Bottling a lager. Add yeast? How much sugar?

I would base the temp for the calculator on the highest temperature reached at the end of fermentation or later. So in your case, assuming attenuation was finished before you lowered your temps, I'd use the 67/68.

 

Sugar doesn't chew on yeast. It's the other way around.
I've never re-yeasted anything, but neither have I bottle carbonated a lager. I think most people would say that it wouldn't hurt to add some insurance yeast, but that it may not be necessary. People have carbonated lagers without adding more yeast before. If you do add yeast, you shouldn't need a whole packet. I'm thinking 1/4 of a packet would be more than enough to carbonate, even if all of your original yeast has dropped out (which it probably hasn't).

 

like Vike says, the high end of the temperature the beer has held prior to bottling, and not necessarily after completion of fermentation, is what you should use.

CO2 from fermentation dissolves into the beer and cold liquid holds more gas than warm liquid, so if the liquid has been at 68 for more than an hour or so there will be lower dissolved CO2 already present.

as for adding yeast, it wont hurt. adding a strain that flocs well is not a bad idea either. US-04 does a good job. using an ale yeast in your lager is not a sin and you most likely would never know the difference. US-04 will drop out nicely which is a good thing in a lager beer. or use the 34/70. or add nothing at all.

carbonate at a warmish temperature. maybe 65 to 75. if you bottle condition below mid 60s expect the yeast to take their sweet time.

Cheers.

 

I didn't add yeast to either of the bottled lagers I have brewed. Just picked up a little in the transfer which will inevitably happen anyways. Primed, then kept at room temp for 3 weeks, and lager in the bottles. I haven't done a long secondary lager before bottling though, I just brew, ferment for a few weeks, cool down for a week or two, bottle, carb @ room temp, then let it age, some have been at ambient in the garage through the Summer like my Dopplebock (took 1st place in a BJCP comp). I realize that this technique is frowned upon. I am making really good lagers though. My kegged and cooled ones seem to hit their peak flavors sooner than the bottled ones, but nothing off in the bottled ones either, just takes a little longer to reach its peak. Just make sure you don't jostle the bottle around and leave all the sediment in the bottle when you pour it.

 

“I haven't done a long secondary lager before bottling though, I just brew, ferment for a few weeks, cool down for a week or two, bottle, carb @ room temp, then let it age, some have been at ambient in the garage through the Summer like my Dopplebock (took 1st place in a BJCP comp). I realize that this technique is frowned upon. I am making really good lagers though.”

It just goes to show that there are many ways to homebrew quality beer. The proof that your technique works is proved out by: “I am making really good lagers though’”

I homebrew my lagers via conventional methods: Primary at 50°F and then lager in a secondary at cold temperatures (less than 38°F) for one week for every 2P of original gravity (I typically make 1.050 gravity lagers and lager for 6-7 weeks).

I am very happy with the results I obtain via my homebrewing practice but I do not doubt for a minute that you are making high quality lagers your way.

Cheers to you!

 

I have never bottle conditioned a lager beer, sorry I am not trying to hijack this thread, just curious if anybody have any experiences in regards the difference between force-carb and priming with sugar a pilsner beer.

Edit : Difference in regards flavor and/or type of bubbles,etc

 

It is not a one-to-one correlation as I brewed 2 beers from the same mash, one with Mosaic, Simcoe, Calypso, with Munich Lager that was DHd and kegged, the other beer got Liberty, US Saaz, and Sterling, Budvar yeast, and was bottled. They were both good beers. Same color, same clarity. The head on both versions was bleach white, creamy, thick, and rich; they held up well, slow fade to thick cap that lasted through the entire glass, great lace rings with each sip. The bottled version held a bottle cap on top of the foam stand. As far as appearance goes, they looked like the same exact beer, just smelled and tasted worlds apart.

 

I have bottled lagers by re-yeasting and I have bottled lagers by not re-yeasting. Both have worked for me, which leads me to conclude that re-yeasting is for non-believers. These guys are tough. They won't let you down.

Unless you filter or take measures to kill your yeast, there will be some hangers on who will finish the deal for you. It might take them a little time, though, so. make sure the yeast have cleaned up the diacetyl before transferring to bottling bucker, add sugar according to your favorite priming calculator, and wait two weeks to crack one, just so you hear a satisfying hiss that lets you know something'd going on. Drink it, of course, but it likely won't be as carbonated as it is going to get. Probably 1-2 weeks after that. Give it a warm space to encourage them - the amount of sugar in there will be low enough that off flavors resulting from high fermentation temps will be minimal.

 

Peter, have you ever made a high gravity lager and then lagered it for 3 months? If so, was it your experience that there was sufficient healthy yeast to bottle condition?

Cheers!

 

Jack, I only have made one high gravity lager, and my approach on this one was a little different but valid, IMO. I made a 1.080 beer and bottled it when it reached terminal gravity (75% apparent attentuation) and passed my diacetyl rest test. I bottle primed at the D-rest temp, so I let it carbonate before I lagered in the bottle. So this is another way to go if you are really concerned about yeast being around to do the job.

 

Peter, thanks for your input. I have brewed many lagers (over 70 batches) but every one of those lagers were of moderate gravity (e.g., 1.050). The longest that I have lagered was 7 weeks. If I brewed a high gravity lager (e.g., Baltic Porter) and lagered for 3 months I would personally be concerned whether the yeast was vital & healthy enough to finish the job (i.e., carbonate the beer during bottle conditioning). A packet of dry yeast is pretty cheap. I personally would add a packet of rehydrated dry yeast as insurance for successful carbonation. It is entirely possible that that there may be sufficient healthy yeast left to complete the job but for a few bucks why not pitch some more yeast at bottling?

Cheers!

 

When I said re-yeasting is for non-believers, my scorn was a bit tongue and cheek. I've tried to bottle condition lagers a few different ways because of my own doubts. Also, I need to be careful not to misrepresent myself as an expert who has thoroughly experimented with bottle conditioning lagers, because my sample size is low. Throwing a little yeast in there for added security until someone makes a definitive study sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

 

like pweis909 I too have bottled lagers with and without added yeast and both have carbed the beer just fine. This is including a 1.082 dopplebock that had lagered for 3 months. I bottled that beer without yeast and it carbed just fine. Then I re-brewed that dopplebock the following year with the addition of 2 cups of bourbon. That time I used dry yeast when I bottled, and as expected that carbonated fine as well. I have a kolsch that I brew regularly. I lager that for 1 month, and have never used dry yeast when I bottle that beer and it has carbed fine every time.

Now I keg, and bottle from the keg, so haven't had to worry about that for a couple years.

Use yeast, don't use yeast. Either way I think you'll be fine.

 

Same here. I've never had to "reyeast" any of the lagers I've made. I always rack to secondary and then lager in secondary for at least a month and a half at around 38-40F. Once done lagering just bottle and let it carb like any ale. Might take a little longer to carb up than an ale but no good beer is rushed in my opinion!!