Yeah I may not do this again. I staggered stuff so the first batch is in the fermenter and the second has 30 mins left on the boil, but there was a pretty hectic crunch in the middle.I have 3 IPA's I need to get done next week to make room for Stouts, Porters, etc. Just don't try to do them at the same time. Been there, tried that, using a 3-keggle system and a Mash n Boil. Didn't work very well and was not fun.
Yep, tradeoff is a bit of saving on total elapsed time vs. the more hectic brew day. It was fun to do once but don't think I'll do it again.I did my first 10g split into two 5g batches last Sunday, and it was a rat race; not to mention my idiot brain decided to do it in the afternoon on a 83° day. I've done double-brew days (with separate mashes) a couple of times in the past, and those too were a bit too complicated. Now I try to schedule it so I'm doing one brew on a Saturday and another on a Sunday; I'd rather clean twice than try to keep track of two brews at once.
I tried the back-to-back/simultaneous 5 gallon batches. I got it done, but the process was about as organized as a soup sandwich!
Since that experience, I found a deal on a bigger brew kettle, (new, open box, small dent; which I knocked back out with a dead blow hammer), and a digiboil water heater. My intention is to move to 7.5 or 10 gallon single run batches.
Any reason why this is not a good idea?
That was going to be my comment as well -- personally I'm more interested in brewing a lot of different things in small batches as opposed to a large volume of one recipe.If you're brewing the same beer and not two different 5 gallon batches, then absolutely. It's much easier, and quicker, to brew a 10 gallon batch vs 2 identical 5 gallon batches back to back.
That was going to be my comment as well -- personally I'm more interested in brewing a lot of different things in small batches as opposed to a large volume of one recipe.
Enter your email address to join: