I have a small barrel of about 90 liters full of 02 vintage Chardonnay
and plan to filter it using my Buon Vino Super Jet. The wine is fairly
clear but not quite as brilliant as I would like. I am thinking of
trying 1 pad of #2 (polishing filtration) followed by 2 pads of #3
(super sterile pads .5 micron) with a view to making it a one-step process.

Has anyone tried using the filter with different levels of pads? Any
thoughts on pros and cons? My main purpose is to primarily to reduce
the handling and therefore oxygenation of the wine and secondarily to
reduce the work.

In the past I have generally been satisfied with the No. 2 pad as it
clears the wine really well however, since I am planning on aging this
wine for several years I feel the .5 micron would help with stability.

Also, does anyone know off hand the microns of the Nos. 1 & 2 pads.
Only the No.3 pad has any reference to microns.

Thanks for any comments.

Glen Duff

Glen,
I don't have any experience with the Super Jet but I do have a thought
on it. I like the idea of what you are trying to do, but I am concerned that
if the pads are rated at .5 nominal then it most likely rated that way
through 3 pads that are the same. That having been said- I would imagine
this wine is dry and has been through MLF so there shouldn't be any
stability problems and it should be a good plan.
John Dixon


"Glen Duff" > wrote in message
...
> I have a small barrel of about 90 liters full of 02 vintage Chardonnay
> and plan to filter it using my Buon Vino Super Jet. The wine is fairly
> clear but not quite as brilliant as I would like. I am thinking of
> trying 1 pad of #2 (polishing filtration) followed by 2 pads of #3
> (super sterile pads .5 micron) with a view to making it a one-step
process.
>
> Has anyone tried using the filter with different levels of pads? Any
> thoughts on pros and cons? My main purpose is to primarily to reduce
> the handling and therefore oxygenation of the wine and secondarily to
> reduce the work.
>
> In the past I have generally been satisfied with the No. 2 pad as it
> clears the wine really well however, since I am planning on aging this
> wine for several years I feel the .5 micron would help with stability.
>
> Also, does anyone know off hand the microns of the Nos. 1 & 2 pads.
> Only the No.3 pad has any reference to microns.
>
> Thanks for any comments.
>
> Glen Duff
>

I have a mini jet and it does not work that way, all 3 pads are
exposed to the same wine via an input port; in your example most of it
would go though the coarsest media. If you put your pads on and all
of the holes line up identically, it works like mine. I have no
experience with a super jet, but think it works the same way.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Joe

"J Dixon" > wrote in message .net>...
> Glen,
> I don't have any experience with the Super Jet but I do have a thought
> on it. I like the idea of what you are trying to do, but I am concerned that
> if the pads are rated at .5 nominal then it most likely rated that way
> through 3 pads that are the same. That having been said- I would imagine
> this wine is dry and has been through MLF so there shouldn't be any
> stability problems and it should be a good plan.
> John Dixon
>
>
> "Glen Duff" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I have a small barrel of about 90 liters full of 02 vintage Chardonnay
> > and plan to filter it using my Buon Vino Super Jet. The wine is fairly
> > clear but not quite as brilliant as I would like. I am thinking of
> > trying 1 pad of #2 (polishing filtration) followed by 2 pads of #3
> > (super sterile pads .5 micron) with a view to making it a one-step
> process.
> >
> > Has anyone tried using the filter with different levels of pads? Any
> > thoughts on pros and cons? My main purpose is to primarily to reduce
> > the handling and therefore oxygenation of the wine and secondarily to
> > reduce the work.
> >
> > In the past I have generally been satisfied with the No. 2 pad as it
> > clears the wine really well however, since I am planning on aging this
> > wine for several years I feel the .5 micron would help with stability.
> >
> > Also, does anyone know off hand the microns of the Nos. 1 & 2 pads.
> > Only the No.3 pad has any reference to microns.
> >
> > Thanks for any comments.
> >
> > Glen Duff
> >

Joe, Are you saying that the wine does not have to go through all three pads
necessarily? I thought it went in one side and out on the other as in a
typical plate filter system.
"Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
om...
> I have a mini jet and it does not work that way, all 3 pads are
> exposed to the same wine via an input port; in your example most of it
> would go though the coarsest media. If you put your pads on and all
> of the holes line up identically, it works like mine. I have no
> experience with a super jet, but think it works the same way.
> Hope this helps.
> Regards,
> Joe
>
> "J Dixon" > wrote in message
.net>...
> > Glen,
> > I don't have any experience with the Super Jet but I do have a
thought
> > on it. I like the idea of what you are trying to do, but I am concerned
that
> > if the pads are rated at .5 nominal then it most likely rated that way
> > through 3 pads that are the same. That having been said- I would imagine
> > this wine is dry and has been through MLF so there shouldn't be any
> > stability problems and it should be a good plan.
> > John Dixon
> >
> >
> > "Glen Duff" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I have a small barrel of about 90 liters full of 02 vintage Chardonnay
> > > and plan to filter it using my Buon Vino Super Jet. The wine is
fairly
> > > clear but not quite as brilliant as I would like. I am thinking of
> > > trying 1 pad of #2 (polishing filtration) followed by 2 pads of #3
> > > (super sterile pads .5 micron) with a view to making it a one-step
> > process.
> > >
> > > Has anyone tried using the filter with different levels of pads? Any
> > > thoughts on pros and cons? My main purpose is to primarily to reduce
> > > the handling and therefore oxygenation of the wine and secondarily to
> > > reduce the work.
> > >
> > > In the past I have generally been satisfied with the No. 2 pad as it
> > > clears the wine really well however, since I am planning on aging this
> > > wine for several years I feel the .5 micron would help with stability.
> > >
> > > Also, does anyone know off hand the microns of the Nos. 1 & 2 pads.
> > > Only the No.3 pad has any reference to microns.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any comments.
> > >
> > > Glen Duff
> > >

John & Joe,

It appears you're right Joe, I just checked the plates. It appears that
the wine is channelled through the large intake hole at the top and is
evenly distributed and forced through all three pads simultaneously
before entering the out-take tube.

I will need to use the same pads during each operation otherwise it
would result in only a portion of the wine running through the fine pad.

Obviously large wineries must set up simultaneous filtering through
increasingly finer pads.

Thanks anyway and cheers,

Glen Duff

ps Does anyone know the microns of pads No. 1 & 2 (blue and red)?

J Dixon wrote:

> Joe, Are you saying that the wine does not have to go through all three pads
> necessarily? I thought it went in one side and out on the other as in a
> typical plate filter system.
> "Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>>I have a mini jet and it does not work that way, all 3 pads are
>>exposed to the same wine via an input port; in your example most of it
>>would go though the coarsest media. If you put your pads on and all
>>of the holes line up identically, it works like mine. I have no
>>experience with a super jet, but think it works the same way.
>>Hope this helps.
>>Regards,
>>Joe
>>
>>"J Dixon" > wrote in message
>>
> .net>...
>
>>>Glen,
>>> I don't have any experience with the Super Jet but I do have a
>>>
> thought
>
>>>on it. I like the idea of what you are trying to do, but I am concerned
>>>
> that
>
>>>if the pads are rated at .5 nominal then it most likely rated that way
>>>through 3 pads that are the same. That having been said- I would imagine
>>>this wine is dry and has been through MLF so there shouldn't be any
>>>stability problems and it should be a good plan.
>>>John Dixon
>>>
>>>
>>>"Glen Duff" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>>I have a small barrel of about 90 liters full of 02 vintage Chardonnay
>>>>and plan to filter it using my Buon Vino Super Jet. The wine is
>>>>
> fairly
>
>>>>clear but not quite as brilliant as I would like. I am thinking of
>>>>trying 1 pad of #2 (polishing filtration) followed by 2 pads of #3
>>>>(super sterile pads .5 micron) with a view to making it a one-step
>>>>
>>> process.
>>>
>>>>Has anyone tried using the filter with different levels of pads? Any
>>>>thoughts on pros and cons? My main purpose is to primarily to reduce
>>>>the handling and therefore oxygenation of the wine and secondarily to
>>>>reduce the work.
>>>>
>>>>In the past I have generally been satisfied with the No. 2 pad as it
>>>>clears the wine really well however, since I am planning on aging this
>>>>wine for several years I feel the .5 micron would help with stability.
>>>>
>>>>Also, does anyone know off hand the microns of the Nos. 1 & 2 pads.
>>>>Only the No.3 pad has any reference to microns.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for any comments.
>>>>
>>>>Glen Duff
>>>>
>>>>
>
>

"Glen Duff" > wrote in message
...
> John & Joe,
>
> It appears you're right Joe, I just checked the plates. It appears that
> the wine is channelled through the large intake hole at the top and is
> evenly distributed and forced through all three pads simultaneously
> before entering the out-take tube.
>
> I will need to use the same pads during each operation otherwise it
> would result in only a portion of the wine running through the fine pad.
>
> Obviously large wineries must set up simultaneous filtering through
> increasingly finer pads.

Typically, the wine that goes into the plate & frame filter looks just about
as clear as the wine coming out. For some wines the plate & frame is
followed by a sterile cartridge filter right at the bottle filler. The
entire operation is done all at once.

There are some setups that use a crossover plate midway down the stack of
plates (or thereabouts) so that you can use coarse pads on the first half of
the stack and finer pads on the second half. The crossover routes the
output from the coarse pads through the second (fine) pads. You _might_ be
able to rig a Buon Vino filter to do that if you're handy with machine
tools. Otherwise, just hang a 10" housing with sterile membrane cartridge
on the output of the Buon Vino.

Tom S

John & Joe,

It appears you're right Joe, I just checked the plates. It appears that
the wine is channelled through the large intake hole at the top and is
evenly distributed and forced through all three pads simultaneously
before entering the out-take tube.

I will need to use the same pads during each operation otherwise it
would result in only a portion of the wine running through the fine pad.

Obviously large wineries must set up simultaneous filtering through
increasingly finer pads.

Thanks anyway and cheers,

Glen Duff

ps Does anyone know the microns of pads No. 1 & 2 (blue and red)?

J Dixon wrote:

> Joe, Are you saying that the wine does not have to go through all three pads
> necessarily? I thought it went in one side and out on the other as in a
> typical plate filter system.
> "Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>>I have a mini jet and it does not work that way, all 3 pads are
>>exposed to the same wine via an input port; in your example most of it
>>would go though the coarsest media. If you put your pads on and all
>>of the holes line up identically, it works like mine. I have no
>>experience with a super jet, but think it works the same way.
>>Hope this helps.
>>Regards,
>>Joe
>>
>>"J Dixon" > wrote in message
>>
> .net>...
>
>>>Glen,
>>> I don't have any experience with the Super Jet but I do have a
>>>
> thought
>
>>>on it. I like the idea of what you are trying to do, but I am concerned
>>>
> that
>
>>>if the pads are rated at .5 nominal then it most likely rated that way
>>>through 3 pads that are the same. That having been said- I would imagine
>>>this wine is dry and has been through MLF so there shouldn't be any
>>>stability problems and it should be a good plan.
>>>John Dixon
>>>
>>>
>>>"Glen Duff" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>>I have a small barrel of about 90 liters full of 02 vintage Chardonnay
>>>>and plan to filter it using my Buon Vino Super Jet. The wine is
>>>>
> fairly
>
>>>>clear but not quite as brilliant as I would like. I am thinking of
>>>>trying 1 pad of #2 (polishing filtration) followed by 2 pads of #3
>>>>(super sterile pads .5 micron) with a view to making it a one-step
>>>>
>>> process.
>>>
>>>>Has anyone tried using the filter with different levels of pads? Any
>>>>thoughts on pros and cons? My main purpose is to primarily to reduce
>>>>the handling and therefore oxygenation of the wine and secondarily to
>>>>reduce the work.
>>>>
>>>>In the past I have generally been satisfied with the No. 2 pad as it
>>>>clears the wine really well however, since I am planning on aging this
>>>>wine for several years I feel the .5 micron would help with stability.
>>>>
>>>>Also, does anyone know off hand the microns of the Nos. 1 & 2 pads.
>>>>Only the No.3 pad has any reference to microns.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for any comments.
>>>>
>>>>Glen Duff
>>>>
>>>>
>
>

Glen,
They have a website but it does not say; Here is the information
address though.

.

I never use anything but the finest ones on a white, I have the others
but never used them. I fine first, so by the time I filter it's
pretty clean to begin with.

Regards,
Joe


Glen Duff > wrote in message >...
> John & Joe,
>
> It appears you're right Joe, I just checked the plates. It appears that
> the wine is channelled through the large intake hole at the top and is
> evenly distributed and forced through all three pads simultaneously
> before entering the out-take tube.
>
> I will need to use the same pads during each operation otherwise it
> would result in only a portion of the wine running through the fine pad.
>
> Obviously large wineries must set up simultaneous filtering through
> increasingly finer pads.
>
> Thanks anyway and cheers,
>
> Glen Duff
>
> ps Does anyone know the microns of pads No. 1 & 2 (blue and red)?
>
> J Dixon wrote:
>
> > Joe, Are you saying that the wine does not have to go through all three pads
> > necessarily? I thought it went in one side and out on the other as in a
> > typical plate filter system.
> > "Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
> > om...
> >
> >>I have a mini jet and it does not work that way, all 3 pads are
> >>exposed to the same wine via an input port; in your example most of it
> >>would go though the coarsest media. If you put your pads on and all
> >>of the holes line up identically, it works like mine. I have no
> >>experience with a super jet, but think it works the same way.
> >>Hope this helps.
> >>Regards,
> >>Joe
> >>
> >>"J Dixon" > wrote in message
> >>
> > .net>...
> >
> >>>Glen,
> >>> I don't have any experience with the Super Jet but I do have a
> >>>
> > thought
> >
> >>>on it. I like the idea of what you are trying to do, but I am concerned
> >>>
> > that
> >
> >>>if the pads are rated at .5 nominal then it most likely rated that way
> >>>through 3 pads that are the same. That having been said- I would imagine
> >>>this wine is dry and has been through MLF so there shouldn't be any
> >>>stability problems and it should be a good plan.
> >>>John Dixon
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"Glen Duff" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>
> >>>>I have a small barrel of about 90 liters full of 02 vintage Chardonnay
> >>>>and plan to filter it using my Buon Vino Super Jet. The wine is
> >>>>
> > fairly
> >
> >>>>clear but not quite as brilliant as I would like. I am thinking of
> >>>>trying 1 pad of #2 (polishing filtration) followed by 2 pads of #3
> >>>>(super sterile pads .5 micron) with a view to making it a one-step
> >>>>
> >>> process.
> >>>
> >>>>Has anyone tried using the filter with different levels of pads? Any
> >>>>thoughts on pros and cons? My main purpose is to primarily to reduce
> >>>>the handling and therefore oxygenation of the wine and secondarily to
> >>>>reduce the work.
> >>>>
> >>>>In the past I have generally been satisfied with the No. 2 pad as it
> >>>>clears the wine really well however, since I am planning on aging this
> >>>>wine for several years I feel the .5 micron would help with stability.
> >>>>
> >>>>Also, does anyone know off hand the microns of the Nos. 1 & 2 pads.
> >>>>Only the No.3 pad has any reference to microns.
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks for any comments.
> >>>>
> >>>>Glen Duff
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >
> >

John,
Yes, if you wanted to use only 1 pad you might get away with it. Mine
plug up pretty quickly with fined wine; maybe 10 gallons per set of 3.
I think the most I ever did was 20 gallons of Chenin Blanc. At that
point it looked like the Three Stooges were filtering the wine, it was
spraying out of the sides everywhere. I just put the drain pan tube
back into unfiltered wine and re-circulate the stuff that leaks out.
None of these yellowed prematurely, so I guess I did not over-aerate
it.

I always presoak mine in a ~0.5% citric acid solution and flush that
through the filter after assembly (right before use on the wine) to
try to eliminate a papery taste too. I can see if I have any leaks
without wasting wine that way.

Regards,
Joe


> Joe, Are you saying that the wine does not have to go through all three pads
> necessarily? I thought it went in one side and out on the other as in a
> typical plate filter system.

In article >,
(Joe Sallustio) wrote:

> I always presoak mine in a ~0.5% citric acid solution and flush that
> through the filter after assembly (right before use on the wine) to
> try to eliminate a papery taste too. I can see if I have any leaks
> without wasting wine that way.

Does that work well? I've been trying to solve that papery cardboard
taste of my filtered wines. Can you give me more details about your
experience with this?

--
Greg Cook
http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine

(remove spamblocker from my email address)