Adding Yeast for Bottling

[Fugglupagus]

I always keep it simple and just add a few grams of a 5 gram packet of EC-1118 Lalvin Champagne yeast. It is highly alcohol tolerant, a good floculator, and can ferment quickly in low pH environments (think fermented beer). Within 7 days (at most), my high ABV% beers are always perfectly carbonated using this method with no worries.

I kinda remember reading your suggestion in an older thread. I also sorta remember that the EC-1118 is less expensive than most dry beer yeasts. Which would make it perfect for me as Champagne yeast would be just like I prefer my women: fast, cheap and easy ! Unfortunately my wife is neither of the three . . . . . .

I don’t know squat about champagne yeast. Does it have similar fermentation capabilities as beer yeast? I guess more to the point, is there any chance that the champagne yeast could ferment some of the harder to use sugars that beer yeast leave behind? If yes, once it’s in the bottle, could it really make a difference?

[brewinhard]

I always keep it simple and just add a few grams of a 5 gram packet of EC-1118 Lalvin Champagne yeast. It is highly alcohol tolerant, a good floculator, and can ferment quickly in low pH environments (think fermented beer). Within 7 days (at most), my high ABV% beers are always perfectly carbonated using this method with no worries.

I kinda remember reading your suggestion in an older thread. I also sorta remember that the EC-1118 is less expensive than most dry beer yeasts. Which would make it perfect for me as Champagne yeast would be just like I prefer my women: fast, cheap and easy ! Unfortunately my wife is neither of the three . . . . . .

I don’t know squat about champagne yeast. Does it have similar fermentation capabilities as beer yeast? I guess more to the point, is there any chance that the champagne yeast could ferment some of the harder to use sugars that beer yeast leave behind? If yes, once it’s in the bottle, could it really make a difference?

That EC-1118 will NOT (as far as I have experienced and researched) attenuate your finished beer any further, especially if added in a small amount during bottling along with minimal priming sugar. I have used this yeast many, many times to bottle condition stronger beers over 8% ABV with no further attenuation and/or impact to the final product. I think it provides the best "bang for your buck" so to speak with regards to yeast for bottle conditioning.

[Fugglupagus]

$0.89 per packet. Me likey.

I always keep it simple and just add a few grams of a 5 gram packet of EC-1118 Lalvin Champagne yeast . . . .

No hydration? Pitch straight into the bottling bucket??

[brewinhard]

Definitely rehydrate and add to your bottling bucket along with your priming sugar.

[Fugglupagus]

I'm gonna give the champagne yeast a try. I've been frustrated by very inconsistent carbonation levels. I get head, but I haven't been able to control how much, and I never get as much as I want. Story of my life.

I've screwed around with priming rates by volume, by weight, by the nomograph, by the nomograph + 20%, etc. I've bottle conditioned in multiple seasons, and over multiple months. I've done temperature experiments on heating pads, and I even made a "warming chamber" out of a woodworking project. I've screwed around with my bottle caps for leaks. I spent an evening f'ing around with my capper to make sure it works correctly. I've used several different types of caps. I've researched head formation/retention searching for something about my process that prevents good head, and have tweaked a couple things as a result. The only variable (that I've thought of) that I haven't really screwed around with is the yeast. I'm hoping champagne yeast will either give me better head, or lead me to good head enlightenment.

Thanks.

[brewinhard]

Not so sure that champagne yeast will make your head retention any better, but it should help to condition your bottles enough providing you have added sufficient amounts of priming sugar for your desired volumes of CO2. When using the nomograph are you taking into account the temperature of your beer at bottling time to adjust for your priming sugar weights?

[Fugglupagus]

. . . . When using the nomograph are you taking into account the temperature of your beer at bottling time to adjust for your priming sugar weights?

Yes. The temp of the beer on bottling day is the temp I've been using for the nomograph. For most of my ales, the temp on bottling day is usually pretty close to my fermentation temp. I also ratio the priming sugar rate up based on my fermentation volume (usually around 5.5 gal) rather than the actual volume that gets racked into my bottling bucket (something less than 5.5 gal). Without having my notes in front of me, I'd guess my last half dozen ales were primed with 4.5-5.5 oz of corn sugar.

What temp should be used for beers that are cold conditioned prior to bottling? It makes more sense to me to use the temp at which fermentation is completed (or maybe the temp for diacetyl rest), not the temp at which the beer is cold lagered and then bottled. Am I sniffing glue?

[Fugglupagus]

I talked myself out of trying the EC 1118. Then I concluded I was being a wussy. So I now have an American brown ale presently comingling with champagne yeast in 12 oz portions. I hydrated the entire 5g in warm bottled water while I racked to my bottling bucket. Then poured about half of the slurry into the bucket, stirred, then bottled. Now is the hard part: waiting.

Since then, I found a BN thread talking about champagne yeast. It suggests beer yeasts are capable of consuming more types of sugars than wine yeasts. I'm assuming both varieties can do simple sugars. So I'm also assuming that "more types" means beer yeasts can consume more complex sugars. If that is the case, and if a beer is fully attenuated, it seems to make sense that champagne yeast shouldn't be able to eat much more than priming sugar if added at bottling time. The discussion was based on a Sunday Session show from Nov 23, '08 which I just finished downloading.