Light Dry Malt. You could use the kit yeast but for areal treat use Lallemand (Danstar) Windsor yeast,

 

Cheers & Beers

Scottie

Valley Brew

[ben 10]

What Hairy said + if you like malt backbone then the EB or IPA are great.

[Scottie]

What Hairy said + if you like malt backbone then the EB or IPA are great.

 

Tennyson and Hairy have a telepathic link.

 

May the force be with you.

 

Scottie

Valley Brew

[Beerlust]

What Hairy said + if you like malt backbone then the EB or IPA are great.

 

Tennyson and Hairy have a telepathic link.

 

May the force be with you.

 

Scottie

Valley Brew

Just don't hand him a light sabre after a he's downed of few of those 7.4% all malt Vic secret brews he's currently tippling!

 

 

Cheers' date='

 

Lusty.[/size']

[ben 10]

BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[Scottie]

I'm still trying to figure out what Hairy said. I am lacking that telepathic connection.

 

[harryup]

Thanks for the helpful tips fellers.........hmmm, decisions, decisions!

Think I'll try a Coopers draught can adding 1kg liquid malt extract. Or try a Lager?

How much sugar/dextrose to that mix? Which is best, dextrose or sugar?

Use sugar, not dextrose for bottle ferment. Castor sugar? Any reason?

 

I like the sound of the EB but will leave that one until my skills are up to my dreams!

When sitting out the back playing with my light sabre and trying to telepathically move the lawnmower, I'd settle for any beer but generally drink VB, Carlton draught, Crown lager, Tooheys old, Coopers mild ale.

H.

 

[Scottie]

Hey harryup

 

Caster sugar is just a fine cane sugar, I prefer it to priming as the fine granules pass easily through the funnel into the bottle, I don't use dextrose because it causes the beer to foam too much and it either takes longer to fill a bottle or you don't get enough beer in the bottle.

 

If you like a malty beer use 1.5kg of light malt extract (liquid), Coopers cans are 1.5kg. This will give you about 4.5%. Add 200g of Dark Brown Sugar (use Dextrose or table sugar if you like) to up the ABV to around 5%. Avoid using too much sugar, a malty beer is full bodied, too much simple sugar will thin the brew.

 

BTW you mentioned VB on a home brew forum, put down the light sabre and don your flame suit

 

Cheers & Beers

Scottie

Valley Brew

[RonaldW2]

Hey Scottie at least he is coming to the light side and coming to real beer. We should give him that.

Even a bad home brew is better that VB and the likes.

Ronald

[harryup]

Ooooops, won't mention that filthy VB again!!!

OK gang, I've got some ideas now so thanks and will let you know how it goes in a few weeks

H

[antiphile]

I know I should shut up, but after my 3rd Brew 51 it's impossible for a girl to do that. I'm going back to my first year at "collage" so the memory will be very blonde.

 

Sugars: are simple (or simplish) molecules that are easily used by living things for quick energy, or converted to other sugars (glycogen) and stored. The most simple are the monosaccharides like glucose (also called dextrose), and fructose (sugars found in fruit etc). The next stage up is sucrose (aka cane sugar, table sugar) which is a slightly larger molecule of one glucose molecule combined with one of fructose. Because this is a combo of 2 simple sugars it is called a disaccharide. For brewing purposes, mono- and di-saccharides are indistinguishable to yeast because they can be very easily broken into their constituent sugars and used as an energy source. Even if there are other chemicals the yeast can use for energy, they will preferentially use these because they are the "low hanging fruit". The problem, however, as many of our clever people here have noted, is if there's too much of the simple sugars the end result will be a thinner, cidery-tasting brew which is usually not wanted.

 

It is much better to give the yeast more malt-like carbohydrates to work on. They are almost as completely digestible (but not quite) as sugars, but leave some undigested bits which contribute to more of a "mouthfeel" and slightly sweeter result which is offset by the hops etc. The remaining bits will also assist in providing a better, denser head to the beer, and it will last longer, and give a nice lacing effect to the side of the glass.

 

I'm certain this verbal diarrhoea will make very little sense, but as I said I couldn't help myself. Now I'm thirsty. Time for a beer.

[RonaldW2]

Yes what antiphile said it's better to use more malt than sugar.

Ronald

[PB2]

Simple sugars?

 

Bonded glucose:glucose = Maltose. This is a disaccharide

 

Philly, have you got more of the story to tell?

 

[antiphile]

Hoodles Paul

 

You owe me a packet of Panadeine Forte because firstly, I've got splinters under my nails from scratching my head, and secondly, you made me think really really hard so I've got a headache you wouldn't believe. But, I've got the answer.

 

Maltose is indeed a disaccharide, and common sense (not one of my strong points) suggests it should be as easily digested by yeast as sucrose, glucose, fructose etc. However, what we call malt is not presented to the yeast as maltose but as a more complex very long chain polysaccharides (or probably less confusing if we call it "barley starch"). The starch certainly contains many adjacent glucose to glucose entities joined by alpha bonds (C1 to C4 bonds of adjacent glucose molecules). This guy explains it far better than I ever could (Reference at end):

 

Both maltose and cellobiose can be extended. That is, we can make a glycosidic link from C-4 of another glucose to the C-1 of the right-hand glucose in the disaccharide, and we can make a link C-4 of the left-hand unit in the disaccharide to C-1 of another glucose. We can keep doing this until we have strung together hundreds or thousands of glucose units. If, as in maltose, the linkages are alpha-1?4, the resulting material is a starch called amylose. Because the maltose units are bent, the chains of rings in amylose (Fig. 6.14) are twisted.

 

Then there's an explanation of cellobiose yada yada yada.

 

Because C-1 and C-4 are straight across the ring from one another, 1?4 linkages can form long, fairly organized chains. But an –OH group on C-1 can also react with the –OH groups on carbons other than C-4. A molecule of amylose, that is, a chain of glucose units with alpha-1?4 linkages, has free –OH groups remaining on C-2, C-3, and C-6. The C-1 hydroxide of a new glucose can link to one of these, usually to the –OH group of C-6, making a branch in the chain (Fig. 6.15). Amylopectin (Fig. 6.16), a starch found in plants, has branches about every 30 to 50 glucose units. Barley starch is typically about 25% amylose and 75% amylopectin. A strand of amylopectin has many free ends, so reactions that break small groups of glucose molecules off from the chain ends are more rapid on amylopectin than on amylose. Glycogen has branches every 10–12 glucose units.

 

So, this explains why barley starch isn't as fully digestible by the yeast as say a simple mono- or di-saccharide. Quod erat demonstrandum. But my brain is still hurting.

 

Reference: the Chemistry of Beer by Roger Bath (Chapter 6: Sugars)

[harryup]

Antiphile...........duh?????? ta for that but I'm only a retired burnt out ol' feller, not up to mathematical equations, physics etc. Gonna stick to what Woodie said, use liquid malt, a little dextrose and try Scotties advice to use castor sugar to bottle, Can't wait to see how it goes!!

Now guys, y' gotta give a bit..........I haven't got a HB to drink yet and there are some VB's in the shed fridge......it's hot....... been working out the back.......I'm thirsty.......yep, convinced myself...off to the shed

[Beerlust]

Reference: the Chemistry of Beer by Roger Bath (Chapter 6: Sugars)

I'm betting Roger Bath drinks %&@# loads of beer! Surely he must in an effort to quell the monster headaches he gives himself each time he puts pen to paper!

 

Lusty.

[RonaldW2]

What you should do harryup is quickly drink that sware word "VB" and go to the bottlo and get some coppers, at least you will be safe.

Ron woodie

[Paragon]

... drink that sware word "VB" ...

Ron woodie

 

A better idea is to tip them out onto the grass.

 

Justin

[PB2]

Philly, a very complicated story but not relevant. Dare I say that you are barking up the wrong tree

 

I raised an eyebrow when I saw "Barley Starch" and a QED thrown in for good measure, nice!

 

The mashing process in the brewhouse converts starches to sweet sugars, comprising mostly; Maltose (as much as 70%), some Maltotriose, a tiny amount of glucose, fructose and some polysaccharides.

 

So Maltose, which is a disaccharide and the main ingredient in Malt Extract (the finished product in either dry or liquid form), will be fermented readily by yeast and in a similar manner to glucose (in dextrose) and sucrose (usually from cane sugar).

 

The gear in Malt Extract, not so easily fermented by the yeast, is maltotriose and polysaccharides - these are the main contributors to the body and residual sweetness in the final beer.

 

Edit: 10:06am, this is the longest morning...

[Beerlust]

Hi PB2.

The gear in Malt Extract' date=' not so easily fermented by the yeast, is maltotriose and polysaccharides - these are the main contributors to the body and residual sweetness in the final beer.[/quote']

Would I be fair in suggesting this "bi-product" of sorts is something resembling Maltodextrin?

 

Cheers,

 

Lusty.

[Scottie]

Philly' date=' a very complicated story but not relevant. Dare I say that you are barking up the wrong tree [img']lol[/img]

 

I raised an eyebrow when I saw "Barley Starch" and a QED thrown in for good measure, nice!

 

The mashing process in the brewhouse converts starches to sweet sugars, comprising mostly; Maltose (as much as 70%), some Maltotriose, a tiny amount of glucose, fructose and some polysaccharides.

 

So Maltose, which is a disaccharide and the main ingredient in Malt Extract (the finished product in either dry or liquid form), will be fermented readily by yeast and in a similar manner to glucose (in dextrose) and sucrose (usually from cane sugar).

 

The gear in Malt Extract, not so easily fermented by the yeast, is maltotriose and polysaccharides - these are the main contributors to the body and residual sweetness in the final beer.

 

Edit: 10:06am, this is the longest morning...

 

Now that makes perfect sense. Despite what they would have as believe it is not necessarily as Sol used to say in the 1970s "Oils ain't Oils". In fact sugars are sugars and my yeast munches through it just as quick regardless of the type. It's the gear in the Malt Extract that make the difference. And then if the gear made up 100% (or a vast majority) of the Malt Extract then we wouldn't be making beer at all.

 

Today I Learn

 

Scottie

Valley Bfrew

[Scottie]

Philly' date=' a very complicated story but not relevant. Dare I say that you are barking up the wrong tree [img']lol[/img]

.