Difference between a pre-Prohibition style lager and post-Prohibition?

From the Surly website:

“Pre-Prohibition American Lager

Surly Nation, 'tis for thee, sweet beer of Liberty!

Light gold in color, #Merica! is an old-school pre-Prohibition American Lager that was brewed in 2015 for the Annual D4th of July party put on by the Minneapolis-based punk band Dillinger Four. One of the only beer styles truly born in the U.S.A, pre-Prohibition American Lagers used corn as an integral part of the flavor profile, rather than as a simple substitute for barley malt. The flaked corn used in #Merica! comes across as a subtle, fresh corn flavor, while soft hop aromatics come from Warrior and Willamette hops, which add a mild fruity, herbal character that stays in the background. #Merica! is perfect for a hot summer day and celebrating the country’s birthday and 21 years of Dillinger Four.

Malt: CMC Pils malt, Acidulated malt, Flaked Corn

Hops: Warrior, Willamette

Yeast: German Lager”

I highlighted in bold the hops used to brew this beer. Neither of these hops were available before Prohibition. Willamette was first released in 1976 while Warrior became available in 2001. Sort of a weird hop selection for a Pre-Prohibition beer.

Cheers!

 

A new brand from Cold Spring's Third Street division --"Brewer's Tears"-- will see distribution over the summer. I have no connection to the brewery so I don't know exactly what this recipe calls for, but it's interesting to see Pre-Prohibition heritage as being integral to the marketing of a new, lager brand from one of our oldest regional breweries.

I reckoned I'd tag @JackHorzempa -- and bump the thread in the process, naturally.

 

@Chaz, if you drink this beer please report back. I will not 'see' this beer since Cold Springs only distributes in the Mid-West.

The label has an intriguing story about finding an old Brewery Logbook. This reminds me of how Coors 'sold' their Pre-Prohibition beer of Batch 19. Keith Villa went on local morning news shows with the logbook in hand intimating that Batch 19 was brewed per the old recipe but it really wasn't.

It will be interesting how 'true to recipe' this Cold Spring (Third Street) beer will be. If they provide details like they use hops like Willamette to brew this beer it is not brewed per the logbook recipe.

Cheers!

P.S. According to BA, Batch 19 is no longer being brewed by Coors. Selling lagers to the beer geek segment of the craft beer market is a challenge.

 

Will do! I'm looking forward to it.

With their Third Street line, Cold Spring has grown distribution incrementally ("organically", although I prefer not to use that term), and each of the Third Street brands I've tried has been solid and "approachable" (to less lifestyle-invested drinkers) in turn.

I reckon their Minnesota Gold might become a go-to Craft lager, once it finds its niche.

 

There is not much information about Minnesota Gold on the Third Street Brewing website; they mostly just talk about the water.

I found some useful information on a BA review of this beer:

“This is a pretty good lager! Very simple, no frills or modern flavor twists. This is in the style of the traditional American lager we grew up with but a cut above your favorite adjunct lager as this is brewed with only high quality ingredients: 2 row and Crystal malts; Columbus and Saaz hops and Minnesota water. No adjuncts...no added crap and you can tell in the crisp taste and grainy, neutral nose.”

Sp, it is all malt and I am guessing bittered with Columbus hops and some Saaz hops for flavoring.

Do you happen to know how many IBUs?

Cheers!

 

There's one source which has it at 15, but that seems lower than what I recall (low 20s) when reading up on the beer during its initial launch. It isn't a CAP or anything like that, but it is a great all-around, all-malt lager.

 

The "Pre-Prohibition Pilsener" Champagne Velvet from Upland Brewing just showed up in Boston last week, since we are now getting some beers distributed from them here. I picked up a 4 pack of the 16oz cans for $9.99. Looking forward to trying it now.

https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/1170/93587/

http://www.uplandbeer.com/brew/champagne-velvet/

 

Except in 1919, even though National Prohibition via the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act wouldn't yet be in effect, there would have still not been a legal beer at 4.7% ABV since Wilson had used his power under the Lever Act to limit beer to under 2.75% to ration grain, starting in Jan 1918.

Al brewing was prohibited after Dec. 1918 and, then, after Jan. 1919, breweries were re-opened (well, some of them) but only "non-intoxicating" beer was permitted.

 

Tröegs just released a Scratch beer (278) that they consider a pre-prohibition style Lager. I had it last week and thought it was very good.

 

“Amber Lager #278

Scratch Series / On Tap

5.0% Abv

24 Ibu

Malt: Floor Malted Pilsner, Munich, Vienna

Hops: Hallertau Mittelfrüh

Yeast: House Lager

Generally referred to as “Pre-Prohibition Lager” in today’s beer lingo, the Vienna Lager’s defining characteristic is its toasted malt flavor, which suggests crusty bread and fresh baked biscuits. Hallertau Mittelfrüh hops impart a blend of spice, citrus, and wildflowers to this traditional German beer style.

Availability: draft & growler fills only.”

http://www.troegs.com/beer/amber-lager/

There were a number of varieties of lagers produced in America prior to prohibition so…

Based upon my readings of “Pre-Prohibition Lager” many folks associate that verbiage with what we homebrewers call the Classic American Pilsner (CAP) style since the lager that was most widely sold in America prior to Prohibition would have been a CAP beer (e.g., Budweiser for example).

Based upon the information above I personally would classify Scratch #278 as being a Vienna Lager.

Cheers!

 

I keep meaning to do a study of this aspect of US "light lager" beers in the Prohibition and Post-Repeal eras but from the stats I've seen, that while the OG of the beers certainly went down, the real degree of attenuation went up constantly after Repeal.

The average of US beers, for instance:

1937 - 57.1 %
1950 - 60.0 %
1960 - 61.7 %
1970 - 63.8 %
1983 - 64.6 %​

The well-known American Brewer study, 25 Years of Brewing (1958, so 25 years since Repeal) even noted it then:

I imagine that has continued for "macro" beers (even discounting the rise and eventual dominance of low calorie "light beer"). While the recipes and attenuation figures are unavailable, there are numerous cases of the ABV of those beers having actually risen over the years - of course, allowable tolerances could explain some of the differences, too. ABV is certainly more important to the consumer since the legalization of noting it on beer labels in the mid-1990s.

Just two examples, (alcohol by volume):

Budweiser --- 1982 - 4.8% (a) / 2017 - 5%
Coors --- 1970s- 4.5% (b) /1980s - 4.625% (b) / 2017 - 5%

a) MJ's Pocket Guide 1982
b) Coors promo books​

 

4 and five eighths? That's a helluva'n accurate hydrometer!

 

What - you don't think Coors had the money for that sort of hydrometer (and to pay the lab assistant who had to count them tiny lines? And to offer their employees a Prescription Safety Glasses Plan?).

Actually, the Coors books from the '70s and 80s are from the era in the US of "Alcohol by Weight" - so they said "3.6%" and "3.7%" ABW, respectively. My favorite is that they brewed* a "regular" 3.3% ABW Coors Light and a 3.2% ABW Coors Light for the Three/Two markets. Really? 0.1% difference? Why bother?

* "Brewed" might be a euphemism - they could have just brewed a high gravity Coors Light and diluted to those two slightly different strengths.

 

Sad news. I happened to enjoy that beer.

 

Do you think that was really a documented calculation, or did they fudge numbers the way the wine makers do and just bottle the same beer?

Wonder what that beer tasted like, Coors is so bland at its regular ABV, why not drink bottled water?

 

I can see the ABV going up, as more corn or rice as a percentage would give more fermentable sugars.

 

Thanks for that post. Raw history with subtle conjecture is fun to read. And yet, here in post-prohibition North Carolina, brewers must print ABV on beers only if above 6%. I'm of the thinking that a lot goes on with beer choices in grades up to 6% and that all beers should have ABV noted.

 

JK, do any of your sources indicate why this was the case?

Is it the case of ever increasing percentages of adjuncts like Jeff posted?

Cheers!

 

Well, increased adjunct percentage and the rise in the attenuation, as "hopfenunmaltz" pointed out, are obviously correlated but the "why" is simply the half a century or more (Repeal through the 1980s) desire of US brewers- and of their customers if one believes the brewers - for lighter and lighter beer. Same as the ever-lowering BUs of the standard US light lagers in the period (which, obviously, also was interlinked with the lightening of the beer).

After that, comes up the old canard that it was all about "cheapening" the beer. I mean, every company wants to save money (even one which "knows of no brand produced by any other brewer which costs so much to brew and age...") but I think that was just a happy byproduct of making a beer that was selling more and more. There were alternatives (heavier beers, all-malt beers, ales, etc) but the brewers who made them eventually fell by the wayside or switched recipes to try to compete.

 

FWIW, I believe the brewers here. In my opinion their principle goal is to serve the market - give the customers what they want. In contemporary times this means beers like Bud Light, Coors Light, Miller Lite,...

Thank goodness there are lots of craft breweries willing to serve the 'alternative' market of craft beer.

Cheers!