Cranberry wine at 1.006 for a month

[Ericphotoart]

I decided to rack my cranberry wine that stopped fermenting a month ago. SG was at that time 1.006 and today is the same. It is actually excellent and exactly what I wanted to achieve. My only concern is that the gravity indicates there is still substantial amount of sugar in it and I am afraid it may start to referment again, although for the last month the carboy was in a 68 F room and there was no fermentation. I used EC 1118 yeasts and I started from a relatively high SG of 1.124, so I am now at 14.5 which still could be tolerated by EC 1118. If my measurements were accurate the wine should still ferment. What am I missing? Is it possible the must SG was much higher and my wine is at around 18% of alcohol now and the EC 1118 cannot handle it anymore?

 

[Paulietivo]

It could be.
What is the ph of the juice? Cranberry has a low ph and that combined w the alcohol may have it stuck. Have you added any yeast energizer or anything to get it started again?

 

[ChuckD]

Why argue with success? If you like the wine why not just stabilize it as-is, bottle it, and call it good?

 

[Ericphotoart]

I was planning to backsweeten the wine after fermentation is complete. I think dry cranberry wine would be not very pleasant to drink so now I achieved a slightly sweet wine without backsweetening and I am actually happy with it. So ChuckD, do you think it is ok that the wine didn't reach FG of 0.998 or 0.996 as wine should?
I did add yeast energizer at the beginning of the fermentation but I have to way to check ph.

 

[ChuckD]

do you think it is ok that the wine didn't reach FG of 0.998 or 0.996 as wine should?

I haven’t made cranberry but I understand low pH can be an issue. Usually solved by back sweetening.

It’s not a problem. I have a wild grape that appears to be stuck just above 1.000 too. I know many others have had the same thing happen for no known reason. It’s fine. Proceed as normal and enjoy the wine.

 

[cmason1957]

I decided to rack my cranberry wine that stopped fermenting a month ago. SG was at that time 1.006 and today is the same. It is actually excellent and exactly what I wanted to achieve. My only concern is that the gravity indicates there is still substantial amount of sugar in it and I am afraid it may start to referment again, although for the last month the carboy was in a 68 F room and there was no fermentation. I used EC 1118 yeasts and I started from a relatively high SG of 1.124, so I am now at 14.5 which still could be tolerated by EC 1118. If my measurements were accurate the wine should still ferment. What am I missing? Is it possible the must SG was much higher and my wine is at around 18% of alcohol now and the EC 1118 cannot handle it anymore?

I'm not sure how you came up with only 14.5% ABV, I feed your numbers into Fermcalc and get something like 16.6-15.9%ABV, and yes that still seems below EC-1118 ability, but since it is cranberry and you have no way to measure Ph, it is likely that the combined ABV and low Ph are enough to knock out the yeast. I would hit it with KMeta now. Potassium Sorbate and Kmeta in the right dosages after it clears, backsweeten it to a drinkable level and call it good.

 

[winemaker81]

I was planning to backsweeten the wine after fermentation is complete. I think dry cranberry wine would be not very pleasant to drink so now I achieved a slightly sweet wine without backsweetening and I am actually happy with it. So ChuckD, do you think it is ok that the wine didn't reach FG of 0.998 or 0.996 as wine should?

Not all wines have a FG below 1.000. Given your high OG and that it's cranberry, it's highly likely it's done.

How long has it been bulk aging? There's nothing wrong with letting it set for another 3 to 6 months. If it's gonna re-ignite, it will, and if not, stabilize and bottle.

 

[Rice_Guy]

wine is a complex preservative system, ie not a simple two component A times B equals C. I would also guess that pH is inactivating the yeast especially assuming it has decreased because of CO2 . (several cranberry juice numbers; 2.70; 2.4; 2.52; 2.69; 2.67; 2.87),, The bad news is we can’t be absolutely sure, example the wine suddenly is degassed > the stress is removed > the pH increases 0.3 units > not all yeast have starved and some start up again. At your 14.5% calculation the risk of other organisms infecting the wine is minimal, it is a safe beverage.

, but since it is cranberry and you have no way to measure Ph, it is likely that the combined ABV and low Ph are enough to knock out the yeast. I would hit it with KMeta now. , , , ,Potassium Sorbate and Kmeta in the right dosages

Here time is your friend, given aging yeast settle and starve, ,,, and you can bottle safely. For a 12% ABV this seems to be at nine months, at 14.5 or even 16% this will happen faster. My style is trying to avoid sorbate and I wouldn't be concerned about bottling this high alcohol/ low pH when the wine has cleared.

 

[ChuckD]

My style is trying to avoid sorbate and I wouldn't be concerned about bottling high alcohol/ low pH when the wine has cleared.

Can you go this route (let the yeast die then bottle without sorbate) if you back sweeten? I would think the risk of bottle bombs would be pretty high.

 

[Rice_Guy]

* If you are using a grocery store “clean” sugar source as frozen concentrated juice or white sugar or honey the risk is low. One might have winery contamination with funnels/ tubing etc but the sugar source will have no yeast per kilo sample. I have successfully used grocery store sugars for years.
* If you have a fresh juice as you want to back sweeten with frozen cider or white grape you will probably have some detectable yeast at the per gram level. You would also have dilution of alcohol and buffering toward a higher pH so the preservative effect decreases. The risk then largely depends on how much dilution.

Can you go this route (let the yeast die then bottle without sorbate) if you back sweeten? I would think the risk of bottle bombs would be pretty high.

With this case where we know that untreated cranberry has a very low pH (yeast don’t like below 2.8) combined with 14 or even 16% alcohol combined with normal bottling 50ppm SO2 I would have no fear about wild yeast surviving. Wine is a multi layered preservative system, just one of these effects would cut the risk close to zero.

 

[Ericphotoart]

I'm not sure how you came up with only 14.5% ABV, I feed your numbers into Fermcalc and get something like 16.6-15.9%ABV, and yes that still seems below EC-1118 ability, but since it is cranberry and you have no way to measure Ph, it is likely that the combined ABV and low Ph are enough to knock out the yeast. I would hit it with KMeta now. Potassium Sorbate and Kmeta in the right dosages after it clears, backsweeten it to a drinkable level and call it good.

1.124-1.006=.118x131=15.458
Some multiply by 133. I don't want to argue with the formula but it will not be 16.6

 

[Ericphotoart]

The wine is crystal clear. I plan to bulk age it for next 3 months and bottle it. It has a perfect cranberry taste and color and it is sweet just right, at least for me. It's good to know the rule to ferment below FG of 1.000 is not really a rule.

 

[Vinobeau]

I decided to rack my cranberry wine that stopped fermenting a month ago. SG was at that time 1.006 and today is the same. It is actually excellent and exactly what I wanted to achieve. My only concern is that the gravity indicates there is still substantial amount of sugar in it and I am afraid it may start to referment again, although for the last month the carboy was in a 68 F room and there was no fermentation. I used EC 1118 yeasts and I started from a relatively high SG of 1.124, so I am now at 14.5 which still could be tolerated by EC 1118. If my measurements were accurate the wine should still ferment. What am I missing? Is it possible the must SG was much higher and my wine is at around 18% of alcohol now and the EC 1118 cannot handle it anymore?

I come up with 15.5%. The starting SG is difficult to accurately determine when you're using solid fruit, there can be a lot of trapped sugar. How did you process the Cranberries ? A starting SG of 1.15 would give you close to 19%. I believe that to raise the SG to 1.15, it would take about 1.5 cups per gallon - could there be that much sugar in the 3, 4 or 5 pounds of Cranberries per gallon, that weren't in solution yet?

I agree, if it tasted where you want it to be, add Sorbate & bottle. After letting it sit a month or so.

 

[cmason1957]

1.124-1.006=.118x131=15.458
Some multiply by 133. I don't want to argue with the formula but it will not be 16.6

There are several different (all approximation formulas for abv). If you go look at Fermcalc, you will see that they report 4 different values, all using different factors. We cannot determine exactly how well the yeast converted the sugar to alcohol. Only real way to know is to have it analyzed by a lab.

 

[winemaker81]

1.124-1.006=.118x131=15.458
Some multiply by 133. I don't want to argue with the formula but it will not be 16.6

As Craig said, the formulas for ABV are an approximation. Making it more difficult there are multiple formulas, and which one to use depends on the ABV. Yes, you have to pick the formula to calculate the answer based upon the value of that answer. I wish I was making this up!

 

[Rice_Guy]

There is a rule but it never was ferment below 1.000, ,,, the rule is will the FDA approve the process making the product legal to sell? and then show the processing logs at inspection time. ,,, Beverage folks go above 1.000 all the time with processes like:
* treat the less than pH 4.0 juice for 45 minutes over 190F in a tank > hot fill in glass > steam tunnel for ten minutes > cooling tunnel
OR * 0.45 filter the juice > treat a juice box with peroxide > sterile fill with Crepaco machinery
OR the last advertisement I saw was Scott Labs technology * ferment a 3% alcohol seltzer > sterile filter the seltzer > precisely fill and dose the beverage with Valcorin (an anti microbial that breaks down in a few hours) > package like normal on a beer bottle line

. It's good to know the rule to ferment below FG of 1.000 is not really a rule.

 

[Raptor99]

The starting SG is difficult to accurately determine when you're using solid fruit, there can be a lot of trapped sugar.

This is something that I have been thinking about. My approach is to mash/crush/chop the fruit and put it in a brew bag, then leave it in the must for 24 hours with pectic enzyme. Once the pectic enzyme has had some time to work, I hope that enough of the sugar has been released from the fruit to get a more accurate OG reading. I've been considering whether it would be helpful to wait 48 hours instead of 24 before adding the yeast. Since I add Kmeta at the very beginning, I'm not too worried about spoilage during that time.

Has anyone else found a good solution for this issue?

 

[winemaker81]

Has anyone else found a good solution for this issue?

When starting the FWK last fall, I experienced differences in the SG between reconstitution time, and the following morning. I seriously thought I stirred well, but found 3 to 4 point differences.

We may be chasing a unicorn on this one. We may not get the answer we want, or fully trust.

I agree, waiting 48 hours may be fine. Start a batch and check the SG every 12 hours until you pitch, stirring before each check. It will be interesting to see the variance.

 

[ChuckD]

When starting the FWK last fall, I experienced differences in the SG between reconstitution time, and the following morning. I seriously thought I stirred well, but found 3 to 4 point differences.

We may be chasing a unicorn on this one. We may not get the answer we want, or fully trust.

I agree, waiting 48 hours may be fine. Start a batch and check the SG every 12 hours until you pitch, stirring before each check. It will be interesting to see the variance.

Those darn known unknowns again . Do I see a use for that Tilt Hydrometer dodad? That and a really big magnetic stirrer!

 

[winemaker81]

Do I see a use for that Tilt Hydrometer dodad?

Call me cynical (you might as well, most people do!), but a tilt hydrometer won't provide much better information, if at all.

Besides being cynical, I'm also cheap. Spending $135 on unit to replace the $4 hydrometer I purchased in 1984 doesn't seem like a bargain.