[tommymorris]

Nope, don't have that one.  I do have 1972 Schlitz in the brewer's handwriting

You can't just say a thing like that and not share. :|

+1

Kinda drooling here....

It’ll be interesting to see if it differs from BYO’s 2012 version (admittedly simplified with flaked corn at working strength vs high gravity)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does BYO saying anything to justify their claim that this is a clone?

I recently brewed an Firestone Walker 805 Blonde “clone” published in BYO. It was not even close and the difference is not due to my brewing error. The BYO “clone” called for 8% Honey Malt. It is a honey malty bomb.  I just tried the real thing on draft and in can last weekend and there is no way the real beer has 8% Honey malt. My guess is the real beer has 2-3% Honey malt.  After this experience I feel like no one (publisher, article author) ever even brewed and tasted the “clone” recipe.

The experience put a bad taste in my mouth.

[denny]

Rechecking my recipe, it's also 1975.  I had this for maybe 10 years before the BYO was published.  It looks kinda like they found the one I've got somewhere.

[brewthru]

And so the search continues...

I recall the taste and flavor of a Stroh's, but not enough to even attempt a clone. Probably the last Stroh's I drank was in the late 70's.

[EnkAMania]

I had Stroh's in the early/mid 80's and all I remember was that disgusting burnt wood taste.

[BrewBama]

...

The experience put a bad taste in my mouth.

Literally!  LOL

I am not sure if they brewed and tasted all 250 beers in this magazine but the list of names on the editorial review board has a few I recognize:

I had Stroh's in the early/mid 80's and all I remember was that disgusting burnt wood taste.

+1. Stroh’s was popular in Korea in the early 80(s). After one (and last) taste I never understood why.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[denny]

I'm also on the BYO editorial review board.  I guarantee you that we do not taste beers made from the recipes in the mag.

[Robert]

Rechecking my recipe, it's also 1975.  I had this for maybe 10 years before the BYO was published.  It looks kinda like they found the one I've got somewhere.

It does look like BYO were working off that source.   It doesn't look like they interpreted it correctly.   But the BYO recipe would probably make a nice beer in the general style, and more in line with typical homebrewers' tastes. 

Sworn to secrecy, I'll say no more. 

Other than, the BYO recipe might hold the OP over for the time being, or provide a starting point for development of his own 70s beer.  Thanks also to BrewBama for posting it.

[tommymorris]

I'm also on the BYO editorial review board.  I guarantee you that we do not taste beers made from the recipes in the mag.

Thanks for your service. I didn’t really expect the editors to taste clone recipes.

I knew when I read the 805 clone recipe that it couldn’t be right, but, I hoped I was wrong. I’ll trust my instincts next time.

That said, I do think clone recipes should provide some justification for the clone label. You named a source above when you said you had something from a Stroh’s brewer. That’s fine justification.  Another possibility is a small group of tasters thought the clone was close enough to justify the label. That’s sort of the can you brew it model. Just writing something is a clone without any back up is bad journalism IMHO.

[Robert]

I think another factor is that there's so much variability in homebrew systems that your milage absolutely WILL vary, and what works for one brewer won't for all.

I have a particular interest in replicating historical American and British beers (old enough that some beers I remember now count!)   What I realize is that you must delve into all the available historical details, but you want to replicate, not reproduce, when "cloning."  You need to have a full understanding of the materials and methods originally used in order to deduce the result they would have produced.   Then you work backwards to figure out how to get the same end result from your own materials and methods.

Making a "scale model" of any brewery's recipe will probably fail to yield the desired result.   You will always be interpreting a commercial beer, not just making a carbon copy (there's another reference that dates me!)   And everyone will need to interpret it for themselves; even another's homebrew recipe won't necessarily turn out the same for you.  For that matter, the big brewers face some challenges in making consistent product across multiple plants.

[brewthru]

I found the following recipes online. Thoughts if they are valid Stroh's clones?

*** 1st recipe ***
    According to a few web searches, I notice it is 4.6% abv, with 12 g. carbohydrates. It is apparently a corn-adjunct beer. I would try the following:

    Shoot for an OG of 1.048, FG 1.012

    Use 70% 2-row, 30% flaked corn, if you are an all-grain brewer

    Bitter with Hallertau, or similar to about 12 IBUs (approx. 1 oz. of 4% alpha hops) Maybe use 1/4 oz saaz finishing hops

    I'd try wyeast 2035, or 2124

    If all-grain brewing, I would use a soft water profile.

*** 2nd recipe ***

Scotts Stroh Beer
http://brewgr.com/recipe/9622/scotts-stroh-beer-classic-american-pilsner-recipe

Recipe claims it's an all grain plus extract, but the fermentables list shows 0% for the Extra light DME. Knowing the OG of 1.045 and the 62% efficiency we can determine the amount of DME used in the recipe. Also, the poster miscategorized the brew as Pre-Prohibition Porter. Probably meant Pre-Prohibition Pilsner.

[Robert]

Looking at the brew day sheets Denny has, I'd say the BYO recipe isn't too far off, but they undershot the adjunct.  It looks like they totally missed the syrup (a high dextrine brewers corn syrup, it looks like) used in addition to the grits, bringing the total fermentables from adjunct up to about 35% in my estimation.  If you adjust the flakes in that recipe to around 30% (assuming you get more yield from flakes than malt on your system) you'd probably be getting close.  (I also see no point in including 6 row.  Back then 2 row and 6 row were different.   Today's 2 row is indistinguishable from 6 row, which is why 6 row is vanishing.)

I've been really going down the rabbit hole trying to work up an adaptation from those records, delving into Milwaukee water reports, trying to identify the acid theywere using to estimate mash pH, and such.  I want to brew it but may have to wait for the new hop crop to find any Cluster and Fuggles.  When I do, if Denny doesn't think it's publicly revealing any privileged information (any more than BYO did,) I'll post my version.  But I think what I said about adjusting the BYO is a pretty good start.

[denny]

Looking at the brew day sheets Denny has, I'd say the BYO recipe isn't too far off, but they undershot the adjunct.  It looks like they totally missed the syrup (a high dextrine brewers corn syrup, it looks like) used in addition to the grits, bringing the total fermentables from adjunct up to about 35% in my estimation.  If you adjust the flakes in that recipe to around 30% (assuming you get more yield from flakes than malt on your system) you'd probably be getting close.  (I also see no point in including 6 row.  Back then 2 row and 6 row were different.   Today's 2 row is indistinguishable from 6 row, which is why 6 row is vanishing.)

I've been really going down the rabbit hole trying to work up an adaptation from those records, delving into Milwaukee water reports, trying to identify the acid theywere using to estimate mash pH, and such.  I want to brew it but may have to wait for the new hop crop to find any Cluster and Fuggles.  When I do, if Denny doesn't think it's publicly revealing any privileged information (any more than BYO did,) I'll post my version.  But I think what I said about adjusting the BYO is a pretty good start.

Rob, I see no problem with you posting your version.  I think we'd all love to see it.

[Robert]

Looking at the brew day sheets Denny has, I'd say the BYO recipe isn't too far off, but they undershot the adjunct.  It looks like they totally missed the syrup (a high dextrine brewers corn syrup, it looks like) used in addition to the grits, bringing the total fermentables from adjunct up to about 35% in my estimation.  If you adjust the flakes in that recipe to around 30% (assuming you get more yield from flakes than malt on your system) you'd probably be getting close.  (I also see no point in including 6 row.  Back then 2 row and 6 row were different.   Today's 2 row is indistinguishable from 6 row, which is why 6 row is vanishing.)

I've been really going down the rabbit hole trying to work up an adaptation from those records, delving into Milwaukee water reports, trying to identify the acid theywere using to estimate mash pH, and such.  I want to brew it but may have to wait for the new hop crop to find any Cluster and Fuggles.  When I do, if Denny doesn't think it's publicly revealing any privileged information (any more than BYO did,) I'll post my version.  But I think what I said about adjusting the BYO is a pretty good start.

Rob, I see no problem with you posting your version.  I think we'd all love to see it.

Cool.  I've got some time to fiddle with that kind of thing now since I'm taking a brief seasonal hiatus from homebrew and homebrewing.  Just to rethink, refit the brewery, make plans, and drink some more commercial beers I need to try. 

[brewthru]

Possible to move the Schlitz items to a new thread instead of hijacking the original Stroh's question/request?

[Robert]

The 1977 edition of the MBAA's The Practical Brewer contains a number of tables of wort composition data.  Two sample wort analyses are footnoted as being courtesy of the Stroh Brewing Co.; one is 20% corn grits and the other 40% corn grits.  No indication of course what products these represent, but it does indicate the range of adjunct they were using in brands they produced, unless these were just pilot plant worts made just for analysis.  Maybe a little piece of the puzzle.