Just wondering if anyone has tried this device and would like to
comment on how it works, how well it works, and how easy it is to
sanitize?

http://www.homebrewcentre.co.uk/prod...ID=430&cID=125


--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?

The one I have works quite well and disassembles to parts which present
little problem for sanitization.

The chief problem I've had while using it is the usual problem of
keeping stationary things which should be stationary. I.e., the siphon
really should be made fast to the neck of the vessel it's in, a task not
easily accomplished; otherwise, excessive motion can cause unwanted
stirring in the liquid being racked. I wish I could recommend a solution
-- perhaps others can suggest something.

Marshall

Adam Funk wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone has tried this device and would like to
> comment on how it works, how well it works, and how easy it is to
> sanitize?
>
> http://www.homebrewcentre.co.uk/prod...ID=430&cID=125

On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:47:16 +0100, Adam Funk >
wrote:

>Just wondering if anyone has tried this device and would like to
>comment on how it works, how well it works, and how easy it is to
>sanitize?
>
>http://www.homebrewcentre.co.uk/prod...ID=430&cID=125

That looks like a standard Fermtech Auto Syphon. Made here in
Canadam.

Love it, wouldn't be without it.

Steve

"Adam Funk" > wrote in message
...
> Just wondering if anyone has tried this device and would like to
> comment on how it works, how well it works, and how easy it is to
> sanitize?
>
> http://www.homebrewcentre.co.uk/prod...ID=430&cID=125
>
>
> --
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
> Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?

Once you've used one you'll never be without. I have 2 at present.
Steve

> The chief problem I've had while using it is the usual problem of keeping
> stationary things which should be stationary. I.e., the siphon really
> should be made fast to the neck of the vessel it's in, a task not easily
> accomplished; otherwise, excessive motion can cause unwanted stirring in
> the liquid being racked. I wish I could recommend a solution -- perhaps
> others can suggest something.
>
> Marshall

Once in place I wrap a piece of duct tape - torn in half length wise -
around it. Kind of like a neck tie.

On Jul 2, 12:47*pm, Adam Funk > wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone has tried this device and would like to
> comment on how it works, how well it works, and how easy it is to
> sanitize?
>
> http://www.homebrewcentre.co.uk/prod...ID=430&cID=125
>
> --
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
> Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?

I use mine only for racking from the brew kettle to the carboy for
fermentation. It does has a tendency to suck some air in around the
plunger which could oxidize finished beer a bit. It works pretty well
except if it sucks a hop petal in which can jam the little rubber
flapper in the open position.

For racking from my carboys I have one of those orange rubber
dohickeys (http://morebeer.com/view_product/18872//
Sterile_Siphon_Starter_-_For_5_and_6_Gallon_Carboys)
and a normal racking cane.

Marshall Jose wrote:

> The one I have works quite well and disassembles to parts which present
> little problem for sanitization.

It works very well. I might add that somehow the little piece of
plastic that acts as a flapper came off and mine and became lost; it
might now have been installed correctly or maybe it was defective, but
after sanitizing I tried using mine and couldn't get it to work. When I
figured out what was wrong, I took a dime and santized it, and then
dropped it down into the large tube and reinserted the plunger; works
like a champ and I've been using it that way for probably over a year.

> The chief problem I've had while using it is the usual problem of
> keeping stationary things which should be stationary. I.e., the siphon
> really should be made fast to the neck of the vessel it's in, a task not
> easily accomplished; otherwise, excessive motion can cause unwanted
> stirring in the liquid being racked. I wish I could recommend a solution
> -- perhaps others can suggest something.

I'm not sure where the excessive motion would come from; once I
carefully insert it and hold onto it tightly while carefully plunging it
just once, I let go and never touch it again until the carboy is empty.
I don't use any clamps, either; I just drape a clean dry hand towel
over the top, which probably helps to stablilize it at least a small
amount. The towel is actually for the purpose of keeping dust and flies
--like those little bar flies or fruit flies that my carboy seems to
attract -- from getting into my carboy and possibly exposing my beer or
yeast patty to bacteria (I will often dump a fresh batch into the
carboy, so I need it to remain sanitized).

Cheers.
--
Bill Velek, www.tinyurl.com/BVELEK => to my following 'homebrew' sites:
Grow-Hops: Homebrewer's Garden: hops/barley/herbs, with 3,000+ members!
BrewEquip: exclusively about brewing equipment, now has 1,300+ members!
"HomeBrewers" Team donated 238+ YEARS of computing to medical research!

Thanks for all the comments. Since there were some drawbacks, I'll
think about this for a bit. (The wine thief is great, though.)


--
Taken on the whole however this is a fine disc and a good example of
the current pop scene attempting to break out of its vulgarisms and
sometimes downright obscene derivative hogwash.
(Julian Stone-Mason B.A., 1972)

On Jul 22, 9:53*pm, Adam Funk > wrote:
> Thanks for all the comments. *Since there were some drawbacks, I'll
> think about this for a bit. *(The wine thief is great, though.)
>
> --
> Taken on the whole however this is a fine disc and a good example of
> the current pop scene attempting to break out of its vulgarisms and
> sometimes downright obscene derivative hogwash.
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *(Julian Stone-Mason B.A., 1972)

Fair enough. I would recommend autosyphons 100%, I live in the UK but
the one I bought is a Canadian import. The Young's one looks like a
direct copy of it. I don't know how I managed without one frankly.

The only drawback is - as stated - similar to all racking canes and
syphons: you need to keep it still at the top of the carboy while
racking is in progress. You can however hold the auto-syphon while
you prime it, whereas with a standard racking cane you have to set it
up then go to the other end to suck the process into action which
makes a huge positive difference. Coupled with the fact that you
don't have to get your mouth near the receiving end of the tube (and
therefore there are no potential sanitising issues) I'd say the
autosyphon is a clear winner.

Jim

On 2009-07-24, merrydown wrote:

> On Jul 22, 9:53Â*pm, Adam Funk > wrote:
>> Thanks for all the comments. Â*Since there were some drawbacks, I'll
>> think about this for a bit. Â*(The wine thief is great, though.)

> Fair enough. I would recommend autosyphons 100%, I live in the UK but
> the one I bought is a Canadian import. The Young's one looks like a
> direct copy of it. I don't know how I managed without one frankly.
>
> The only drawback is - as stated - similar to all racking canes and
> syphons: you need to keep it still at the top of the carboy while
> racking is in progress. You can however hold the auto-syphon while
> you prime it, whereas with a standard racking cane you have to set it
> up then go to the other end to suck the process into action which
> makes a huge positive difference. Coupled with the fact that you
> don't have to get your mouth near the receiving end of the tube (and
> therefore there are no potential sanitising issues) I'd say the
> autosyphon is a clear winner.


Thanks. I'll probably hmm about it a bit more and end up getting one.


--
Bob just used 'canonical' in the canonical way. [Guy Steele]