I'm looking at 2 meters. Both have a resolution of .01. One has an
accuracy of +_ .1, the other has an accuracy of +_ .2. Is the
difference in accuracy worth twice the price? Will that much difference
make a detectable difference in the wine. With my fruit wines I never
worried about pH and they all came out pretty decent.

Dick

You answered your own question. Being .1 off is nothing to worry about. Get
the cheaper one and use the difference to get a refractometer (sp?).
Tom
--





"Dick Heckman" > wrote in message
...
> I'm looking at 2 meters. Both have a resolution of .01. One has an
> accuracy of +_ .1, the other has an accuracy of +_ .2. Is the difference
> in accuracy worth twice the price? Will that much difference make a
> detectable difference in the wine. With my fruit wines I never worried
> about pH and they all came out pretty decent.
>
> Dick

On Aug 2, 5:34 pm, "Tom" > wrote:
> You answered your own question. Being .1 off is nothing to worry about. Get
> the cheaper one and use the difference to get a refractometer (sp?).
> Tom
> --
>
> "Dick Heckman" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > I'm looking at 2 meters. Both have a resolution of .01. One has an
> > accuracy of +_ .1, the other has an accuracy of +_ .2. Is the difference
> > in accuracy worth twice the price? Will that much difference make a
> > detectable difference in the wine. With my fruit wines I never worried
> > about pH and they all came out pretty decent.
>
> > Dick

I would suggest an accuracy of 0.2 units is unacceptable for
winemaking; 0.1 pH units is the minimum accuracy I would accept. A
0.05 pH accuracy can be purchashed for under $100 US.

0.2 units isn't much better than pH test strips. This is a
logarithmic value so that error is substantial.

Joe

> I would suggest an accuracy of 0.2 units is unacceptable for
> winemaking; 0.1 pH units is the minimum accuracy I would accept. *A
> 0.05 pH accuracy can be purchashed for under $100 US.
>
> 0.2 units isn't much better than pH test strips. *This is a
> logarithmic value so that error is substantial.
>
> Joe- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'll second Joe's opinion. pH is one of the most important wine
characteristics to monitor for many reasons. Don't scrimp on your pH
meter. Wine pH is typically between 3.0 and 4.0.so an accuracy of
+/-0.2 units in this range is not suffiicient to know what's going
on. As Joe mentioned pH is a logarithmic scale - a 0.4 unit swing is
huge.

RD

First of all, resolution doesn't mean much if the meter is not calibrated.
You will need to test it against a standard like a known and fresh buffer
solution at 70 deg F in the range where you use it like a pH 4.0 buffer. pH
meters are also temperature sensitive and a good one will have a built in
thermometer to compensate for temperature variations. You will be better off
buying a cheap acid titration kit and use it instead.


"Dick Heckman" > wrote in message
...
> I'm looking at 2 meters. Both have a resolution of .01. One has an
> accuracy of +_ .1, the other has an accuracy of +_ .2. Is the difference
> in accuracy worth twice the price? Will that much difference make a
> detectable difference in the wine. With my fruit wines I never worried
> about pH and they all came out pretty decent.
>
> Dick

On Aug 19, 9:28*pm, "Mike Nelson" > wrote:
> First of all, resolution doesn't mean much if the meter is not calibrated..
> You will need to test it against a standard like a known and fresh buffer
> solution at 70 deg F in the range where you use it like a pH 4.0 buffer. *pH
> meters are also temperature sensitive and a good one will have a built in
> thermometer to compensate for temperature variations. You will be better off
> buying a cheap acid titration kit and use it instead.
>
> "Dick Heckman" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > I'm looking at 2 meters. *Both have a resolution of .01. *One has an
> > accuracy of +_ .1, the other has an accuracy of +_ .2. *Is the difference
> > in accuracy worth twice the price? *Will that much difference make a
> > detectable difference in the wine. *With my fruit wines I never worried
> > about pH and they all came out pretty decent.
>
> > Dick- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

As long as the Sodium Hydroxide is good. I've had it come in 30% off
because it must have sat on a shelf for too long or wasn't sealed.
The best cheap instrument is a trained tongue. I do agree with you
on cost though, it's 10 times cheaper to buy equipment to measure TA.
I don't think you can measure pH well without spending at least $100
US.

Joe

DIck,

I'll offer you a "hack" technique just in case you don't have a ph
meter or your meter doesn't have the desired accuracy. If the grapes
are from california, assume a ph of at least 3.9. Add enough tartatic
to bring the Ph down .4. If the grapes are not that ripe ( lower Ph)
you can always take the tartaric out after fermentation. Adding
tartaric after fermentation never tastes the same as adding it before.
Bottom line is that you want the Ph as low as possible before
fermentation, it ensures a cleaner fermentation. This method can be
used if your Ph meter goes on the blink the day you bring the grapes
home. When in doubt use tartaric. Additionally, use Prisse de Mousse
which tolerates low Ph and SO2 levels. Also, Be sure to use enough SO2
when grapes have mold or acetic acid on them. If you don't use enough
SO2 then ethel acetate will form. ( Acetone smells)

Bob

On Aug 2, 3:54*pm, Dick Heckman > wrote:
> I'm looking at 2 meters. *Both have a resolution of .01. *One has an
> accuracy of +_ .1, the other has an accuracy of +_ .2. *Is the
> difference in accuracy worth twice the price? *Will that much difference
> * make a detectable difference in the wine. *With my fruit wines I never
> worried about pH and they all came out pretty decent.
>
> Dick