Base malt..

That is what crystal malt (Dextrins & other unfermentable sugars), wheat & unmalted grains (Proteins), maltodextrin (Dextrins), Lactose (Unfermentable Sugar) or mashing higher (Dextrins) are for.

For base malt, you can look at diastatic power and sugar content, but the effects are pretty minimal.

 

I'm gonna say either wheat malt or rye malt, all else being equal.

 

If you brewed with 100% Munich Malt the resulting beer would have a higher final gravity.

Cheers!

 

Not the case in my experience. It's true specialty malts have a big impact on body with a comparatively small percentage of the grain bill. However, subtle differences in base malt kilning and barley variety will be more amplified simply because they usually make up 80% or more of the grain bill.

Brew two Ambers and, all else equal, use a 4L pale ale malt in one and a 1-2L US 2-row in the other. I guarantee there will be a noticeable difference in the body of the beer.

 

I've done this with a Mild using around a 5.3 L base malt (Mild Malt) and 2.5 L Pale malt, both mashed at 156 F. No noticeable difference in the mouthfeel or FG. Granted its one beer, but the only thing that really was different was the flavor profile.

I can see this being more apparent if something like Munich (10-20 L) was used as the base malt.

 

http://www.brewingwithbriess.com/Assets/PDFs/Briess_PISB_AshburneMildMalt.pdf
http://www.cargillfoods.com/na/en/products/malt/specialty-malts/pauls-malt/index.jsp

Mild malts are advertised as sweeter and more dextrinous, but the four or so times I've brewed with these two did not yield noticeably sweet and full bodied beers. Of course, I didn't do side by side batches with 2 row or pale ale malt, but I would say that the effect of basemalt on body would be subtle, all other things being equal (mash temps and specialty malts)

 

Thats exactly why I brewed a Mild with the Briess Mild Malt, but was pretty bummed about the way the body and flavor of the beer turned out. I actually preferred the Pale malt alternative I brewed the same day. Thankfully the third time I brewed one I used Marris Otter (for Flavor) and ratcheted up the mash temp (160 F) and crystal malt (~20% of the grist split between GNO, English Extra Dark and Medium crystal), and finally got the flavor profile and body I wanted.

 

4L Pale malt...but it will be subtle compared to a Crystal Police house raid or a 160*F mash : )

 

Why would that be?

 

Below is courtesy of Kai Troester:

“grain bill composition (base malt): mashes with high diastatic power (Pilsner,

Pale) will produce more fermentable worts since they contain a lager amount of

beta-amylase which can produce more maltose compared to mashes with lower

diastatic power (Munich or large amounts of unmalted grains) assuming the same

saccharification rest temperature.”

Cheers!

P.S. You can read more here:http://braukaiser.com/documents/Effects_of_mash_parameters_on_attenuation_and_efficiency.pdf

 

You left a very important part out of your original statement:

 

Interesting question for sure. When I think of "more body", I think of increased mouth feel. Thicker vs. thinner, but not related to sweetness. Based on what I've read, and assuming a single infusion mash (no step mash or decoction to adjust protein conversion), then I think perhaps the malt's modification level based on the Kolbach Index or soluble nitrogen ratio (SNR) may be the best indicator of potential body/mouth feel due to the resulting proteins in the final beer. For highly modified malts this index is in the 35-45% range. Thicker body would be at the lower end of the range, and thinner body at the upper end. Note these values obviously change from harvest to harvest, but here are some data points from malt analysis sheets I had from one of our club bulk buys a few years ago:

Thomas Fawcett Optic: 37.6
Thomas Fawcett Golden Promise: 38.0
Thomas Fawcett Wheat: 38.4
Best Pilsen: 40.0
Best Vienna: 40.1
Best Munich Light: 40.4
Baird Maris Otter: 41.4
Best Munich Dark: 42.0
Best Wheat: 42.8
Canada 2-row: 43.2
Great Western premium 2-row: 43.9
Baird Pale: 44.6

So, I'm not sure you could generalize that one category of base malt (2-row, Pils, Munich, etc.) vs. another would be a better contributor to body.

 

The OP asked the question of: “Which base malt gives beer the most BODY?”

There were no questions concerning mash thickness, mash time, grind, mash pH, saccharification rest temperature, etc,

The question implied that with all other conditions being equal, which base malt would yield a beer with the most body. My answer was 100% Munich Malt.

Cheers!

 

With the highest °L still fermentable base malts. An easier way is to alter the mash temperature higher before one starts dumping in adjuncts like wheat or rye.

 

One of my upcoming beers is an octoberfest where I'm using ~97% 5-7L Munich malt. Should I do a beta amylase rest for 30 minutes before ramping up to my sacch rest to avoid an overly sweet lager or would you not worry about it?

 

I do not have personal experience with brewing with 97% (or 100%) Munich malt. The most Munich malt that I have used (in an Oktoberfest beer) is about 50% of the grist.

The fact that you are using a lower kilned Munich Malt ( 5-7L Munich malt) is an ‘indicator’ that you may experience less of a fermentability issue but the diastatic power of the malt is the better indicator.

Do you have an ‘issue’ with you beer having a lower final gravity? There really is no ‘problem’ with having a beer with a higher final gravity (more mouthfeel). I have made some beers using Munich Malt which had higher final gravities (Oktoberfest, Alts) which I thoroughly enjoyed!

If you are looking for you beer to have a lower final gravity then Kai Troester states:

“When working with large amounts of highly kilned malts attenuation and efficiency
problems can arise due to the lower diastatic power (enzymatic strength) of these malts.This can be counteracted by lower mash temperature and longer mashes or the addition of diastatic stronger malt to the grist (e.g. 10-20% of Pale/Pilsner malt).”

Cheers!

 

No I don't have issues with low FG's but I've never brewed a basically all Munich beer before and didn't know how much impact on ferment ability I would face. I too don't mind high FG especially in a malt forward style like octoberfest. Thanks for the great input jack.

 

Several years ago I made a stout with munich as the base malt. Back then I used 60 min single infusion and I don't recall any problems with sweetness or conversion. However, I came to realize that I don't like munich as the sole base malt. Even at 50% in an Octoberfest or alt I can find it overwhelming.