# Punching down the cap..



## BernardSmith (Oct 9, 2020)

Clearly it is vital to punch down the cap that forms several times a day but what do you do if you need to be away for three or four days and there is no one else who can take over that task? Does it make any sense to strain the fruit and then store it in a fridge (or freezer) and then to replace the fruit upon your return or is there another solution?


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 9, 2020)

I've taken fermenters with me (in a car or truck) - clearly not possible on plane or airplane. Last week I had to put my dandelion wine in a plastic jug while on a trip - after it finished before I expected. Also not an option if you are making large amounts. 

Also with your plan, you could add the fruit back as an f-pack in secondary. (Warmed to room temp). I might suggest freezing to kill all the yeast then warming to add back.

What are you making and how far along are you?


----------



## Johnd (Oct 9, 2020)

BernardSmith said:


> Clearly it is vital to punch down the cap that forms several times a day but what do you do if you need to be away for three or four days and there is no one else who can take over that task? Does it make any sense to strain the fruit and then store it in a fridge (or freezer) and then to replace the fruit upon your return or is there another solution?



I actually had this happen twice. The first time, I just let it ride and regretted it, there was mold growing on top of the cap. Removed the top 1" of skins and discarded them and everything came out just fine, but it was pretty nasty looking.

Second time I had to be away, I cut the lid of one of my Brutes to fit down inside of the fermenter just below the level of the liquid, pushed it down into the fermenter and held it in place with two stainless rods that were at a 90 degree angle to each other, and were cut to wedge tightly against the sides of the fermenter. It held the cap down, liquid still made its way around the edges, it certainly wasn't a watertight fit. Put a lid on top of the fermenter and left it that way for 3 days, no issues.


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 9, 2020)

VinesnBines said:


> What are you making and how far along are you?



Taking the fermenter with me is not a good option... This is for a second batch of wine I am making with the skins and fruit after pressing and racking. This wine will have been on the fruit for a week before I need to leave for three days.


----------



## Johnd (Oct 9, 2020)

BernardSmith said:


> Taking the fermenter with me is not a good option... This is for a second batch of wine I am making with the skins and fruit after pressing and racking. This wine will have been on the fruit for a week before I need to leave for three days.


Just devise a way to hold the cap down while you're gone, it should be fine.


----------



## ttaje16 (Oct 9, 2020)

Could also try to put the skins in a mesh bag with some type of weight to bring it down.


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 9, 2020)

Try Johnd's method and weight it down with some clean bricks in gallon ziplock bags.


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 9, 2020)

These are all good ideas ... I will work on one or both of them. Thanks.


----------



## cmason1957 (Oct 9, 2020)

BernardSmith said:


> Taking the fermenter with me is not a good option... This is for a second batch of wine I am making with the skins and fruit after pressing and racking. This wine will have been on the fruit for a week before I need to leave for three days.



The been on the fruit for a week Adds a new dimension to things. I think I would press off the fruit and solve the problem that way.


----------



## Cynewulf (Oct 9, 2020)

I’ve been reading about submerged cap maceration and how the practice began at Ridge, apparently when faced with a situation similar to yours: Submerged Cap Fermentation - Ridge Vineyards


----------



## Jay A (Oct 9, 2020)

Great read! My favorite Zin's are from Ridge.


----------



## stickman (Oct 10, 2020)

There is a very good podcast about Ridge Monte Bello linked below. It covers a fair amount of detail about the vineyards and winemaking process that is specific to their grapes. 






GuildSomm







www.guildsomm.com





For those that don't have the time to listen, here are a few interesting takeaways.

For the Monte Bello Cab, they talk about the brix at harvest being around 22.5 to 25 depending on the block and vine age, and very high must acidity typically in the range of 9g/L and 3.1 pH. During bulk aging with this low pH, they use only .3 ppm molecular SO2 which comes out to around 6 ppm free. The grapes are tannic given the cool climate, so the primary fermentation is in the range of 6 days or so using pump overs; they talk about an extended maceration experiment that went for 40 days yielding a highly tannic undrinkable wine.

Malolactic starts in tank and then pumped to barrels for completion.

Barrels are 100% new at 97% American and 3% French. Their racking schedule is similar to old school Bordeaux typically at 3 month intervals, cleaning the barrels and using steam and ozone before refilling.

Wine lots are held separately for about 5 months, then tasted and blended accordingly and continue aging for a total of 18 months. Wine is only pad filtered (not sterile) and and bottled at the same .3 ppm molecular SO2. The estate Cab is reportedly drinkable young, but very long lived 50+ years.

I would like to taste some of this stuff.


----------



## Booty Juice (Oct 10, 2020)

Stickman thank you. 

The Ridge Wine website provides very interesting information for each varietal in the "Winemaking" drop down box. I like their "minimal intervention philosophy ".


----------



## Booty Juice (Oct 10, 2020)

Cynewulf said:


> I’ve been reading about submerged cap maceration and how the practice began at Ridge, apparently when faced with a situation similar to yours: Submerged Cap Fermentation - Ridge Vineyards



Sounds like something I'll try next season with Merlot or PN.


----------



## Ajmassa (Oct 11, 2020)

stickman said:


> There is a very good podcast about Ridge Monte Bello linked below. It covers a fair amount of detail about the vineyards and winemaking process that is specific to their grapes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Loved that podcast! Very forthcoming. From canopy management & irrigation all the way to the tasting room. Thanks for sharing that. Interviewer was on point too- asking all the right questions. 
Surprised to see how strict they are with different things. Might be the first time I’ve heard of 3month barrel aging racking. (For 18-24 mos?!) I know that’s the safe “standard” they say, but I mean, how many of us _actually_ do that? (and w/ barrels?!). If it’s clean wine I didn’t see a point. They already get micro-ox from the barrels. (Plus topping up every 2 weeks!) so I guess the racking just keeps those new barrels clean as a whistle and giving wine a strong o2 tolerance despite almost no so2. 
Also they never press at dryness- and even then it’s still 10 yrs for the wine to start shining. But I’m _always_ pressing dry!
Generations of winemaking really allowed them to perfect the process. 
I dunno. It just feels like if I ever got a chance to make super high quality stuff I’d be very very conservative in everything scared to mess it up. Top quality fruit is a whole different ballgame. I’d like to taste some vintages he dismisses as bad years. Or bad lots that didn’t make it into the $250 blend. I’d be willing to bet even the lower quality stuff is still very good. He said at tastings he will pour out a ‘74, ‘84, & ‘94 so they can get a sense of the aging. Love that. When I eventually get out there Monte Bello will *have* to be a stop.


----------



## stickman (Oct 11, 2020)

I believe the 3 month racking schedule is based on old Bordeaux, the grapes are cool climate and high in tannin, they are not picked at 28 brix, so the tannin is highly reactive to oxygen, and the wine needs the oxygen to link up the color and tannin and to soften and develop. Not all red wine would need that amount of oxygen, in more recent times it seems like many are using 6 month racking intervals, or "as needed".


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 12, 2020)

@BernardSmith -- what is your current SG? I like @Johnd's solution, but if that doesn't work for you and the SG is 1.020 or less, you can press.


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 12, 2020)

Today , the SG reads 1.026 but your point is a fair one, and I expect the gravity to fall well below 1.020 by Wednesday and so Wed or Thursday I might call it macaroni and press. Thanks for that suggestion.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 15, 2020)

@BernardSmith, how is your progress?


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 15, 2020)

Hi winemaker81, 
I called it macaroni on Tuesday night and was able to obtain a hair over 3 gallons from the second runnings (I added 2 gallons of water after I pressed the first time. The color is good (not sure if it's called dark copper or burgundy - Although in the two bottles I have in addition to the 3 gallons it is clearer and several shades darker and the taste (for a very green wine) is really good. Decided not to press a second time but simply filled a paint straining bag with the grapes and liquid and allowed the weight of the grapes to do the pressing and so allowed the wine to drain. 
Solved my problem by racking off the skins a couple of days earlier than I had originally planned. Bottom line: I have been able to extract a good 6 gallons from the 72 lbs of grapes (2 separate batches that I may not blend, but we shall see) and that is after the removal of gross lees from the first 3 gallons - the second runnings have insignificant gross lees at this time as I never pressed the grapes a second time.


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 15, 2020)

I actually tried the weighting with my batch of second run. It was nearly dry yesterday > 1.000 but it had only been on the skins sine Sunday. I wanted more time on the skins so I decided to gamble and see what happens. I laid a plastic bag over the cap, put my half moon press blocks in two plastic bags and tied up good. For a couple hours I weighted the blocks with a 20 pound dumbbell in a plastic bag but it seemed to be too much. I left the press blocks on the cap and snapped on the Brute lid at 5 am, 10/14/2020. I'll be home sometime in the evening of Saturday 10/17/2020. I have a pet cam in the basement so now and then I pan over to the see the Brute. It doesn't look like any explosions and I'm sure my son will let me know if we have leaks. He is capable of punching down but I wanted to give the submerged cap a try. I'll update on Saturday.


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 18, 2020)

My submerged cap worked. No off smells or molding. I will need to devise something better for the future. One of the plastic bags leaked and one of my blocks was wet. I don’t think any harm. I pressed today and had nearly 9 gallons. My first press was 14 gallons so I added 7 gallons of water and 14 pounds of sugar, so I was surprised at 9 gallons on the second run press.
I’ll say it was a success.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 18, 2020)

I got a lot more volume than expected from last year's second run as well. I suspect that the juice remaining in the pulp is more than we realize.


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 18, 2020)

That has to be true. I used my big press for the first press and I know I Han more torque on the first press. Anyway, I’m pleased.


----------



## Ajmassa (Oct 18, 2020)

Do you guys feel the wine from a second run is worth the aggravation ? How do the 2 wines compare when finished? I never did it but every year I read some discussions about it and get intrigued.

And do you add back to the initial volume or just a portion?


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 18, 2020)

I’ve only made three attempts at second run but have been pleased with each. I usually tweak with either grape concentrate or raisins. The result is usually lighter in taste but not watery. I haven’t mixed first run and second run, though that is a possibility. I figure the cost of some sugar and a little time makes it worth the effort.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 18, 2020)

@Ajmassa, the short answer is 2nd runs are worth it. To quote the guys that taught me, "second run is what you drink while the first is aging."

For every 2 gallons of 1st run, add: 1 gallon water, 2 to 2.5 lbs sugar, 1/4 tsp grape tannin, 1 tsp acid blend, yeast nutrient. In short, you get about half the volume from the 2nd. For the cost of sugar and some additives, you extend your yield by 50%.

My notes from last year are *here*.

Some folks pull only free run juice, while others (including me) do a light press. Don't do a hard press -- the 2nd run will be very light if you do.

I use hot tap water and dissolve the sugar in it, then add the remaining items listed above. Then stir in the pomace. This is thick, so stirring is difficult. Getting an accurate SG is tough, as there is a fair amount of completed wine in the pomace. Using the normal calculation for sugar in water should give you an idea of the final ABV, although the ABV of the wine remaining in the pomace muddies the waters. If you don't stress about that, it helps.

Last year I light pressed the 2nd run, then hard pressed it, keeping the two separate. The hard press (Squeezins') is thicker, darker, and harsher. However, it mellowed amazingly, and produced a full bodied wine that is possibly darker than the 1st run. Which makes sense -- it's got the best of the grape solids in it. One of my sons prefers the Squeezins' to the first run.

The light press 2nd run is still in the barrel -- it's lighter than the 1st run or the Squeezin's, but it's a very tasty wine that has nice complexity. It's drinkable now, but will be better after a year or two in the bottle. I'd drink it with red sauce or steak.

This year? I'm going to do what one of my mentor's did -- he divided the Squeezin's (that was his name for it, that I carry forward) between the 1st and 2nd runs -- he had 2 barrels for the 1st run and one for the 2nd run, and divided the Squeezin's equally between the three.


----------



## sour_grapes (Oct 18, 2020)

Ajmassa said:


> Do you guys feel the wine from a second run is worth the aggravation ? How do the 2 wines compare when finished? I never did it but every year I read some discussions about it and get intrigued.
> 
> And do you add back to the initial volume or just a portion?



I cannot recall who, but someone here advised me against a second run. I proceeded anyway. 

I am glad I did, but with a huge caveat. I like to say that I made a "wine-like substance." Mine was red (Syrah), and it does not seem a lot like standard wine, but rather (chilled) is a refreshing summer porch pounder. People like it, but you would not confuse it for a red table wine. Good in granitas or sangrias or just tasty, cheap alcohol.


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 19, 2020)

I agree that getting an accurate SG in the second run is tough. When I added the cooled sugar syrup, I had an SG of 1.090; a couple hours it was 1.040. A hard stir brought it back to 1.070 so I did some step feeding with grape concentrate and more sugar syrup. I have no clue what my starting SG was but we dropped below 1.00 at pressing. I'm of Scottish descent so I'm thrifty (read cheap); I can't stand to waste anything especially something that has some flavor left. After the second press I pretty much had only seeds. 

I've made jam from the leftover fruit in country wine making. I have a wonderful blueberry jam left over from a Dragon Blood. In fact the jam is better than the DB. DB (even jacked up with fruit) is too weak for my taste.


----------



## Cynewulf (Oct 19, 2020)

I scored a bottle of @mainshipfred ’s second run he made from @Boatboy24 ’s Carménère and Petit Verdot pomace. Fred talked it down a bit but I was keen to try a second run; especially one by him. I poured some for my wife who is French and told her Fred had made piquette. She tentatively sipped a little and said, ‘But this is not the piquette, this is good!’ Piquette has become a derogatory catch all phrase in France for any cheap, terrible wine; like what her grandfather drinks after warming it up in a little cup on the radiator in his kitchen. What Fred made was highly drinkable and if he hadn’t told me, I probably wouldn’t have known it was a second run. There was a lot of oak so that could have hidden some flaws but I thought it was successful enough for me to want to put in the effort myself. I added half a Grenache juice bucket to my spent skins after pressing this past Saturday following the suggestion here: Second Press Runs to Get More from Your Grapes - WineMakerMag.com. More expensive than water and sugar but still not bad if it gives me another 3-4 gallons of drinkable wine.


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 19, 2020)

VinesnBines said:


> I agree that getting an accurate SG in the second run is tough. When I added the cooled sugar syrup, I had an SG of 1.090; a couple hours it was 1.040. A hard stir brought it back to 1.070 so I did some step feeding with grape concentrate and more sugar syrup.



I guess I don't understand why the gravity reading is so challenging with a second run. Wouldn't you assume that virtually all the sugars have been consumed by the yeast during the first run so any sugar (and so the gravity above 1.000) is going to come from the sugar you add. If you add 2 lbs of sugar then the gravity (by calculation) ought to be around 1.080 per gallon of water you add. The problem is less the starting gravity but the ABV. I just made my first batch of wine using whole grapes and after first pressing obtained 3 gallons (plus) - I have only my hands to press. I added 2 gallons of water and 4 lbs of sugar and after a second pressing I obtained another 3 gallons, so I expect that this batch is not going to be 10.5% but closer to 7%. So , my question: are second runnings typically far lower in alcohol than first runnings if the amount of wine resulting is significantly greater than the amount of liquid added OR is the additional liquid wine at the same ABV as the wine from the first batch?


----------



## VinesnBines (Oct 19, 2020)

I'm not sure why it was difficult to get a good read except that the pomace was really dry. I pressed hard the first run so as not to waste anything if the second was a flop. That may have been counter productive but I figured I'm not super strong and since the press was not bolted down, I might get by. Taste is good on the second run and the smell good. May be less tannic so hopefully drinkable sooner.

With a hand press BernardSmith, you should have a really nice second run. 

Cynewulf, I did something similar last year with some cab franc skins. I dumped a cheap cab sav kit on some skins and the result was very nice. Different than the kit alone. I'm all for a second run if nothing more for experimentation.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 19, 2020)

BernardSmith said:


> I guess I don't understand why the gravity reading is so challenging with a second run.


Excellent question! All your points make sense. I puzzled this one out myself, and came to what appears to be a logical conclusion. Here goes (a detailed explanation):

Last year I got 12 gallons wine (before sediment loss) from 5 lugs of Merlot. The 2nd run recipe I use calls for 1 gallon of water for every 2 gallons wine. I wanted mine a bit more robustness, so I added 5 gallons of hot tap water (instead of 6) to the primary and stirred in 2 lbs sugar for each gallon (10 lbs), stirring until clear. The SG was about right (roughly 1.090 IIRC), so I added tannin, acid, nutrient, then stirred in the pomace.

Checked the SG again, 1.054 ....

I started inventing new swear words for the occasion. Purchased another 10 lbs sugar and divided between my 3 batches (also made 2nd run from Malbec & Zinfandel). I sprinkled the sugar in and stirred hard. SG came up to 1.076. Not what I expected, but good enough for a 2nd run.

When fermentation completed I pressed all 3 batches, hard enough to get 5 gallons from each. My intention was to fill a barrel I had just purchased. Then I hard pressed the remainder and got 8 gallons total (from all 3).

To recap -- I put 5 gallons of water into each batch, got 5 gallons out. Then another 8 gallons, roughly 2.5 gallons extra for each.

My conclusion is that there was far more wine left in the pomace that I realized, about 20% based upon the stated numbers. The 1st run wine was at roughly 1.000 when pressed, so when averaged with the sugar water and including not stirring well enough? The SG I got (1.054) makes sense. I did not need to add the additional sugar.

@VinesnBines pressed his pomace hard, so he should have had a lot less juice in it. However, my suspicions is there was more wine left in the pomace than he realized.

@BernardSmith, the ABV of the 2nd run depends on the SG of the sugar water, how much sugar water was added, the total amount extracted, and the SG of the original wine. Without delving to deeply into the math, if your 1st run SG was good (above 10%) and the sugar water SG was good (ditto), you can extrapolate the final ABV as being between the two.


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 20, 2020)

But why would the SG of the second run be "between" the first run and the SG of the water and sugar solution I added for the second run? If the additional liquid being expressed from the grapes at the end of the second run was wine from the first run and the first run's starting gravity was essentially the same as the second run's SG then why wouldn't the ABV of the second run be pretty close to the ABV of the first batch? The additional liquid isn't water. It's wine and it's wine that was made from the same juice with the same Brix as the wine that is now in the carboy after the first pressing... No?


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 20, 2020)

@BernardSmith -- at first blush, I agree this scenario doesn't make sense, but here are practical examples:

In my case, I had 5 gallons of sugar water at 1.090 and 2.5 gallons of wine at 1.000. The original SG of the wine doesn't matter, it's what the current reading is that affects the current SG reading. The weighted average is 1.060. This jives close enough with my SG reading.

ABV? We have 5 gallons with a potential ABV of 11.5, and 2.5 gallons with the ABV of the first run, 15.5%. The weighted average is 12.8%.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 20, 2020)

sour_grapes said:


> I like to say that I made a "wine-like substance."


I'll guess you pressed the first run pomace hard, which leaves less for the second run. Or added more water than is recommended, which dilutes the final result.

The picture below shows my light press 2nd run, which has been in a barrel since last December and had 5 months of exposure to 6 oz medium toast French oak cubes, and the hard press -- which has received no additional oak beyond 1/2 lb fermentation oak.




The one one on the left is a barrel sample, the left is the hard press that was bottled in August. Neither wine is going to win an award for "best red wine color of the year".

However, both have far more body and flavor than you'd expect, based upon the color. Sure, the first runs are better, but these wines will go with a red sauce or steak. I'd also serve them with salmon or tuna, and probably turkey (we'll find out at Thanksgiving). They also age much faster, so I'm FAR less tempted to open the first runs any time soon.

Ok, I opened last year's Zinfandel to celebrate today's pressing, so I lost to temptation.

I started this year's second run today -- I pressed the pomace harder than last year, but also added 1/3 more pomace from another wine, plus I used ScottZyme ColorPro enzyme in the first run. We'll see what difference it makes in the second run.

My results will be posted in a week or so.


----------



## sour_grapes (Oct 20, 2020)

winemaker81 said:


> I'll guess you pressed the first run pomace hard, which leaves less for the second run. Or added more water than is recommended, which dilutes the final result.



I believe it was the former. I did not overwater.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 20, 2020)

It's a toss up -- press hard to get "more" for the first run, or press lighter to improve the second run?

At literally the last minute I chose to press harder to get more 1st run. We'll see if adding the Zin pomace to the others makes a difference.


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 21, 2020)

winemaker81 said:


> @BernardSmith -- at first blush, I agree this scenario doesn't make sense, but here are practical examples:
> 
> In my case, I had 5 gallons of sugar water at 1.090 and 2.5 gallons of wine at 1.000. The original SG of the wine doesn't matter, it's what the current reading is that affects the current SG reading. The weighted average is 1.060. This jives close enough with my SG reading.
> 
> ABV? We have 5 gallons with a potential ABV of 11.5, and 2.5 gallons with the ABV of the first run, 15.5%. The weighted average is 12.8%.


 But it's not "the current reading" that tells the story. That liquid at 1.000 is not water. It's wine and the original gravity IS critical because that wine was trapped in the grapes until you released it with the second runnings. It is, I think, identical in principle, to someone who step feeds their yeast. You need to know the starting gravity to know the ABV. Knowing the last gravity reading you took tells you nothing about the TOTAL amount of fermentables that were in solution and so the actual ABV of the wine.. But I think your calculation is correct. The average ABV is around 12.8% but that ain't between first runnings and the second. That is an average of both and that average might be less than the first runnings OR greater than it. It depends on how much sugar you added and what the ABV of the first runnings was. An average (A+B/2) is not always less than A.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 22, 2020)

Following is a complete explanation of my reasoning for SG and ABV -- it should make more sense and I did my best to write in English, not math geek. Be warned that it is long winded ...

First, SG:

I know the SG of the water is ~1.090, as sugar in water in the stated ratio produces this value. If fermented with no additions, it will produce an alcoholic liquid of ~11.5% ABV.

The ratio of alcohol to SG is not a linear relationship, as alcohol increases and SG decreases. [For those who are not math majors, when SG vs ABV is plotted on a graph, it forms a curved line, not a straight one.] It is also influenced by the other constituents in the wine, so an exact calculation is not possible. I read recently that the formula(s) used to approximate ABV in beer cannot be used for wine, as different ABV ranges require different formulas to approximate the value.

There are 4 formulas (that I know of) floating around that all produce different results -- I have not yet determined which ABV ranges each formula should be used for.

For this reason determining SG when feeding a wine does not produce an accurate result, not the way the original SG is. The alcohol content skews the SG readings, and the higher the ABV, the more it is skewed.

Getting back to my example, the pomace was at 1.000, so while it will contribute a bit to the final ABV, it's not part of the ABV calculation.

However, the 2.5 gallons of wine left in the pomace reduces the overall SG of the pomace + sugar water from ~1.090 to ~1.060. Checking the SG to see if it's in the expected range is good, but the exact value determined is not useful, as we cannot at that point determine how much wine is left in the pomace. I check and record the SG, but it doesn't have a practical use.

This is among the reasons I blend the sugar into the water before adding the pomace.

Second, ABV:

We use the OG and FG to calculate the ABV of the first run wine, with the expectation that when the wine trapped in the pomace ferments out completely, that trapped wine will have the same ABV. It should -- it's the same wine.

In my case, the first run wine is 15.5% ABV (final value) and we know the sugar water should produce ~11.5% ABV. The weighted average (12.8%) exists between those 2 values. I used

((5 * 15.5) + (2.5 * 11.5)) / 7.5

to determine the weighted average. This produces an approximation which is sufficient for me, as I'm not selling the wine.

This is a great discussion, as it made me look at all this in more detail!


----------



## blumentopferde (Oct 22, 2020)

Since second runs have overtaken this topic I would like to add some question on it: ;-)
I don't really understand of how it works. Following the instructions on winemakermag, I just add sugared water and press again? Why would that work? wouldn't the added liquid just run through without leaving much to extract?
Or would I leave the sugar water with the pomace for a few days and get it through another fermentation process before I press?
Could you explain that a little bit more to me?


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 22, 2020)

That is precisely what winemakermag suggests you do. In other words, you treat the pomace as if it is crushed grapes and you ferment again on those grapes. Given that you have extracted much or all of the juice, you add sugar water to the pomace (and the article suggests you add tartaric acid) and the yeast still in the pomace is enough to restart the fermentation immediately. You know that because a few hours later the cap is back on top of the sugar water and as you punch down that cap two or three times a day color and flavor is extracted and the yeast produce wine. I think mine was at a pH of 3.4 when I removed the pomace a second time and was close to 1.000.


----------



## blumentopferde (Oct 22, 2020)

Thanks Bernard for making that clear! For me that sounded like "just add some ingredients and press again"... X-D

To add something to both topics at the same time: I have been experimenting with something similar like second runs. I was making some kind of pomace wine, I just collected all my pomace - mostly from white grapes - added some yeast to it and and let it ferment for a week and then pressed it. And that actually worked - the fermentation process would still extract considerable amounts of liquid out of the skins. Obviously there is no way to "push down the cap", as the fermentation process starts with much more solids than liquids, so my work around was to just lay some plastic film directly on the pomace and let it ferment.

And guess what, that worked! No mold, nor off flavours and I still still extract about 50% of the pomaces weight into wine! The result is weird though, so I guess from now on I will make common second runs ;-)


----------



## BernardSmith (Oct 22, 2020)

But that was my experience too with red grapes. You crush the grapes so there is virtually no juice for the first week but there is enough juice after a day or so to enable you to punch down the fruit. Indeed, I suspect, but I could be wrong, if there was not enough liquid there would be no way that the fruit would form a cap because the yeast would not have enough liquid to transport the sugars through their cell walls. Certainly, my VERY limited experience suggests that crushing the grapes results in a very, very small amount of juice (even with the addition of enzymes to help extract juice and break down pectins) but after a few days the yeast extract a very significant amount of juice.
But I am curious: if these are grapes for white wine don't you press them immediately? Are you also fermenting on the pressed grapes for the first run?


----------



## blumentopferde (Oct 22, 2020)

BernardSmith said:


> But that was my experience too with red grapes. You crush the grapes so there is virtually no juice for the first week but there is enough juice after a day or so to enable you to punch down the fruit. Indeed, I suspect, but I could be wrong, if there was not enough liquid there would be no way that the fruit would form a cap because the yeast would not have enough liquid to transport the sugars through their cell walls. Certainly, my VERY limited experience suggests that crushing the grapes results in a very, very small amount of juice (even with the addition of enzymes to help extract juice and break down pectins) but after a few days the yeast extract a very significant amount of juice.


Sounds legit, but I don't have that much experience with red wine either ;-)
I just can tell you that if you make a second run without additional water, the pomace will stay mostly solid till the fermentation is over. Still the amount of extract is quite considerable. That could also be due to the fact that I am using a hydro press which won't extract as much as a basket press...



BernardSmith said:


> But I am curious: if these are grapes for white wine don't you press them immediately? Are you also fermenting on the pressed grapes for the first run?



Sure. I just had a normal first run, but that just got about 50% of juice out of the grapes, so didn't want to throw away all that pomace and gave it a try. ;-)

Anyways, the taste was just too intensive for white wine, but maybe it would work well on a red, who knows?


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 23, 2020)

To expand upon what Bernard has said, 2nd run wine works on the premise that the pomace still contains "goodness", for lack of a better term.

Pressing the 1st run wine has extracted most of the liquid and most (maybe all) of the sugar. So we add water, sugar, tannin, and acid blend to fill in the holes, and let it ferment using the existing yeast.

I will press this year's 2nd run tomorrow -- for each 2 gallons of wine I got from the first run, I added: 1 gallon water, 2 lbs sugar, 2 tsp tannin, 1 tsp acid blend. The short answer is you get 1/2 the yield of the 1st run.

Keep in mind that the 2nd run will be lighter than the 1st run, it has lesser body and it's not a deep red wine. However, it's still a nice wine, and you got it for the cost of sugar and some additives. Last year's 2nd run was bottled today -- 14 gallons that has been in a barrel since December. Previously I bottled a 5 gallon carboy. For about $30 USD, I got 19 gallons of a lighter wine.


----------



## winemaker81 (Oct 24, 2020)

For this year's 2nd run, I added 15 gallons of water to the pomace from 576 lbs (16 lugs) of grapes. We pressed today and pressed *hard*, the cakes were dry when removed from the press. My yield was 19 gallons, so the pomace held 4 gallons of wine. There's a lot of sediment, so I'm guessing I'll have ~16 to 17 gallons of finished wine. At $0.38/bottle (USD), it's worth the effort.


----------



## blumentopferde (Oct 25, 2020)

winemaker81 said:


> To expand upon what Bernard has said, 2nd run wine works on the premise that the pomace still contains "goodness", for lack of a better term.
> 
> Pressing the 1st run wine has extracted most of the liquid and most (maybe all) of the sugar. So we add water, sugar, tannin, and acid blend to fill in the holes, and let it ferment using the existing yeast.


I'm just figuring out that it would be quite a waste if I didn't do a second run: I use a hydro press and it seems to leave a lot of "goodness" in the pomace.
This year I had about 30 liters of white wine and was left with about 14 liters of pomace after pressing (weighing it would have been more informative though...).

I also added yeast to the pomace - without adding sugar and water - to let it ferment too. After the maceration process I pressed again and could still extract 7 liters. So about 50% of the "goodness" was still left in the pomace. 

Since now it is too late for a "regular" second run, I now added water, sugar and acid to the wine and hope that this will restart the fermentation...


----------



## balatonwine (Oct 26, 2020)

winemaker81 said:


> Neither wine is going to win an award for "best red wine color of the year".
> 
> However, both have far more body and flavor than you'd expect, based upon the color.



In my humble opinion, what matters if the total experience. Even if the color was lacking, it can be made up with nose and or palate. And the three need not be weighted evenly. I would put eye lowest on the list, especially if nose and palate are good.


----------



## David Violante (Nov 29, 2020)

How would saignee affect a second run? I imagine the skins might have more potential for a better second run, or would the second run be more astringent / tannic?


----------



## winemaker81 (Nov 30, 2020)

David Violante said:


> How would saignee affect a second run?


I would not expect saignee to change the 2nd run. Fermentation will pull the same "goodness" from the pomace either way -- saignee has less juice so the "goodness" is more concentrated.


----------



## Mac60 (Nov 30, 2020)

winemaker81 said:


> For this year's 2nd run, I added 15 gallons of water to the pomace from 576 lbs (16 lugs) of grapes. We pressed today and pressed *hard*, the cakes were dry when removed from the press. My yield was 19 gallons, so the pomace held 4 gallons of wine. There's a lot of sediment, so I'm guessing I'll have ~16 to 17 gallons of finished wine. At $0.38/bottle (USD), it's worth the effort.



Bryan,
I have been seriously thinking about this since we do 40 lugs each year, I feel we can substantially increase our yield. I just thought it wasn't worth the effort, however after reading this thread. I'm rethinking it, however I'm not sure I fully understand the process.
I have a few questions, did you mentioned you use wine from the first press or did I misunderstand that.
Can you do a second run without adding wine from the first run? 
Can you only use water, sugar, yeast nutrients, tannin's, tartaric acid and the pomace?

How did you decide to add 15 gallons of water to your 16 lugs? How much sugar, yeast nutraints, tannin and acid did you add?
If I use your numbers I come up with the following numbers do they sound correct? is there a formula you use.

Just based on extrapolating your numbers, my 1440 lbs (40 Lugs) I would have to add approx
38 gallons of water 
76 lbs of sugar 
320 Grams of Tannin's (4.2g/tsp)
160 Grams of Tartaric Acid
Do add the above to the pomace, measure the SG of the must, let ferment (5-7) days with the pomace, press once SG is reached. Is that the process?

Thanks 
Mike


----------



## VinesnBines (Nov 30, 2020)

I'll let Winemaker81 elaborate but to answer a few questions; you don't use any of the first run wine in the second run. The rule of thumb is to measure the amount of wine you pressed from the first run, then add 1/2 as much water and 2 pounds of sugar for each gallon of water. Adjust your nutrients and tannin to match the amount of water you add to the second run. So in your example, if you had 76 gallons of first run wine, then you go with the 38 gallons of water and 76 pounds of sugar.


----------



## Mac60 (Nov 30, 2020)

VinesnBines said:


> The rule of thumb is to measure the amount of wine you pressed from the first run, then add 1/2 as much water and 2 pounds of sugar for each gallon of water. Adjust your nutrients and tannin to match the amount of water you add to the second run.


OK you here's my example I did this year of my Super Tuscan
I yielded 90 gallons of wine from the free run and press of 36 Lugs (1296lbs)
1/2 of that is 45 gallons
45 gallons of water @ $2.44 Gal $109.80
90 pounds of sugar @ $1.44 per/lb $129
383 Grams Fermk K $20
383 Grams Tartaric Acid $11
383 Grams of Tannins FT Rouge $40
Total $309.80 
Assume yield 65 gallons (325 Bottles) roughly 95 cents per bottle with the glass $2.00 is it worth the effort? Our 1st press batch cost us $5.38 $6.38 with the bottle. What do you all think?


----------



## VinesnBines (Nov 30, 2020)

Here's an idea. Try with a smaller sample of leftover pomace and see what you think. Say 1/4 of the leftover from first run. That way you have less invested money wise and if you think it is not worth the effort, you won't be out so much money.
I think my second runs are worth the effort and money but I'm not processing as much as you are; yet.


----------



## winemaker81 (Nov 30, 2020)

What @VinesnBines said. Some go with 2-1/4 lbs sugar per gallon but I'm satisfied with 2. I add 1/4 to 1/2 tsp tannin and 1 to 2 tsp acid blend per gallon. Add nutrient as if it is a regular wine.

I added no enzymes as the 1st run was dosed with ScottZyme ColorPro, and I didn't think more would buy me anything. I used well water, which cut that expense from my bill, and it appears I got a better price on sugar buying in larger bags.

@VinesnBines's suggestion to start with a smaller amount is a great idea. You can also concentrate the used pomace -- this year I made four 4-lug batches, each producing 9-11 gallons of 1st run. I started the 2nd run with 3 of the batches, using 5 gallons of water each, then divided the pomace of the 4th batch between the 3.

Is it worth $0.95 USD/bottle? Following are my reasons, copied from another post:

As to why make a 2nd run? Let me count the ways!

Increase yield by 50% at a fraction of the cost. Last year's wine cost $0.38 USD per bottle.
Ages faster and is drinkable sooner, reducing the temptation to touch the 1st run early.
More accessible to non-red wine drinkers.
Dirt cheap cooking wine.
It's a lighter wine for the days I don't want a heavy red but also don't want a white. Last year's 2nd run resembles a Pinot Noir in color, a bit lighter in body.
Then there's the most important reason:

I get something else to ferment!

EDIT: I added 15 gallons of water to this year's 2nd run and hard pressed 20 gallons (raw). A surprising amount of wine is left in the pomace when not doing a really hard press.


----------



## David Violante (Nov 30, 2020)

I've been thinking about where to post this thought. In homage to the original question I'll post it here. If it needs to go somewhere else, I'm happy to move it. I've been thinking about cap management, submerged cap, saignee, second run, temperatures, etc... and came up with the following draft of an idea (below). Do you think this will work? I was thinking of putting the pump on a basic timer that I can set to 1/2 hour runs three times a day. The pump draws juice from the must (via a gajillion hole pipe) and disperses it via eductor over the must, in which the cap is submerged. The cap plate can be held with gallon jugs of water or if it gets hot, gallon jugs of ice. This would keep the cap submerged / wet, aerate with oxygen, and could help with temperature control. Too much? Over thought? BEX is sending me an eductor to try (versus a straight hose in or a venturi contraption - which I might build just to try).


----------



## Ajmassa (Nov 30, 2020)

David Violante said:


> I've been thinking about where to post this thought. In homage to the original question I'll post it here. If it needs to go somewhere else, I'm happy to move it. I've been thinking about cap management, submerged cap, saignee, second run, temperatures, etc... and came up with the following draft of an idea (below). Do you think this will work? I was thinking of putting the pump on a basic timer that I can set to 1/2 hour runs three times a day. The pump draws juice from the must (via a gajillion hole pipe) and disperses it via eductor over the must, in which the cap is submerged. The cap plate can be held with gallon jugs of water or if it gets hot, gallon jugs of ice. This would keep the cap submerged / wet, aerate with oxygen, and could help with temperature control. Too much? Over thought? BEX is sending me an eductor to try (versus a straight hose in or a venturi contraption - which I might build just to try).
> 
> View attachment 68984


interesting. And always good to see rough ideas sketched out like that. 
What you drew up I think is probably very similar to many commercial setups for their pump-overs. I know most probably use a bottom filtered drain valve but I know I’ve seen the gajillion pipe method used on a larger commercial scale in videos as well. In the end tho wouldnt the cap plate be unnecessary? If you are able to perform routine pump overs to keep the cap saturated then is there really any need to weigh it down?
Also could use not just for pump-overs but “delastage” as well—-where the wine is removed and instead of directly pumped back on top it’s transferred to another vessel for a little bit before dumping back onto the skins.


----------



## CDrew (Nov 30, 2020)

So this is all pretty interesting, but why not just punch it down? 100% effective, time proven, no effort. None of us home guys have professional equipment for pump overs and similar.


----------



## Ajmassa (Nov 30, 2020)

CDrew said:


> So this is all pretty interesting, but why not just punch it down? 100% effective, time proven, no effort. None of us home guys have professional equipment for pump overs and similar.


The discussion originated from seeking out different solutions after learning they had to leave town for a few days during active fermentation.


----------



## winemaker81 (Nov 30, 2020)

CDrew said:


> So this is all pretty interesting, but why not just punch it down?


I doubt I'd build anything like what David suggested, but it's an interesting idea. Building things is both fun and satisfying.


----------



## JohnT (Dec 1, 2020)

I like that idea of a pump on a timer, but see no need for weighing it down too. the wine you pump over will weigh the cap down.

my only concerns are ..

Make sure that all external surfaces that contact the wine (the gajillion hole pipe and your eductor) are placed inside inside your primary fermenter. I would then loosely cover the whole works with a thin plastic (unused) drop cloth.

I would make sure that this only happens during active fermentation. Without the positive pressure of co2 being produced, you could be encouraging spoilage.


----------



## David Violante (Dec 1, 2020)

Thank you all for the thoughts and suggestions! 

When I incorporated the cap plate, I was just thinking of options for better / more skin to juice time versus time possibly drying out or being exposed to air. I would consider it a modular piece that could be there if you wanted but doesn't have to be. I was intrigued by a number of wineries that use them and articles about submerged caps.

@CDrew I too, at the moment, just punch down the cap but then there are 16 hour days at work where the cap should have been punched down and I couldn't get home to do it so this would be another way of cap management. Plus as @winemaker81 eloquently said, sometimes it's just fun and satisfying. I'm a project guy and very curious so figuring this out to fruition would be very satisfying. 

@Ajmassa my first design had a 'through the wall' drain pipe at the base like you suggested. Then I thought of a Koi pond filter I originally built that had more holes going through the container than probably the definition of 'container' meant... LOL. To minimize the possibility of leaking (especially from a plastic container) and to minimize cleaning/sanitizing points, I thought of the gajillion hole pipe method I first saw on your postings and it clicked for me. I agree this could be adapted for delestage. It could even be used for delestage with seed removal but I think that using conical containers for primary fermentation might be better as you can easily remove the seeds through the bottom drain. 

@JohnT excellent points. I would only use this during primary until pressing. I read an article somewhere here (I think in the 'Closing the Gap' forum) about how different wineries schedule their cap management cycles and would mimic those as best as my notes remember. I believe early on it was twice a day until a cap began in earnest, then it went to three times a day, then as the fermentation closed in on finishing it went back to twice a day. Easily set on a timer, and could be done through the night as well. And of course enclosed to some extent because of those (explitive) fruit flies. 

As this progresses I'll keep everyone posted. Sounds like a good winter project...!


----------



## Spencerthebuilder (Apr 6, 2021)

Thought of a cap submerging plate, maybe stainless wire mesh, and once again here it is already.... Seems like at best only half a regular cap is in contact with the wine. The other half is just drying out in the CO2, necessitating punch down. If the goal of punching is to increase the interaction between the cap and the wine to leach out the good stuff, this doubles the contact. Seems to make lots of sense.


----------

