A couple general questions

[JimmyT]

I'm going to be trying to put together a couple ports and I'm unsure of a few things. What starting sg do you usually shoot for? At what sg reading do you step feed more sugar in? How much do you raise the sg each time you step feed? Do you use more than the recommended dose of nutrient or energizer? How do you step feed the nutrient for a port since the sg will keep rising and falling? What yeast is recommended to use to get the most abv? What temp do you ferment at? This is just a "few" I can think of right now!

 

[cmason1957]

I ferment at normal Temps. Use Ec1118 yeast. Start at 1.120 or they're abouts, ferment down to 1.050, then back up to 1.090. A couple of things to think about your abv isn't just the delta of sg added together. Each time you add sugar, you change the volume. There is a way to handle that. Seth worked out a formula for it. You will have to search for it. More fruit is better, due to the volume changing also, you want a thicker must than normal. For that pretty mouthfeel when you are done.

 

[richmke]

The commercial port makers start at around 1.120 SG, ferment down to 1.030 (12% abv), and fortify with 150 proof young brandy to 20% abv. However, you are not likely to find 150 proof brandy.

What I would do is: Ferment down to 1.010, and chapitalize back to 1.020. Repeat until the yeast gives up. Then you are around 18% abv with an SG of 1.020 (assuming EC-1118 yeast). Fortify with 80 proof (40% abv) brandy (mid-grade), and sweeten to your desired level.

Do your step feeding of nutrient/energizer the normal way (like you were making wine). Once you start chapitalizing, don't add any more. Note: The first chapitalize I would go to 1.030 trusting that it will ferment down.

 

[JimmyT]

I hope Seth can comment on this thread and point me in the right direction on that formula.
I seen several port recipes that called for dme and was wondering how important that is to add body and structure. Can you add other things instead of the dme to get a comparable result?
I'm planning on a 2 gal or so for my first try. Does anyone have a rough estimate on how much brandy I'd need to buy to get to 20-22% if my yeast can make it to the 18% mark?
I know traditional ports are fortified with brandy but if I get to 18% and fortify with something other than brandy would you still consider it a port? Or even just leaving it at what ever it ferments to?
What sg is a typical port back sweetened to? I know I should go by my taste but I was just curious what the average is.

 

[wineforfun]

I hope Seth can comment on this thread and point me in the right direction on that formula.
I seen several port recipes that called for dme and was wondering how important that is to add body and structure. Can you add other things instead of the dme to get a comparable result?
I'm planning on a 2 gal or so for my first try. Does anyone have a rough estimate on how much brandy I'd need to buy to get to 20-22% if my yeast can make it to the 18% mark?
I know traditional ports are fortified with brandy but if I get to 18% and fortify with something other than brandy would you still consider it a port? Or even just leaving it at what ever it ferments to?
What sg is a typical port back sweetened to? I know I should go by my taste but I was just curious what the average is.

I can't find Seth's thread on his formula. PM him or he may chime in here.

As far as how much brandy, etc. to add to the wine, use the Pearson Square to calculate.
http://www.winemakingtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10358&highlight=pearson+square

 

[sour_grapes]

Here it is in an article version. Not all of the graphics are showing up for me at this time:

http://www.winemakingtalk.com/step-feeding-calculator.html

And here it is in thread form:
http://www.winemakingtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=363485#post363485

Oh, and by the way, Seth now approves, I believe, of using 131 instead of 125 as the multiplicative factor.

 

[JimmyT]

Ok so I went through his correction thread and used his example and formula and came up with the same numbers. What I foresee me having a problem with is how to come up with the volume increase numbers. I understand how he got the numbers but if I add one cup of sugar to a gallon how much would that increase the volume? I can eyeball and rough guess from the markings on the side of the bucket but how accurate is that.

 

[richmke]

I can eyeball and rough guess from the markings on the side of the bucket but how accurate is that.

Not very accurate when you are trying to read a 1 cup change on 6 gallons.

Maybe withdraw 2 cups into a 1 quart measuring cup. Dissolve the sugar into the measuring cup, and read the new level.

 

[cmason1957]

That was the same issue I had with the correction factor. You never really know how much volume you start with our the intermediate volumes. So I always just go with the delta in sg. I know it isn't exact, but it is close enough for me.

 

[JimmyT]

I usually do straight sugar instead of a simple syrup so my added volume would be less of a change and less % off if using the delta system. I wouldn't have been too concerned or even thought about it but I just put together a 1.5 gallon batch of super sugar welches. I added in 2 3/8 lbs of sugar and it took the total volume up to 1.75 gallon. That's a pretty big difference just adding sugar alone.

 

[sour_grapes]

I just use fermcalc. With a little thought, it is not difficult. You just need to know your initial volume and SG, and how much sugar you added. It calculates the new volume (and SG, and hence ABV) for you. You do not need to take care of the individual steps: you can just consider it as one addition of all your sugar.

 

[JimmyT]

I'm assuming this calc is using a similar formula as Seth's I take it? That really sounds good using this calculator compared to me doing it long hand! Thanks for the heads up.

 

[sour_grapes]

I'm assuming this calc is using a similar formula as Seth's I take it? That really sounds good using this calculator compared to me doing it long hand! Thanks for the heads up.

They are mathematically equivalent, yes.