How do You run Cold and Slow?

[cayars]

Yummyrum that's going to confuse people because it's the head room, size of the neck, the column height, it's width, it's design, the amount of vapors that can be in process, the amount of vapor that can be knocked down. The same 2" head should NOT take the same amount of time to run if connected to a 5, 8, 13 or 16 gallon boiler YET should be able to produce the same spirits with the same flow rate.

Each still design will have an optimal take off rate of, purity to heat used and that's the zone it should be ran in for optimal results. The size of the boiler and how much is filled WILL influence the duration of the run.

[Yummyrum]

Yummyrum that's going to confuse people because it's the head room, size of the neck, the column height, it's width, it's design, the amount of vapors that can be in process, the amount of vapor that can be knocked down.

Absolutely not .
It’s all those “subtle detail” you mention that folk get so bogged down worrying about when the number one thing that will determine purity of spirit coming out of a Pot still is how hard its run .

The same 2" head should NOT take the same amount of time to run if connected to a 5, 8, 13 or 16 gallon boiler YET should be able to produce the same spirits with the same flow rate.

Yes it should .... because you should adjust the power to suit the amount .

If you put 1 gallon in your boiler , you can’t run it at the same pace you would if you had 10 gallons in it . You would be putting 10x as much heat into it and smearing it to bugggery . So you must scale back the heat .

[VLAGAVULVIN]

@ Runt and cayars: you generate acids inside of your pot just during the spirit run of your low wines / so, no need to add them from the outside or the left field

@ pope: it's pretty cool the big distilleries use H2SO4 as they control their processes well and check their products in the lab; but anything we could read about it all is half-knowledge and half-truth... besides, say, I know it well how to refine vegetable oil using an ordinary industrial equipment but never in my life I will try to heat and wash my oil with soap and orthophosphoric acid at home.

@ Otis and Yummie: the newbies should understand that if they have only "pan and worm pipe" (and a glass jar instead of the normally calculated thumper) then they smear the crappy things at any speed / wuts more, they will get new crappy ones at the slowest possible speed, especially if they keep on boiling dead yeast in their pan.

[cayars]

Yummyrum that's going to confuse people because it's the head room, size of the neck, the column height, it's width, it's design, the amount of vapors that can be in process, the amount of vapor that can be knocked down.

Absolutely not .
It’s all those “subtle detail” you mention that folk get so bogged down worrying about when the number one thing that will determine purity of spirit coming out of a Pot still is how hard its run .

It most certainly is when you say things like:
"So the amount of gas ( heat) is proportional to the amount of charge , and the amount of produced . The time taken is the same .

My point is that yes there is an ideal speed at which to run the still that ensures good separation with minimal smearing , and that seems to be about 8 hrs per run . To achieve this , the amount of power ( heat) applied to the boiler will be proportional to how big the charge is ."

A 2" head on my 5 gallon and on my keg boiler will NOT take the same time to run. The 5 gallon is going to take roughly 1/3 the time and change. Why would I run the 5 gallon slower just to hit some "magic timeline" of 8 hours when I can run it based on the vapor load it can properly handle? If I put a 1/2" or 3/4" type head on the 5 gallon then it would be much closer to the 8 hour mark because the still is now limited in the vapors it can process.

If I took a 3/4" head off a cheap 3 to 5 gallon pot still and put it on a keg, I wouldn't expect to be able to run that at 8 hours either as it's going to take a lot longer. I simply won't be able to pass enough vapor quickly enough to get done in 8 hours if that's the time it normally take with a 2" head.

The same 2" head should NOT take the same amount of time to run if connected to a 5, 8, 13 or 16 gallon boiler YET should be able to produce the same spirits with the same flow rate.

Yes it should .... because you should adjust the power to suit the amount .

If you put 1 gallon in your boiler , you can’t run it at the same pace you would if you had 10 gallons in it . You would be putting 10x as much heat into it and smearing it to bugggery . So you must scale back the heat .

I don't adjust the heat based on the amount of boiler charge, but based on temp AND vapor rate produced.

Commercial distilleries using pot stills do not adjust the flow based on the boiler charge. They won't run slower if they had 1/3 full boiler vs 3/4 full boiler. They will run the still at the optimal flow rate it can handle and produces best at. The boiler charge will deplete itself of alcohol faster in this situation with a smaller charge of course and the run will be different than if it was full (usual level), but it will also be faster as well. They would not both take "8 hours" to run.

[OtisT]

@ Otis and Yummie: the newbies should understand that if they have only "pan and worm pipe" (and a glass jar instead of the normally calculated thumper) then they smear the crappy things at any speed / wuts more, they will get new crappy ones at the slowest possible speed, especially if they keep on boiling dead yeast in their pan.

Sure. Pot stilling is nothing but one big smear. Run too fast and it smears too much. The trick is finding what “too much” is. Otis

[VLAGAVULVIN]

The trick is finding what “too much” is. Otis

One ancient Russian pan-and-worm trick is not so complicated in terms of speed but 3 runs are expected
I think you had read about it.

[OtisT]

The trick is finding what “too much” is. Otis

One ancient Russian pan-and-worm trick is not so complicated in terms of speed but 3 runs are expected
I think you had read about it.

No, I don’t recall reading anything about that. Maybe a long while ago? I don’t use a worm but I have used a liebig quite a bit on top of my old pan boiler. (A straight worm? ). I can’t imagine there is any difference between the the worm and a liebig in terms of making a good product. I have made quite a few good batches in my pan boiler with the liebig on top having done only two runs, paying attention to speed so I get good separation. I have not done three fast runs on that still so I can’t compare the two methods, but I believe you if you are telling me that ancient Russian trick makes a fine drop too. Just proves that there is more than one way to make a descent spirit.

Happy stilling. Otis

[cayars]

What is this Russian pan-and-worm trick that is mentioned?

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Okay, okay...

Equipment: the wifie's old big pan + lid sealed with the dough, the worm gotten from some old fridge, any thermal meter (lol), any alco meter & parrot (options), direct heat, the backyard (optional, too).

Wort/wash (5-7-10%AbV): any allgrain, or sugarhead, or birdwatchers / remark: fruit or berry are not so good.

1st run on full swing (splitting to 1.1 and 1.2). That 1.2 becomes when you have about 94oC in your pan or about 40-42%AbV in stream. Run it till water, yeah.

2nd run: take your 1.1 and proof down to 5-7-10% (but better 5) and split it in 2.1 and 2.2 (same parameters as above, may use a bit moderated speed). Grant your 2.1 to the Gods of the Lavatory (or keep it for the next year boka build, but this 2.1 is very "dirty").

3rd run: there are 1.2 and 2.2 finally married in your pan. Run it at normal (not slow, at least) speed. Stop at about 35-40% in stream (i.e. run while it's able to burn in a spoon). Proof it down to 40% AbV and let it rest. Add some roasted malt or herbs or raisins or wooden chips or etc... That's all.

Here you get almost no-heads-no-fusels distillate with slightly tail-ish accent. No-go for fruit, once again.

More complicated with theory in my bad English — here (with 1 off-topic movie and 1 useful picture).

[cayars]

I'm not sure why anyone would want to do that for a flavored spirit as all that dilution is going to hurt the taste. It's probably one of the worst ways to run flavored spirits. I certainly would never do that in a pot still.

The whole point of the strip run is to consolidate the alcohol we get from the mash and bring it up from roughly 8%-10% to 30%ish for the spirit run. We are trying to condense flavors and alcohol not dilute them at this point. You could certainly do a bit of refining on the strip run by removing foreshots and early heads which are nasty and will contain little usable good stuff and maybe some fusels that would come deep in the run but overall it's a "condense run" to compact our alcohol and flavors.

You could also take about 20%-25% of the strip run and reprocess it with the next strip run to clean them up further but not dilute them. That 20%ish would be early heads/late tails if you want to call them that from the first strip. That would clean them up more and condense more flavor and alcohol as well for the spirit run.

The alternative would be a normal strip and spirit run with feints ran as a queens share run where maybe you dilute these to 40% if needed. Or just save the feints and add to the next batch to carry over flavor.

But personally I would not dilute things that don't need diluting at that point as that just require more energy and time to process for little to no gain and likely hurts the very flavor you are trying to preserve.

On the other hand if going for a neutral then dilution is a wonderful thing to help remove flavors and make it "neutral" tasting.

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Just. Try. This.

Meanwhile, you show us your love for texting rather than understanding. As per your method (including the alternative one) — what would you like to save there: fusels? You will. As for the time losses... weren't you about to get hearts drop by drop, for 8+ hours and more? Wasting both your life and energy for getting the same funky booze in fact.

Try to get the reason of dilution on your own, do a favor. Please.

[cayars]

I've tried about every type of run there is including this type of run and it just doesn't make a lot of sense for the reasons I mentioned.

hearts drop by drop, for 8+ hours and more

Where you get that from? I advocate starting slow to discard foreshots/early heads as we don't really want them and the best way to consolidate those nasty things is by running slow. But that is the START of the run, certainly not the whole run.

For most (not all) of the things I run, the sweat spot on my still the way I run it happens to be 75% to 60% for hearts. I'll take small amounts off in jars around those points so I have finer grain blending ability. I'll do a little tasting around 60% down to where I know I'm not going to include any of those jars. Once at that point I'll crank up the energy and pull tails as fast as I can to save time or a later run.

You run the still at the rate it produces best at for purity vs heat input. That could be a stream to a drip depending on configuration. Time is a function of boiler charge and still configuration, not something you target.

Dilution is for "filtering" and removing flavor pure and simple.

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Bro, Otis and you just asked me so, I just answered with all proper detail. But let's recall the situation: the big ancient pan and the horizontal chiller. No vertical segment, no still, in fact. And here — we either have no bad funky friends in the wort (impossible) or remove them by some method that has nothing to do with the "vertical fractionating", even full (as in bokas) or just partial (swan necks).

You have just described the calssics. Yes, it has place. And yes, from 75-80% to somewhat 60-65%, depending on supposed aging period, mash bill, own taste etc. And it works if you have the still. In my example you have nothing but pan and worm.

Filtering sounds strange, at least. Removing sounds better, but for which flavor, bro? The hints: 1) we have some very weak alcohols-containing thing inside and 2) we have no vertical department to proof the vapors up.

P.S. Don't worry to get too neutral distillate while using that "strange old Russian method". Grain yummies have a rather tail-ish character. So, if the one will not stop his 3rd run at 40% the distillate will become even over-delish

P.P.S. I'm not here to expose anyone across the ocean. I'm looking for some new knowledge that is as small as grain of sand. I can share my knowledge, too. And "practice is the criterion of truth". I would not describe the methodology that was not yet proven by me personally. And I hope that anyone here would share the same things proven by himself/herself, no double-talks.

[cayars]

It's not a strange old Russian method but a well known used method. The Russians may have done this but so did Scotch & Irish distillers when they wanted to produce lighter spirits.

Anytime you add water back to dilute the spirit and redistill it you are "filtering" the spirit as the distillate run will have more water in the next run.

[OtisT]

Bro, Otis and you just asked me so, I just answered with all proper detail.

Vlad,
Thanks for the details. I don’t recall reading about this method before but it sounds familiar. I may have read about it and possibly did not understand it fully at the time. Anyway, it does sound interesting and different from other methods I’m familiar with. I can see how this cleans up the heads first, leaving all the tails in the boiler on the last run for flavor. You did not specify this, but I assume there is still a small heads cut on the third run, foreshots at least.

Like I said before, there are many ways to make a good drop and I may have to try this method some day. Not because I don’t like my double pot still method, but because I like to try new things. That helps keep distilling interesting for me.

For clarification, when I described my pan setup I did not say this, but there was a 2” copper vertical component with elbow between the pan and condenser, and my liebig condenser was slanted, not horizontal. I did not bring it up because I did not think it relevant to that conversation.

Thanks again. Otis

[kimbodious]

I run my pot still on stripping runs where the output stream has just reached a consistent unfaltering stream any less and the stream would be broken. On my 40 litre charges on an a 2” system that equates to a pencil lead sized stream at around 1.5 litres per hour. I am using a 2200W element with 240V AC with a power controller. The meter at my “ low and slow” setting indicates somewhere between 1450 and 1600W depending on the current boiling point of the mixture.

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Like I said before, there are many ways to make a good drop and I may have to try this method some day. Not because I don’t like my double pot still method, but because I like to try new things. That helps keep distilling interesting for me.

For clarification, when I described my pan setup I did not say this, but there was a 2” copper vertical component with elbow between the pan and condenser, and my liebig condenser was slanted, not horizontal. I did not bring it up because I did not think it relevant to that conversation.

Otis, then for 1st & 2nd runs it's reasonable to configure the set like this:

It's important to have neither vertical tube nor packing inside / better drop some copper just into the pot.
Any vertical segment would strengthen the vapors and re-condence fusels back to the pot (but this time we don't need it: let them take off freely).

For the 3rd run the following sets are OK:
more "authentic":

more "lossless" in the end of the run:


This method will not make wonders. But it's OK for getting somewhat heavy-balanced and clean "base whisky" in Irish/Canadian style. Then you add some "heads-oriented" pure malt classics distillate and let it mature a bit after this marriage

Anytime you add water back to dilute the spirit and redistill it you are "filtering" the spirit as the distillate run will have more water in the next run.

Anytime you weaken your alco-containing solution down to 5-10% AbV and run it then fast,,, surprisingly the isoamyl alcohol (CH3)2CHCH2CH2OH becomes head fractions. So, you get rid of the most saturated monohydric alcohols having no "real still" at hand. Unfortunately, it's no-go for brandies, calvados, slivovitz and so on, and so forth... and of course, you know why

[Yummyrum]

It most certainly is when you say things like:
"So the amount of gas ( heat) is proportional to the amount of charge , and the amount of produced . The time taken is the same .

My point is that yes there is an ideal speed at which to run the still that ensures good separation with minimal smearing , and that seems to be about 8 hrs per run . To achieve this , the amount of power ( heat) applied to the boiler will be proportional to how big the charge is ."

Fair enough cayers , that was not the best use of grammar and had a few typo's

What I was trying to say is that there is an ideal rate at which you can put heat into a given charge that will allow the best separation of fractions with minimal smearing .
It seems to be a fact of nature , law of physics ....what ever you would like to call it, that regardless of the charge size , it will take around 6-8 hours to effectively allow this separation to occur .The amount of heat required will be proportional to the charge and the rate at which the product comes off will also be proportional .Try to push harder than the physics will allow and you increase the smearing .
Think about in terms of Watts/Liter of charge.
If you increase the charge , you must increase the watts to maintain the same rate .

A 2" head on my 5 gallon and on my keg boiler will NOT take the same time to run. The 5 gallon is going to take roughly 1/3 the time and change. Why would I run the 5 gallon slower just to hit some "magic timeline" of 8 hours when I can run it based on the vapor load it can properly handle?

You are missing the point . You can't just whack a bigger head on your still and somehow think you can magically defy the laws of physics and be able to separate fractions faster out of a boil .

If I put a 1/2" or 3/4" type head on the 5 gallon then it would be much closer to the 8 hour mark because the still is now limited in the vapors it can process.

If I took a 3/4" head off a cheap 3 to 5 gallon pot still and put it on a keg, I wouldn't expect to be able to run that at 8 hours either as it's going to take a lot longer. I simply won't be able to pass enough vapor quickly enough to get done in 8 hours if that's the time it normally take with a 2" head.

Well yes ...actually ... you seem to have this notion that the size of the head is responsible for how fast you can take off product .You seem to think that a 3/4" head will hinder a spirit run .
Sorry that is completely wrong . I can be stripping at 10 liters an hour with a 3/4" head .
So seeing as spirit run is coming off at a fraction of that , its not a contribution factor

[cayars]

What I was trying to say is that there is an ideal rate at which you can put heat into a given charge that will allow the best separation of fractions with minimal smearing .

Agree, and the ideal rate will also be determined by the amount of vapor that can be present at any one time. A 3" column allows for twice as much vapor to be present in the column than a 2" column does.

It seems to be a fact of nature , law of physics ....what ever you would like to call it, that regardless of the charge size , it will take around 6-8 hours to effectively allow this separation to occur

disagree, the column size, ABV present and the total amount all matter.

The amount of heat required will be proportional to the charge and the rate at which the product comes off will also be proportional .Try to push harder than the physics will allow and you increase the smearing .

agree

Think about in terms of Watts/Liter of charge.
If you increase the charge , you must increase the watts to maintain the same rate .

Sure thing. But a 5 gallon or 15 gallon charge with the same ABV will still vaporize at the same temp.
A 5 gallon boiler charge at 10% will contain 0.5 gallons of alcohol to be extracted. A 15 gallon boiler charge at 10% will contain 1.5 gallons of alcohol to be extracted.

A 5 gallon charge at 30% will contain 1.5 gallons of alcohol to be extracted.

The amount of alcohol present in the boiler is the key.

A 2" head on my 5 gallon and on my keg boiler will NOT take the same time to run. The 5 gallon is going to take roughly 1/3 the time and change. Why would I run the 5 gallon slower just to hit some "magic timeline" of 8 hours when I can run it based on the vapor load it can properly handle?

You are missing the point . You can't just whack a bigger head on your still and somehow think you can magically defy the laws of physics and be able to separate fractions faster out of a boil .

It's not a matter of defiance but working with the physics. A 3" column for example contains TWICE as much vapor as a 2" column contains at the same height. A 1/2" or 3/4" column would hold substantially less vapor. You can't arbitrarily increase the size and expect better results as there has to be enough alcohol in the boiler to support the column area properly.

If I put a 1/2" or 3/4" type head on the 5 gallon then it would be much closer to the 8 hour mark because the still is now limited in the vapors it can process.

If I took a 3/4" head off a cheap 3 to 5 gallon pot still and put it on a keg, I wouldn't expect to be able to run that at 8 hours either as it's going to take a lot longer. I simply won't be able to pass enough vapor quickly enough to get done in 8 hours if that's the time it normally take with a 2" head.

Well yes ...actually ... you seem to have this notion that the size of the head is responsible for how fast you can take off product .You seem to think that a 3/4" head will hinder a spirit run .
Sorry that is completely wrong . I can be stripping at 10 liters an hour with a 3/4" head .
So seeing as spirit run is coming off at a fraction of that , its not a contribution factor

Yes I do. Given the amount of alcohol present in the boiler, the proper amount of heat to boil said total liquid and proper amount of cooling to knock vapors down, the size of the head is the limiting factor. It's just physics.

Once you open up the vapor path enough so that it's no longer the limiting factor it will not be faster nor will it produce better spirits but can hurt your production as you may not be able to properly keep the vapor path compacted properly.

Another way to state this is that for X amount of alcohol present and Y amount of heat applied Z amount of vapor will be produced. The size of the vapor path matters and will determine the flow rate. It's like putting your thumb on the end of a garden hose to build pressure and quirt both faster and farther. When you stick you thumb on the vapor path of the still you'll cause smearing as the vapor passes to quick to fraction properly.

[cayars]

This method will not make wonders. But it's OK for getting somewhat heavy-balanced and clean "base whisky" in Irish/Canadian style. Then you add some "heads-oriented" pure malt classics distillate and let it mature a bit after this marriage

If it's like a traditional Canadian or Irish whiskey base in their blends, it's a thin/light whiskey that has a lot of the full flavor removed. You can get there with high ABV output from the still or by multiple passes using dilution. It's done using high ABV output (and fast) in large plated stills commercially in order to produce large amounts of spirits quickly, then back blended with pot stilled full flavor products to put flavor back in. Economics of scaling production.

Dilution and re-running spirits in the hobby sector is a favorite way to try to salvage spirits that have off tastes as well. Or can be used to lighten the taste of a spirit. A couple months back I tried a new rum recipe and it was way to molasses flavored for my taste. I diluted it back down and re-ran it to make it lighter tasting.

Dilution surely has a place but cutting feints from say 30% down to 5% is a pretty drastic thing to do as part of the way you run normally.

Anytime you add water back to dilute the spirit and redistill it you are "filtering" the spirit as the distillate run will have more water in the next run.

Anytime you weaken your alco-containing solution down to 5-10% AbV and run it then fast,,, surprisingly the isoamyl alcohol (CH3)2CHCH2CH2OH becomes head fractions. So, you get rid of the most saturated monohydric alcohols having no "real still" at hand. Unfortunately, it's no-go for brandies, calvados, slivovitz and so on, and so forth... and of course, you know why

I'm going to disagree on several points. First how the isoamyl alcohol is formed, second that you could pull this off in head fractions and third that you can easily separate these out at all on a home still (or even would want to).

I'll also give you another thing you can try. Take your tails in one collection vessel preferable tall and narrow and add a bit of water. You will cause a chemical reaction that may separate out some of the oils (depending on what's in the tails you collected). You can then skim/suck the oils off the surface or wick them. Repeat until oils stop forming. That can remove a lot of oils that contribute to "flavor" good or bad but will help to create a lighter spirit without the need to fraction them off in the still.

http://www.chemeng.tsinghua.edu.cn/scho ... active.doc
Have a read and you'll find that about 0.3% of the distillate will be fusel oil with isomyl alcohol being a part of that 0.3%. To reliably extract it take 40 or more plates in a column still. Isoamyl alcohol has a boiling point of 130.8C.

When you dilute your spirits down to 5-10% and then run fast you are just smearing your output which further "filters" out the feints as you are bringing over much more water in the process that was used for dilution. "Filtering by dilution"

https://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2013/web ... 31469.html
"Fusel oil is a mixture of alcohols obtained as a side stream during distillation of fermentation-derived ethanol with yields around 1 to 10 liters per thousand liters of fuel ethanol."

"Conventional separation of fusel oils is accomplished in batch distillation systems using different cuts where water and ethanol are removed first. After lights removal, isoamyl alcohol is distilled from top obtaining a 95% w/w product while a dark brown liquid is removed from the reboiler. This process is energy intensive and operating costs represent a major fraction of the final costs."

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Cayars, isoamyl and his brothers make the small part of your pot contents. But it's the stinkiest and the poisonous one, too. Using hillbilly hobnailed crafting methods, it's better to kick the most of them out in the very beginning.

Still you are tended for texting rather than for understanding. Sorry, I gotta tell it to you once again. Stop copy-pasting and go in for some practice, man.

Yes, the boiling point of fusels is much higher than the same for water. Why do you get fusels prior to pure water from your pot then? Does "azeotropic mix" makes sence for you? I'd tell you even moar: methanol is not head component, actually. Da "transitives", doe.

My method has nothing to do with your "plates in a column still". Try it. Or just stop telling me that this planet has the shape of daddy's suitcase. There are plenty interesting things to be finished in my life. Don't wanna waist it for all these phallometrics anymore.

Re. Canada's base: you are right in terms of its "neutral" character. And yes, they make it at 93-94% using all those columns. But their effect is close to "mine"... say, for about 1/2 ready to discuss "this".

[cayars]

How do you "kick them out in the beginning" when it has a boiling point of 130.8C and a Azeotropic temperature of 95.15C, again tails region of distillation, not heads.

Methanol is the simplest alcohol and has a boiling point of 64.7°C and would distill off quickly and most certainly is considered a "foreshot or heads component".

I certainly would not say isoamyl alcohol is one of the stinkiest either. It's used quite a bit in flavoring and fragrance industries. It has a banana like flavor that is sought after.

"Yes, the boiling point of fusels is much higher than the same for water."
Not a true statement. Some yes, other no. I think most people know many oils float on water and are lighter as well. There is a direct correlation to them distilling off as well.

[VLAGAVULVIN]

Hehe, still we go on with cybering the brain each other

Just to begin with: tell me please, one thing. Say, we have (suddenly) more than 80% of alcohol in the pot. Yeah, they sit there all together: methanol, EtOH, higher alcos etc. We start trying to run it by some separating stuff... When will the methanol fly?

... ... ...

And don't confuse fusel alcohols with fatty acids or other tail-ish things. Too much oils appear just on the surface of your soup... do they have more head-ish properties in comparison to the boullion? Okay, try to evaporate them out then

[cayars]

I'll suggest going back to square one and starting here:
https://homedistiller.org/wiki/index.php/Distillation
https://homedistiller.org/wiki/index.php/Heads
https://homedistiller.org/wiki/index.php/Tails
https://homedistiller.org/wiki/index.php/index.ph ... _fractions
https://homedistiller.org/wiki/index.php/Fusel_oils

The answer to many of your questions and misunderstandings lay right on those pages.

After reading those pages, you'll understand better what many of the things you've mentioned actually are, where they fall into heads, hearts and tails.
If you disagree with these basic distillation principles, please start a new topic to discuss and I'll happy participate as well as others I'm sure. But let's stop polluting this thread with information outside it's scope.

[ShineonCrazyDiamond]

Methanol is the simplest alcohol and has a boiling point of 64.7°C and would distill off quickly and most certainly is considered a "foreshot or heads component".

The man that read it is impossible should not interrupt the man doing it.

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=40606

[pope]

Great quote! More interesting info to read. When I read the headline on that thread I was wishing it was according to an "Edwin Croissant" study, though "European Commission" does sound much more legitimate.

[OtisT]

The man that read it is impossible should not interrupt the man doing it.

True words of wisdom. Otis

[Saltbush Bill]

The man that read it is impossible should not interrupt the man doing it.