Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Cider Digest #1548
Subject: Cider Digest #1548, 18 January 2010
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #1548 18 January 2010
Cider and Perry Discussion Forum
Contents:
Hydropress (Andrew Lea)
Sulfite loss during fermentation (Andrew Lea)
Re: Cider Digest #1547, 13 January 2010 (Bear Swamp Orchard)
Re: Cider Digest #1547, 13 January 2010 (Mike Faul)
hydropresses ()
NOTE: Digest appears whenever there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider#Archives
Digest Janitor: Dick Dunn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Hydropress
From: Andrew Lea <andrew@harphill.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:33:54 +0000
Kristen Jordan wrote:
> Has anyone used a hydropress? We're thinking of purchasing one. It looks
> like it might save a bit of labour but we are wondering whether the juice
> yield will be as high as our rack and cloth press.
Neighbours of mine use a hobby model hydropress made by Speidel in
Germany and sold into the UK by Vigo. See
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/HarpHill/20081011JuicingAtManor?authkey=Gv1sRgCLGc
mtec2Yz4Yg&feat=directlink
It works fine and is a dream to clean without racks and only one cloth.
However, to get good yields with apple the pulp must be quite fine and
in the case of this model there is a dedicated Speidel knife mill which
is highly recommended. Without it I understand the yields are not good.
For the hobbyist with a fairly deep pocket it is ideal and probably much
better value and easier to use and store than an equivalent size rack
and cloth press. For commercial use I'm not so sure. The unit charge of
pulp is quite small and it could become tedious compared to a larger
pack press.
Andrew Lea
nr Oxford UK
www.cider.org.uk
------------------------------
Subject: Sulfite loss during fermentation
From: Andrew Lea <andrew@harphill.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:59:20 +0000
Jason wrote:
>
> I am curious as to the fate of sulfites added to cider before
> fermentation. Do they stay in solution as bound sulfites or do they
> literally precipitate out? I had always assumed the former, but as I
> test my ciders for sulfites over time it appears that the levels of
> total(not free) sulfites is dropping. Might this be a reflection of
> what is happening in the cider or is it a result of poor laboratory
> skills?
If a progressive decline it is unlikely to be your laboratory skills. It
could be degradation of the iodine solution but I think that would make
the figures go up, not down. The standard answer to your question is
that although most sulfite is bound (see SO2 page and spreadsheet on my
website) some quite small portion of added sulfite is not bound but is
irreversibly oxidised to sulfate (which stays in solution). The extent
of this will depend on the presence of oxidizing enzymes in the few
minutes after pressing, plus general access to in situ oxidising agents
such as peroxide thereafter. You do not say when you made your
measurements (before, during or after fermentation) but here are some
figures reported by Len Burroughs on a cider juice at Long Ashton in
1958. Do yours show the same pattern?
Time Total SO2 ppm
5 min 174
2 hrs 173
4 hrs 166
22 hrs 170
3 days 162
4 days 163
Fermentation began at 4 days and reached SG 1.002 at 16 days. Thereafter
Len recorded total figures as follows:
16 days 160
Centrifuged 161
Overnight at 0C 157
Carbonated / bottled 156
Pasteurised 147
Stored 4 weeks 137
Stored 14 months 125
Note that like all truthful experimentalists Len recorded the actual
figures even when they apparently increased (due to experimental error)!
Andrew Lea
www.cider.org.uk
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cider Digest #1547, 13 January 2010
From: Bear Swamp Orchard <apples@bearswamporchard.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:24:03 -0500
Kristen,
We have a small (micro ?) commercial orchard that we just added a
cidermill to this past year. Because of our scale and the need for
flexibility with our space we went with a Lanceman water powered
press from OESCO.
After one season I am very happy with the way the press/grinder set
up worked.
The press works very well. A lot of it I think is thanks to the
grinder. I bought the small grinder that OESCO (I am not associated
with them) makes that does a fantastic job. The yield varied this
year between 2.5-3.5 gallons per bushel depending on the cultivar,
how long they had been sitting (sweating) and time of year.
It is easy to clean, there is a cloth that lines the tub that just
pulls out when you tilt it to clean it. From there you just rinse the
whole thing off and thats it. Like all clothes it can be a pain to
get all of the tiny bits out of it but unlike a rack press, there is
only the one cloth.
I t didn't seem to that there were a lot of options out there that
would be efficient for for a small commercial cider mill. It needed
to be affordable but it also needed to work and not waste allot of
time and apples. I liked the size, portability, ease of cleaning
and pressing ability of this one. As well as the price to juice
ratio. We made probably around 600 + gallons this year with it this
season, and the max that we would press would be around 1000 gallons
given the size of our orchard, so scale wise it suits us well.
good luck,
Steve
Bear Swamp Orchard
Jennifer Williams & Steve Gougeon
1209 B Hawley Rd
Ashfield, MA 01330
email - apples@bearswamporchard.com
413-625-2849
413-768-7989 - cell (out in the orchard)
www.bearswamporchard.com
> Subject: Hydro presses
> From: kristen.jordan@shaw.ca
> Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:25:17 +0000
>
> Hello Cider Digest,
>
> Has anyone used a hydropress? We're thinking of purchasing one. It
> looks
> like it might save a bit of labour but we are wondering whether the
> juice
> yield will be as high as our rack and cloth press.
>
> Kristen Jordan
> Sea Cider Farm & Ciderhouse
> Victoria, BC
> Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cider Digest #1547, 13 January 2010
From: Mike Faul <mfaul@faul.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:54:19 -0800
If you mean a 'standard' grape bladder press then I would not suggest
that. I have tried those and they do not work as well.
------------------------------
Subject: hydropresses
From: <derek_bisset@shaw.ca>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:57:36 -0800
Kristen asked about hydropresses. I used one for several yars and found
it quick to operate and producing a yield as good as rack and cloth. It
was easy to clean and keep sterile. However I found myself reluctant to
use it finally and went back to rack and cloth.
The screen on mine is designed for grapes and apple pulp came through
requiring the use of a liner always.
Discharging spent pulp meant waiting while the bladder drained and removing
the screen single handed was sometimes heavy work . Removing the spent pulp
could also be messy .
It did not work well with partial loads so it made it difficult to do a
small batch of a single variety apple.
Filling a load could be messier sometimes depending on the condition of the
pulp.
Some of these awkwardnesses could be got around by using air pressure - mine
was water operated.
Filling and emptying the bladder with air could quicker and less messy .
There is provision on these to allow for air adaptation although a
compressor would then be required.
One surprise was the efficiency of the bladder . Because it has a large
area against the pulp compared to a top pressure plate it was able to press
a load very quickly even with 50psi water pressure produced by my well
pump. I use a 20ton jack press and it does no better either in speed or
yield
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #1548
*************************
