How long to boil. 90 or 60mins?

[jmc]

Hi

I think all the recipies in GW's BYOBRA are based on a 90 minute boil.

Other authors like the American Charlie Papazian say a 60 minute boil is all that is needed.
eg in his book Complete Homebrewing.

I've seen other UK websites use 60 mins too (eg 1648 Brewery)

I realise that the boil length affects hop utilisation, i.e. the longer you boil the more bitterness (to a point) you'll get out of the hops.
I assume that to get to the same level of bitterness (EBU ) you could probably use Beer Engine software to calculate increased hop quantity required, if say you used a 90min recipe, and you only wanted to boil for 60 minutes.

HOWEVER, the info I'm really after is to whether boil length changes other characteristics of the beer besides hop utilisation.

I'd appreciate your views.

TIA gents.
John

[steve_flack]

Some people do 60 minute and some do 90 (and some somewhere in between). I use 60 as the difference in utilisation is pretty small and I can't tell any difference between beers made using 60 or 90. If your boiler is a bit lacklustre you may want to do 90minute boils. I get around 10% boil off over an hour.

[GrowlingDogBeer]

I do 60 minutes as a 90 minute boil would mean too many losses due to evaporation, requiring me to top up, I can just about manage a 25 Litre brew length in a 30 Litre boiler with a 60 minute boil.

[Piscator]

Here's another dimension to the question.................


When do you start timing the boil:

Onset of full rolling boil, wort ready to leap out of the boiler
or
First signs of some turbulence and bubbles

[Kev888]

I have concluded that it doesn't matter that much really, my understanding is that 60mins is enough to do what is necessary but you get a bit better hop utilisation by going longer - as Steve said though its a law of diminishing returns so I don't think its a biggie.

Personally I've increased the boiler size to 25gals so I've decided to go for 90mins - my logic (such as it is) is that after investing the time and energy cost of reaching the boil in a lot of wort, an extra 30mins isn't hugely significant, and I quite like relatively low AA hops (which cost a bit more to achieve the bitterness with) so I like to think I'm getting the most from them. I don't get too much evaporation in that time so there doesn't seem much reason not to either.

Cheers
Kev

[raiderman]

I do 60m, used to do 90 and I can't say I notice any difference. With brewing its often a case of doing what feels comfortable and if you feel better with a longer boil then do it. I'm a lazy sod and feel the opposite!

[HighHops]

I usually boil for 90 minutes, unless I'm running late but I don't think it matters much for ales. The only thing is a longer boil can darken the wort as sugars start to caramelise. This may not be wanted in pale ales. For lager/pilsner brews I always boil uncovered for the full 90 minutes to ensure all the DMS is driven off and then top back up at the end of the boil. I can lose 7L from 25L when I leave the lid off my boiler completely for 90mins.

[dopejack]

Like Kev, I go for 90, and for the same reasons. Plus, it's not like you have to sit there with it while it's happening; the PS3 is only in the next room!

Cheers

[BarnsleyBrewer]

60, 90 mins is a load of ............ electricity waste.

[Horatio]

60 mash and a 60 min boil for me but only so I reduce the length of my brewday. I always did 90 mins upto earlier this year when I switched and I can't say I've notice any difference in beers that I have brewed at both time scales.

[mat69]

you can add this one one to FAQ jim..