These are the beers on which London had built its brewing reputation and they were still a big part of their business. At Truman, 23% of the output of their Brick Lane brewery was Porter or Stout in 1930*. For Whitbread, they were even more important: 28% of production**.
I can tell you one thing for certain: there's not a single Porter in the London table. All of the beers are too strong. Well, maybe No. 17 could just about be a Porter. But it would be right at the very, very top end.
Don't believe me? OK, here is a selection of London Porters from the period:
London Porter in 1930 | |||||||
Brewer | Beer | Price per pint | Acidity | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation |
Courage | Porter | 5d | 0.07 | 1038 | 1012.8 | 3.26 | 66.32% |
Courage | Porter | 5d | 0.10 | 1036 | 1008.4 | 3.58 | 76.67% |
Hoare | Porter | 5d | 1035 | 1010.8 | 3.13 | 69.14% | |
Hoare | Porter | 5d | 1037 | 1009 | 3.63 | 75.68% | |
Hoare | Porter | 5d | 0.07 | 1034 | 1006.6 | 3.56 | 80.59% |
Hoare | Porter | 5d | 1037 | 1010.2 | 3.47 | 72.43% | |
Wenlock | Porter | 5d | 0.08 | 1038 | 1014.2 | 3.07 | 62.63% |
Wenlock | Porter | 5d | 1037 | 1009.8 | 3.53 | 73.51% | |
Source: | |||||||
Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/001. |
Convinced now?
The London Stouts show the greatest concentration of residual sugars we've seen so far, both in absolute terms and in relation to the amount of alcohol. The ones over 4.5% ABV look like typical draught London Stouts, with gravities in the 1050-1055 range. The modest ABV is explained by apparent attenuation of less than 70%, which was common.
Composition of London Beers | |||||||
Calories per pint. | |||||||
Total Solids per cent. | Absolute Alcohol (by weight) per cent. | Ratio of Total Solids to Alcohol (T.S.=1). | ABV | Solid Matter. | Alcohol. | Total. | |
Stouts and Porters. | |||||||
No. 15 | 7.04 | 3.82 | 1:0.04 | 4.85 | 164 | 152 | 316 |
No. 16 | 5.77 | 3.53 | 1:0.61 | 4.48 | 134 | 140 | 274 |
No. 17 | 4.75 | 3.10 | 1:0.05 | 3.94 | 110 | 123 | 233 |
No. 18 | 6.11 | 4.23 | 1:0.69 | 5.37 | 142 | 168 | 310 |
No. 19 | 5.69 | 3.40 | 1:0.59 | 4.32 | 133 | 135 | 268 |
No. 20 | 5.40 | 3.42 | 1:0.63 | 4.34 | 126 | 136 | 262 |
No. 21 | 6.08 | 4.20 | 1:0.69 | 5.33 | 142 | 167 | 309 |
No. 22 | 5.42 | 4.30 | 1:0.79 | 5.46 | 126 | 171 | 297 |
Average | 5.78 | 3.75 | 1:0.64 | 4.76 | 134 | 149 | 283 |
Source: | |||||||
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 38, Issue 1, January-February 1932, pages 84 - 88. |
Relatively high levels of alcohol and lots if unfermented stuff give London Stout the highest value rating so far, reaching almost 300 calories.
Now for the country beers:
Composition of Country Beers | |||||||
Calories per pint. | |||||||
Total Solids per cent. | Absolute Alcohol (by weight) per cent. | Ratio of Total Solids to Alcohol (T.S.=1). | ABV | Solid Matter. | Alcohol. | Total. | |
Stouts and Porters. | |||||||
No. 71 | 5.02 | 3.65 | 1:0.72 | 4.64 | 117 | 145 | 262 |
No. 72 | 5.78 | 4.55 | 1:0.78 | 5.78 | 135 | 181 | 316 |
No. 73 | 4.57 | 3.16 | 1:0.69 | 4.01 | 100 | 125 | 231 |
No. 74 | 5.29 | 3.14 | I:0.59 | 3.99 | 123 | 125 | 248 |
No. 75 | 3.86 | 2.58 | 1:0.66 | 3.28 | 90 | 102 | 192 |
No. 76 | 4.12 | 3.08 | 1:0.74 | 3.91 | 96 | 122 | 218 |
No. 77 | 5.12 | 3.50 | 1:0.68 | 4.45 | 119 | 139 | 258 |
No. 78 | 6.19 | 3.98 | 1:0.64 | 5.05 | 144 | 158 | 302 |
Average | 4.09 | 3.45 | 1:0.69 | 4.38 | 116 | 137 | 253 |
Source: | |||||||
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 38, Issue 1, January-February 1932, pages 84 - 88. |
We see the pattern of lower alcohol levels in the country beers continue. This time the residual sugars are much lower in the country beers.
And finally my comparison of the averages.
Porter and Stout | Calories per pint. | ||||||
Total Solids per cent. | Absolute Alcohol (by weight) per cent. | Ratio of Total Solids to Alcohol (T.S.=1). | ABV | Solid Matter. | Alcohol. | Total. | |
London | 5.78 | 3.75 | 1:0.64 | 4.76 | 134 | 149 | 283 |
Country | 4.09 | 3.45 | 1:0.69 | 4.38 | 116 | 137 | 253 |
% difference | -41.32% | -8.70% | 0.08% | -8.70% | -15.52% | -8.76% | -11.86% |
Once again, more of just about everything in the London beers. If the London and country beers sold for the same price, it's clear which were better value.
* Document B/THB/C/256c held at the London Metropolitan Archives.
** Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/096, LMA/4453/D/01/097 and LMA/4453/D/01/098.
2 comments:
I wonder what user perception was! I would have considered a fresher, drier, local stout to a sweeter, heavier, mass produced London stout...
Btw, good to check the difference between these low gravity porters and low gravity dark milds in The Homebrewer's Guide to Vintage Beer. I think that most dark milds made by microbreweries are, really, low gravity porters!
Karanka,
the London versions were probably better quality, despite being mass-produced.
In the old days there was a clear difference between Mild and porter, especially in the grists, but I can see what you mean.
Post a Comment