Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Makes me thirsty


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#21 Big Nake

Big Nake

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53914 posts

Posted 17 September 2014 - 09:52 AM

It was very, very coarse. I think my Chinook was somewhere around 13 or 14% so we're talking 6.5 to 7 AAU (so maybe 30-35 IBU?) and it just hit my tastebuds like a handsaw. I kept asking the other guys who made it how they liked it. Some said it was really good while others questioned the hop selection. If Chinook has changed in the past 10-12 years, I would be willing to try it again. Also, my tastes have changed too and I am much more open to hoppy beers so maybe Chinook and I are on a collision course. :P

i actually have a tough time imagining any hop (assuming it hadn't "gone bad" or something) could contribute enough at that hopping rate for me to really like or dislike it.  I might be able to detect some subtle differences but nothing enough for me to go "bbbllleeeccchhhh"!

Do you feel that you have sampled a wide variety of hops? I mean, there are a lot of hop varieties out there and some are good for bittering but not as good late in the boil. I like some hops and stay away from others.

Edited by KenLenard, 17 September 2014 - 09:52 AM.


#22 positiveContact

positiveContact

    Anti-Brag Queen

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68886 posts
  • LocationLimbo

Posted 17 September 2014 - 09:52 AM

It was very, very coarse. I think my Chinook was somewhere around 13 or 14% so we're talking 6.5 to 7 AAU (so maybe 30-35 IBU?) and it just hit my tastebuds like a handsaw. I kept asking the other guys who made it how they liked it. Some said it was really good while others questioned the hop selection. If Chinook has changed in the past 10-12 years, I would be willing to try it again. Also, my tastes have changed too and I am much more open to hoppy beers so maybe Chinook and I are on a collision course. :P

 

it is def more course.  but I guess I don't find it so course that a half oz addition could get me to the point or REALLY noticing that.  when I've noticed it was at least 2x that hopping rate at the start of the boil and with more chinook added in at various times.



#23 Big Nake

Big Nake

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53914 posts

Posted 17 September 2014 - 09:54 AM

it is def more course.  but I guess I don't find it so course that a half oz addition could get me to the point or REALLY noticing that.  when I've noticed it was at least 2x that hopping rate at the start of the boil and with more chinook added in at various times.

Could have also been that using it in such a simple and straightforward style was not smart. For an American Wheat, I could see Mt. Hood, Willamette, Crystal, Glacier, Santiam, Vanguard, Sterling and a host of others. Using Chinook in that case probably made it more like a pale ale without the late hops.

#24 positiveContact

positiveContact

    Anti-Brag Queen

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68886 posts
  • LocationLimbo

Posted 17 September 2014 - 10:06 AM

Could have also been that using it in such a simple and straightforward style was not smart. For an American Wheat, I could see Mt. Hood, Willamette, Crystal, Glacier, Santiam, Vanguard, Sterling and a host of others. Using Chinook in that case probably made it more like a pale ale without the late hops.

 

certainly a factor.



#25 neddles

neddles

    No Life

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16608 posts

Posted 17 September 2014 - 10:10 AM

Yeah I can see how Ken would not have liked it. Half oz. of Chinook at 60 produces a coarse bittering for me that I find pretty classic in AIPA. Knowing Ken's tastes and the fact that this beer has no other hops added for flavor or otherwise, I think it would have come through pretty clearly for him.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users