Thanks for having such great information - newbie ? on SG

Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum

Help Support Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

LilSewnut

Junior
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am a very casual hobbyist at winemaking.. have made about 10 batches at home. I live in Southwestern Ontario, so I do try to use Canadian (Ontario sourced grapes) . I have made the Blood Orange Sangria from a kit 4 times and this last batch, has me confused. It started at SG 1.054, and over the suggested period made it to SG .996 , though now, 2 weeks later and ready to bottle has me confused as it is reading 1.016... higher than the starting SG and the measure of last week. Did something go wrong, is this common, should I bottle it anyway, suggestions or explanations are welcome. Thank you
 
Last edited:
Welcome to WMT!

I assume the kit has an F-pack? The F-pack contains flavoring, sugar, and probably sorbate (to prevent a renewed fermentation). The sugar increases the SG.
 
I am a very casual hobbyist at winemaking.. have made about 10 batches at home. I live in Southwestern Ontario, so I do try to use Canadian (Ontario sourced grapes) . I have made the Blood Orange Sangria from a kit 4 times and this last batch, has me confused. It started at SG 1.054, and over the suggested period made it to SG .996 , though now, 2 weeks later and ready to bottle has me confused as it is reading 1.016... higher than the starting SG and the measure of last week. Did something go wrong, is this common, should I bottle it anyway, suggestions or explanations are welcome. Thank you

Are you using a hydrometer or a refractometer to measure the SG?

You said that its current reading (1.016) is "higher than the starting SG" which was 1.054. This is not correct -- 1.016 is lower than 1.054.
 
Indeed it did. The OP said that the current reading was higher than the original and the reading of last week (which I assume was his 0.996 reading). So my comment still stands.

However, I now realize that my knee-jerk question about the refractometer is not operative -- the 0.996 reading negates that possibility.
 
Back
Top