Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0632
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 91/05/08 03:07:57
HOMEBREW Digest #632 Wed 08 May 1991
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Belgian Lambics mailing list (Mike Sharp)
SF brewpubs (Eric Simmon)
Re: cheap malt extract (BAUGHMANKR)
Re: looking for second brew book (John DeCarlo)
Re: Siphoning Method (John DeCarlo)
Re: Wort Straining (John DeCarlo)
Re: Removing Cold Break (John DeCarlo)
Re: Homebrew Digest #630 (May 06, 1991) (Jean Hunter)
a non-beer related cooling question (krweiss)
bottle contamination worries (krweiss)
Carapils (C.R. Saikley)
Re: Homebrew Digest #631 (May 07, 1991) (Darryl Richman)
Fermentables in Dark Malts (Don McDaniel)
Cheaper extract. ("DRCV06::GRAHAM")
Siphoning tip (Carl West x4449)
hop growing question (Carl West x4449)
SN culturing question (Carl West x4449)
Re: Oregon Brew Bashing (David Lim)
looking for brewpot (mbharrington)
sanitizing bottles (mbharrington)
unsubscribe (Michael Westmore)
Maibock == Heller Bock (07-May-1991 0923)
Hunter phone number (Ken Johnson)
Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmi@hplabs.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmi@hplabs.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues]
Archives are available from netlib@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 8:21:28 EDT
From: msharp@hawk.ulowell.edu (Mike Sharp)
Subject: Belgian Lambics mailing list
Hi!
Just wanted everyone to know that the Belgian Lambics mailing
list is up and running. This has started as a relativly
technical forum so may not be for everyone. Currently most of
the articles center around two test batches, the techniques used
to make them, and the behavior of the specific bacteria/yeast.
Anyway, my point for posting this was to let everyone know the
new addresses:
lambic@cs.ulowell.edu for submissions
lambic-request@cs.ulowell.edu for administrative junk
--Mike Sharp
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 09:29:36 EDT
From: simmon@eeel.nist.gov (Eric Simmon)
Subject: SF brewpubs
I am going to be in San Fransisco next week for a conference. Could someone please send me a list of good brewpubs and microbreweries to check out while I'm there.
Also, I want to brew a good, dry hopped, extract pale ale. Anybody have any good recipes? Any good Dopplebock recipes?
Please Email.
Thanks
Eric D. Simmon
simmon@eeel.nist.gov
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 1991 10:19 EST
From: BAUGHMANKR@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU
Subject: Re: cheap malt extract
>Some friends and I recently purchased some 60-pound, 5 gallon buckets
>of malt. We paid wholesale prices, and picked it up it directly from
>the processor. Our price was $50.00/bucket, with a minimum purchase
>of three (or maybe it was five). That works out to $0.83/pound, which
>we were quite pleased with. Unfortunately this was a one-time deal
>that I don't think we can repeat, but it does give you an idea of what
>a supply shop must pay.
Don't forget that most shops can't pick up those 60-pound pails
directly from the processor so their prices reflect an appreciable
shipping charge.
Kinney
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 7 May 1991 10:19:13 EDT
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: looking for second brew book
>From: mbharrington@UCSD.EDU
>I own Papazian's book and love it dearly. I'd also like to get
>something else, just for a second opinion and more recipes. I'm
>considering Miller's book, but just thought I'd see what y'all
>thought of it before I paid for it. Any comments?
What do you want the book for? I think that Miller's book is
more useful for brewing technique than Papazian's. Papazian has
some interesting recipes, especially for us extract brewers. I
also like Byron Burch's _Brewing_Quality_Beers_ as a concise
description of brewing.
Once you get into it, there are lots of other books on specific
topics.
Anyone have a Brewing/Beer Book Bibliography on-line?
John "I only have about two dozen books related to brewing so
far" DeCarlo
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
(or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 7 May 1991 10:28:02 EDT
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Siphoning Method
>From: huyink@npdiss3.StPaul.NCR.COM (Dave Huyink)
>I siphon twice with every batch, once from the primary fermenter
>(food grade plastic) to the secondary (glass carboy) and once
>more from the secondary to the bottles. I start the siphon by
>sucking on the tube.
> ...
>With very little practice, you can start the siphon and pull the
>tube out of your mouth before the beer actually reaches the end
>of the tube.
>...
>I am probably more careful than I have to be about sanitation
>since at the bottling stage the beer is already fermented
OK, let me say that I have not had any problems with
contamination, but I may be lucky in what resides in the air and
dust in my house. On the other hand, I love to *taste* the beer,
as fresh as I can. *Therefore*, I start the siphon with my
mouth, and drink a little bit of it, before transferring the
siphon to the container. I do this when racking to the secondary
and when racking to my priming bucket before bottling. Now,
I don't know what I would do about tasting the beer if I changed
methods, and wouldn't want to give that up.
John "*I* like the taste at all stages" DeCarlo
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
(or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 7 May 1991 10:28:58 EDT
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Wort Straining
>From: Bob Hettmansperger
> <Bob_Hettmansperger@klondike.bellcore.com>
>I also have a rather large funnel with a metal screen
>near the bottom to strain the wort as I pour it into the carboy.
>Well, I tried it for the first time last night, and when I went
>to pour the boiled wort into the carboy, I found that the screen
>got clogged almost instantly from the hops.
I use this method (though I plan to try the whirlpool and
siphoning someday) and equipment. You need to keep a spoon or
something to stir the hops around so they don't clop up the
funnel. Every so often I stop and dump the hops into a pan and
continue on. The hop bed on the strainer helps get more of the
hot break particulates from getting into the fermenter (I am
told). It works best with two people, but my funnel fits nicely
and stably in the carboy neck, so I can manage it myself.
Oh, and you can try a hop bag to keep your hops in if you want to
make the hop cleanup easier. Then you can put the bag on the
screen and pour through that without causing any clogging.
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
(or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 7 May 1991 10:29:55 EDT
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Removing Cold Break
I went back and read the _zymurgy_ article, "The Trouble with
Trub". Let me quote a few portions:
"Hot break and cold break should be removed before fermentation
to create easy access for the yeast to the nutrient base, as well
as to delete negative flavor components."
Followed later by:
"The consensus on cold break influencing the flavor of the beer
is mixed. It is well-documented that total removal of cold break
creates negative attributes for the fermentation cycle and the
final flavor spectrum. ... However, the advantage of cold-break
removal is apparent with respect to vitality of the yeast reuse."
So, my interpretation was to remove as much of the cold break as
you can, but not *all* of it. Though it isn't discussed,
presumably the oft-used methods we homebrewers use *don't remove
all the cold break*. So I decided not to worry.
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
(or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 May 91 11:09:13 EDT
From: Jean Hunter <MS3Y@CORNELLA.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #630 (May 06, 1991)
Davin Lim asks if a microwave oven would be any use in sterilizing. No,
because they heat so unevenly that you might melt one part of your plastic
hose while another part barely warmed up. The microwaves themselves do not
have sufficient energy to disrupt the DNA of contaminating bacteria. Micro
waves are like radio waves; they have a wavelength longer than visible light.
You would need UV light or the even shorter wave X-rays to decontaminate
your equipment. The only use I know for a microwave in brewing is to warm
your sterile stock of malt extract agar before pouring out some new slants.
Or to pop some popcorn to go with that great home brew. --Cheers, Jean
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 08:19:43 -0700
From: krweiss@ucdavis.edu
Subject: a non-beer related cooling question
Get those flamethrowers ready -- this is a non-brewing related query!
A net.correspondant of mine has a 300 gallon marine aquarium. The intense
lighting and high capacity pumps needed to support this monster are raising
the water temperature to an unacceptable level. For about $1400 she could
buy a stainless steel thermostatically controlled chiller to maintain 75
degrees. She's looking for a lower cost solution.
It occurred to me that the participants in HBD might have some good
suggestions on a cut rate way to maintain a mass of salt water at a set
temperature. I thought of using a stainless coil inside a small
refrigerator, with a Hunter energy monitor to maintain the temp. Any
other/better ideas? Design parameters:
Must achieve about a 10 degree drop from ambient temperature.
Must maintain temperature +- 1 degree F.
Must be non-corrosive and non-toxic (i.e. copper tubing is probably out)
Must cost less than $1400
Thanks for your consideration. Since this is non-brewing related, please
direct all replies to me at krweiss@ucdavis.edu, and I'll summarize if
anything comes in that looks like it would be of general interest.
Ken Weiss
Manager of Instruction
Computing Services
U.C. Davis
Davis, CA 95616
916/752-5554
krweiss@ucdavis.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 08:19:49 -0700
From: krweiss@ucdavis.edu
Subject: bottle contamination worries
>Date: 05/06/91
>From: Joe Kendall <SYSHJK%GSU.EDU@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
>Subject: Bottling and cleanliness
>
> I'm about to bottle my first batch of homebrew in about a week. I'd like
to
> clean and sanitize my bottles the night before I bottle. I'm worried
that
> doing this will allow the bottles to get contaminated. How long can I
expect
> a bottle to remain sanitary when it's sitting on a counter in a clean
kitchen?
> Should I cover the bottles? Store them upside down in their cardboard
box?
> Thanks in advance for the help.
Joe,
I run my bottles through the dishwasher as I drink 'em, and keep them in a
kitchen cabinet until I'm ready to bottle. No sanitizing, no nothing. I
keep them right side up and uncovered. I have (please don't strike me down
for hubris, Lord!) never had a problem with contamination. I think you'll
be reasonably safe, assuming the bottles are clean to begin with.
Ken Weiss
Manager of Instruction
Computing Services
U.C. Davis
Davis, CA 95616
916/752-5554
krweiss@ucdavis.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 09:49:39 PDT
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Carapils
From: BAUGHMANKR@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU
>How do they malt Cara-pils so that it doesn't have any convertible
>starches?
Carapils is made very much like crystal malt. It goes thru the same
steeping and germination periods that all malt does. After germination,
pale malt, Munich malt, chocolate malt and black patent malt are dried
and then roasted to the desired degree.
Crystal malt and carapils are not dried. They are raised to saccharification
temp while still moist, allowing starch->sugar conversion in the hulls.
Crystal malts are then raised to a still higher temp to allow carmelization
of the newly formed sugars. This is why crystal adds residual sweetness,
the carmelized sugars taste sweet, but are not fermentable.
Carapils is dried at a lower temp, so it does not go through the
carmelization that crystal does. The amount of dextrin in carapils is
controlled by the temp during starch->sugar conversion. If you mash with
carapils, you can convert these dextrins into simple sugars, thereby
losing those elements that the maltster so painstakingly provided.
Given that the conversion takes place in the uncracked grains, I don't
think that it's accurate to say that carapils has no convertible starches.
Here is an attempt at ascii graphics :
BARLEY
|
|
------------------------------------
| |
| |
FLAKED MALT
BARLEY |
| |
| -------------------------
ROASTED | |
BARLEY | |
CARAPILS PALE MALT
| |
CRYSTAL MUNICH
|
CHOCOLATE
|
BLACK PATENT
Hope this helps,
CR
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 09:57:29 -0700
From: darryl@ism.isc.com (Darryl Richman)
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #631 (May 07, 1991)
I'd like to second Martin Lodahl's impressions of the west coast first
round of the national competition. Anyone who sent a beer to San
Francisco owes a debt to Russ Wigglesworth, Brook Ostrom, and Paddy
Giffen. I salute you for the best run competition I've experienced.
We also owe thanks to Anchor Brewing for allowing the use of their
excellent facilities. Behind the scenes, Russ had all of the entries
on his computer, and the results were tallied within an hour of the
collection of the last judging sheet. I think that the biggest
flight tasted was 11 beers, the average more like 7 or 8. With
35 or so judges this weekend, three judges per flight, and two flights
per day, this was a most professional event. I hope that the other
sites can carry on in this Grand Tradition in the making.
> HBD's own
> Darryl Richman and C.R. Saikley, for example, are even better in
> real life than in print.
Wull, garsh. >blush!< Ya ain't so bad yerself. (Oww! I seem to
have strained my arm reaching behind my back! ;-)
--Darryl Richman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 11:15:44 -0600
From: dinsdale@chtm.unm.edu (Don McDaniel)
Subject: Fermentables in Dark Malts
in HBD 631, Dale Veeneman says:
> Second question (also related to recent discussion): I know
> ^^^^^^
>that dark grains have no fermentables, so there is no need to
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>mash. However, Papazian recommends cracking all speciality
>^^^^
>grains, put in the cold water, bring to boil, and then remove,
>while Burch says to put uncracked dark grains directly in the
>boil for the whole time. I've done it both ways, and while I
>haven't noticed strong tannins with Burch's method, I still
>wonder what's really better?
I'm not the sage that some of the more experienced contributors
to this digest are, but I am an all-grain brewer with ten batches
of experience. (So much for establishing credibility) I feel
compelled to respond to Dale's highlighted statement which, judging
from other recent postings is a common misconception.
Dark grains have no enzymes with which to convert starch to sugar.
Enzymes are produced in the sprouting or "malting" process. They
are naturally produced to allow the seed to convert its starches
into sugar which can be metabolized (wrong word for a plant I'm sure)
in the growth of the plant shoot. The sprouting of the grain is
then stopped by the maltster so that we brewers can use the enzymes
and starch at our convenience. Dark grains are kilned at high
temperatures. This roasting carmelizes some of the starches and
de-activates the enzymes. There ARE still starches which may be
converted to sugars if the grains are mashed with pale malts which
have excess enzymes. Miller's figures for extract are 24-25
points of gravity per pound per gallon for dark roasted malts.
This compares
with 35-36 points for typical pale malts.
In my recipe formulation I account for the fermentables in dark malts
and my OGs have been coming in very close to my calculated expected
gravities. So, if you want to get the most of your malts...MASH.
Don McDaniel
dinsdale@chtm.unm.edu
------------------------------
Date: 7 May 91 15:15:00 EDT
From: "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <graham%drcv06.decnet@drcvax.af.mil>
Subject: Cheaper extract.
In 630 comment was made about not finding liquid extract for less than
$2.00 per pound. In #631 a brewer fell into a deal of less than a dollar
per pound. While this is not likely to be repeatable, I have found $1.33
to $1.50 per pound at several mail order shops if you purchase a five
gallon bucket, (60 lbs.) of extract.
Alternative Beverage, 800 365-BREW, sells a "Concentrated Wort" which is,
they claim, pure extract, in 5 gallon buckets for $91.25. This is just
above $1.50 per lb. The Homebrewer's Store, 800 TAP-BREW sells their own
extract, Premier and Telford's extracts in the 5 gallon buckets for $75 to
$80. This is as low as $1.25 per pound. My local supplier, also a mail
oerder shop, Jasper's Homebrew Supply in Litchfield New Hampshire, don't
know the phone, will sell extract at $80 per five gallons.
Now, these prices don't include shipping, and shipping on a 66 pound net
package can run as much as $25 from coast to coast. I suggest you use the
one nearest you, and call others for the bulk prices. Many places don't
carry the 5 gallon buckets, but might if the demand goes up.
There is another issue here; will it spoil. If you get pasteurized
extract, probably not, if it's unpasteurized, it will grow alien life forms
in several months if it's unused. There is a cure for this. If your
extracts grows, put it in a large pot, your wort pot will do, and bring it
to pasteurizing temperature, about 158 F. Hld it there for a few minutes
and ladle off the surface scum and mold, or whatever grew. This should
reclaim the extract and render it perfectly useful. This is a trick maple
syrup folk have used for years should their syrup develop mold.
Even pasteurized syrups will grow on you if they are left long enough.
The above procedure will work for them, too. If this is at all unsafe, I
would appreciate the word of a qualified commenter.
The moral is: Brew a lot, or buy with a friend and split it up. This
business of $9.95 for 3.3 lb. cans is far too expensive for my taste.
Dan
"Beer made with the Derry air, (Derry, New Hampshire)"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 12:28:32 EDT
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West x4449)
Subject: Siphoning tip
-
siphon hose - A
\ - (don'tcha love ascii graphics?)
-
- B
-
- To start, be sure that your hose is all uphill.
- If it isn't, you'll get air bubbles in the hose which
/ will probably break the siphon before it's begun.
! / ! Draw the beer up to point A in the hose. Then pinch or
! / ! kink the hose or simply maintain suction and push part
! / ! B of the hose down below C level and fasten it there,
!^^^/^^C^! gently release the pinch, kink, or suction. Your siphon is
! / ! now ready to flow whenever you lower the end of the hose
! / ! below C level, and it will stop when you raise it above C
! Beer ! level. (There is hysteresis in the system due to the
!________! inertia of the liquid in the hose, it won't stop instantly)
Cheers,
Carl
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 14:22:09 EDT
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West x4449)
Subject: hop growing question
In all the descriptions I've read about growing hops,
they describe trellises that are 12 to 20 feet off the
ground. Is this to avoid some sort of pest? Or does it
make the whole project more convenient somehow? (hard
to believe). Maybe it's to keep vines from running into
each other?
Also, in the planting instructions from Freshops it says
that rizomes of the same kind may be planted as close
together as three feet, but different varieties should be
at least five feet apart. Anyone know why?
Carl
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 15:04:45 EDT
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West x4449)
Subject: SN culturing question
I'm attempting to culture the yeast from the sediment from a
bottle of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. I poured off (and drank :)
all but the last 1/2" of beer, flamed the lip of the bottle,
and added about 1/2" of weak sterile wort and sealed up the
bottle with a fermentation lock.
I figured that keeping some of the beer involved would help
keep the bacteria down, and what better place to grow a yeast
than where it's been surviving nicely (I hope/assume) 'til now.
Everyday I shook it up to aerate the wort and stir up the
sediment/yeast. About four days later I added about another
inch of weak sterile wort. I've continued the shaking routine.
There has never been a `head' on the wort, but there have been
a few bubbles and the fermentation lock looks like it might be
glubbing about once a day. The liquid has always been clear,
whatever's in there settles very quickly.
A week and a half later there is about an 1/8" of sediment in the
bottle. SOMETHING is growing in there. Is there any test short of
brewing a small batch that'll tell me if I got it? Those of you
who've had success with this sort of thing, does this sound like
a success so far? This is my first attempt, so I have no idea.
Carl
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 15:34:14 MDT
From: David Lim <limd@sulu.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Re: Oregon Brew Bashing
I understand where Florian (florianb@chip.cna.tek.com) could have easily
found some less-than-ideal local micro-brews at the groceries. Sigh....
the one thing I miss the most about leaving Portland (even above the
fantastic winsurfing in the Gorge) was the abundance and variety of
brewpubs. I lived in the neighborhood of NW Portland (the artsy, eccelctic,
increasingly yuppie, but-still-a-whole-lot-better-than Beaverton, part
of town) and was easily within a three miles of about *six* brewpubs
- Bridgeport, Portland Brewing, McMenamins (I could never spell this right)
Tavern and pool, the Blue Moon (another McMenamins), Widmer (really the
Heathman Deli), some other McMenamins in a hotel on 23rd. Talk about a
*real* pub crawl... There's now probably a few new establishments since I
left - almost two years ago. My favorites were Bridgeport, Widmer's,
and Portland Brewing. They had the most consistent products and the
cask-conditioned Blue Heron Ale at Bridgeport was heavenly. The McMenamin
products are not so consistent, but can be excellent on occasion.
Anyway, I *do* feel that having microbreweries WILL eventually make for
better beer all around. I just don't buy the line that Bud, Miller, Coors,
etc... shouldn't be knocked because they're "extremely consistent and If
any homebrewer who tries to make them would understand how difficult it
really is, blah, blah, blah..." Consistency and repeatability do NOT make
a beer great. Clean and refreshing are adjective that can well be applied
to water as well as beer. As more communities become exposed to a wider
variety of beers at a *LOCAL* level, and understand that fine beer can be
made right next door (as opposed to some bohemian castle in a long-lost land, far, far,
away...) the demand for such products will only grow. I seem to recall that
micro-brew beer consumption in the Portland metro area (yes, even Beaverton)
is approaching the levels of consumption of mass-marketed beer. With
education comes appreciation (of fermentation? sorry...) Even if there
are example of less than perfect-beer, it's still a whole lot more fun
than seeing Hamms, Bud, and Blitz as the only choices on the menu (oh, I
forgot the import Corona.) As the micro and pub brewers begin to mature,
it *is* inevitable that the product quality *must* improve - otherwise they
will drop by the wayside.
-Davin Lim (now a Colorado resident and trying to support the local
brewpub and microbrewery busineses as well as I can.)
(limd@sulu.colorado.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 14:49:17 PDT
From: mbharrington@UCSD.EDU
Subject: looking for brewpot
Great Fermentations of Santa Rosa has a 33 gallon brewpot (ceramic on steel)
for $36.95 + shipping/tax. Seemed like a great price to me. Anyone
have comments or suggestions for a better place to get a brewpot on
a starving student's budget? Thanks in advance...
- --Matt
Matthew B. Harrington Internet: matt@ucsd.edu
University of California at San Diego Recycle or Die.
Biophysics Think! It's not illegal yet.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 14:52:19 PDT
From: mbharrington@UCSD.EDU
Subject: sanitizing bottles
I'm about to sanitize my bottles for my first batch of homebrew. Some
of the bottles came from the recycling bin in my dormatory (sp?) so I can't
vouch that the people that drank from them were healthy. Should I soak the
entire bottle under water+bleach overnight? Or is filling the bottle
sufficient? Help! I can't relax and have a homebrew knowing that I could
get hepatitus or something...
Thanks,
Matt
------------------------------
Date: 7 May 91 17:17 -0500
From: Michael Westmore <umwestm0@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: unsubscribe
Please remove me from the mailing list. Thankyou.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 16:42:50 PDT
From: 07-May-1991 0923 <hannan@gnpike.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Maibock == Heller Bock
Thanks all for the Maibock (May Bock) descriptions. It makes me
feel better knowing what I'm drinking ;-)
As someone mentioned via private email, bock doesn't mean dark at all.
Closer inspection of a 6-pack holder revealed the added generic name of
Heller Bock, and I know that Hell means light in German, so light colored
strong beer is a rough enough description.
Thanks,
Ken
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 May 91 21:47:37 PDT
From: kjohnson@argon.berkeley.edu (Ken Johnson)
Subject: Hunter phone number
Damn. I bought the wrong thermostat. O.k., now I'll start my search for the
Hunter AIR STAT which may or may not be had at Home Depot where I bought and
will return the wrong item. Just in case my search comes up with nothing,
does anyone have Hunter's phone number?
kj
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #632, 05/08/91
*************************************
-------
