- I have always used (Initial Specific Gravity - Final Specific

Gravity) X 135 to calculate the abv of a fermented wash.

Reviewing TA's site, I saw (ISG-FSG) X 129 ! ! ! !

About a 5% difference. Which one is right?

I got the 135 factor from Lines Big Book a bazillion years ago. I

think Miller uses the same factor.

Mark - It depends on the og of your wine/beer.

for say 1.040 beer, 0.129 is close, but for wines say

1.100 .135 is better.

This is covered in notice 226 from UK Customs and

Excise. This is the official rulebook for brewers in

the UK.

Unfortunately, I long since lost my copy, so can't

give you the full table, but from memory

og multiplier

1.040 .129

1.060 .135

and approx linear between. Higher ogs aren't linear.

It has something to do with an assumption that the

yeast uses a fixed amount of sugar to initially grow

(producing no ethanol).

Hope that helps,

Rob.

--- Mark <markgofast@...> wrote:

> I have always used (Initial Specific Gravity -

__________________________________________________

> Final Specific

> Gravity) X 135 to calculate the abv of a fermented

> wash.

>

> Reviewing TA's site, I saw (ISG-FSG) X 129 ! ! !

> !

>

> About a 5% difference. Which one is right?

>

> I got the 135 factor from Lines Big Book a bazillion

> years ago. I

> think Miller uses the same factor.

>

> Mark

>

>

>

>

Do You Yahoo!?

Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

http://mail.yahoo.com - For a straight sugar wash 129 is correct. I've seen the derivation of

this from basic principles a couple of times but can't remember where.

Maybe on Tony Ackland's WEB site. Or one of Mike Nixon's postings to

this forum? Or one of Dr. John Stone's book?

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <markgofast@h...> wrote:

> I have always used (Initial Specific Gravity - Final Specific

> Gravity) X 135 to calculate the abv of a fermented wash.

>

> Reviewing TA's site, I saw (ISG-FSG) X 129 ! ! ! !

>

> About a 5% difference. Which one is right?

>

> I got the 135 factor from Lines Big Book a bazillion years ago. I

> think Miller uses the same factor.

>

> Mark - It's definately not constant, unless you og/fg are

constant.

See:

http://tinyurl.com/8cb2y

http://tinyurl.com/c7wlq

that said and done, whats a few % petween friends.

Rob.

--- rodmacd2000 <rmacdoug@...> wrote:

> For a straight sugar wash 129 is correct. I've seen

__________________________________________________

> the derivation of

> this from basic principles a couple of times but

> can't remember where.

>

> Maybe on Tony Ackland's WEB site. Or one of Mike

> Nixon's postings to

> this forum? Or one of Dr. John Stone's book?

>

> --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "Mark"

> <markgofast@h...> wrote:

> > I have always used (Initial Specific Gravity -

> Final Specific

> > Gravity) X 135 to calculate the abv of a fermented

> wash.

> >

> > Reviewing TA's site, I saw (ISG-FSG) X 129 ! !

> ! !

> >

> > About a 5% difference. Which one is right?

> >

> > I got the 135 factor from Lines Big Book a

> bazillion years ago. I

> > think Miller uses the same factor.

> >

> > Mark

>

>

>

>

Do You Yahoo!?

Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

http://mail.yahoo.com