The grist has become a little more complicated with the addition of a little sugar. I’ve no idea what type of sugar, as there’s no indication of any kind in the brewing record. I’ve just guessed No. 2 invert. There were four types of base malt, two made from English barley and two from Californian. With the latter making up around a quarter of the total.
The hopping is way heavier than in 1883. Which is pretty obvious when you look at the calculated IBUs. The hops themselves were all English, one from the 1900 harvest and the other two from 1899.
As this was the weakest Truman’s Mild Ale, there’s no way this got any older than a couple of weeks before being drunk.
| 1901 Truman (Burton) Ale | ||
| pale malt | 11.25 lb | 97.15% |
| No. 2 sugar | 0.33 lb | 2.85% |
| Fuggles 150 mins | 1.25 oz | |
| Fuggles 60 mins | 1.25 oz | |
| Fuggles 30 mins | 1.25 oz | |
| OG | 1051 | |
| FG | 1012 | |
| ABV | 5.16 | |
| Apparent attenuation | 76.47% | |
| IBU | 45 | |
| SRM | 5.5 | |
| Mash at | 150º F | |
| Sparge at | 170º F | |
| Boil time | 150 minutes | |
| pitching temp | 59.5º F | |
| Yeast | WLP013 London Ale (Worthington White Shield) | |
Posts
8 comments:
your malt weights are out by a factor of 10
it appears that the amount of base malt needs to be increased in order to reach the ABV
Should that be 11 lbs of pale malt?
Er, is this correct . . . just 1.25 lbs of malt and a bit of sugar?
While it may be Truman's weakest mild ale, there has to be more pale malt than 1.25 lbs. to get an OG of 1.051. Typo?
There was a 1 missing. The correct weight is 11.25 Lbs.
Interesting that the hopping rate had increased from 1883, thought it would have gone the other way?
Oscar
Post a Comment