Differences in draught Guinness cans in the north and south

Rebelheart

Got some beer from the north and was tasting the draught cans of Guinness - 'Brewed in Dublin' - last night.

First, why are the cans in the north 440ml rather than 500ml? It's an unusual size.

Second, there was a noticeable difference in the taste in the north. So I checked the can and the alcohol content of draught Guinness in the north is less, at 4.1% (compared to 4.2% here). Why would Guinness do this to their drink? I'd be fairly sure that they have changed something else about the cans north of the border as that .1% surely does not account for the taste difference alone.

Any ideas?

Ham'nd'egger

Rebelheart wrote: »

Got some beer from the north and was tasting the draught cans of Guinness - 'Brewed in Dublin' - last night.

First, why are the cans in the north 440ml rather than 500ml? It's an unusual size.

Second, there was a noticeable difference in the taste in the north. So I checked the can and the alcohol content of draught Guinness in the north is less, at 4.1% (compared to 4.2% here). Why would Guinness do this to their drink? I'd be fairly sure that they have changed something else about the cans north of the border as that .1% surely does not account for the taste difference alone.

Any ideas?

440ML is 16 fluid ounces and a pint, albeit an American pint. The beer is brewed to the same ABV that the market in the UK is used and traditionally relates to alcohol duty levels that brews would have been brewed to match; Budweiser in the UK is stronger than what is sold here and is a good example of this.

BeerNut

Hamndegger wrote: »

440ML is 16 fluid ounces

16 UK fl oz. is 455ml. Odd they didn't make the cans 450ml if that's the reason.

Hamndegger wrote: »

and a pint, albeit an American pint.

16 US fl. oz. is 473ml, so it's still less than a US pint. The aluminium Bud bottles are 473ml, presumably made for the US market.

Hamndegger wrote: »

The beer is brewed to the same ABV that the market in the UK is used and traditionally relates to alcohol duty levels that brews would have been brewed to match

Well, it's brewed to the same strength for everywhere: somewhere around 7-8% ABV. It's then diluted to whatever strength the local market requires. The Guinness trucks you see on the Dublin quays would be full of high-gravity Guinness going to get watered-down and kegged in the UK.

Alter-Ego

Could be my imagination but any time i've gotten guiness up the north it's been very tasteless. Anybody find this? The .1% couldn't make that much of a difference in taste.

gurramok

I've drunk many a nordie Guinness can at a party and I can tell you they are indeed weaker than their Southern counterparts.

Its as if they watered them down, not a patch on the strength of real Guinness in the pub.

Rebelheart

Alter-Ego wrote: »

Could be my imagination but any time i've gotten guiness up the north it's been very tasteless. Anybody find this? The .1% couldn't make that much of a difference in taste.

I agree totally with this. I'm just having difficulty in understanding what Guinness in Dublin is doing supplying a different type of Guinness to Newry than it does to Cork, which is 150km further away.

Glad to see that I'm not imagining these differences. I, too, would be interested in knowing what else Guinness is doing to change the taste of canned Guinness in the north; that .1% difference could not alone account for the odd taste.

Is draught Guinness in pubs in the north similarly different to pints in pubs in the south?

BeerNut

Rebelheart wrote: »

I'm just having difficulty in understanding what Guinness in Dublin is doing supplying a different type of Guinness to Newry than it does to Cork, which is 150km further away.

It's because Newry is in a different country to Dublin and Cork, with different packaging requirements and excise rules. The Guinness in Newry is probably processed and packaged at a Diageo cannery in England and shipped back across the Irish Sea.

Ham'nd'egger

BeerNut wrote: »

It's because Newry is in a different country to Dublin and Cork, with different packaging requirements and excise rules. The Guinness in Newry is probably processed and packaged at a Diageo cannery in England and shipped back across the Irish Sea.

Only returning to this thread now, thanks for the clarification. This post actually answered my first question as I was still under the assumption that canning was done in Ireland though I know about Miwadi/Essence is used in this brew; it is easier to say brewed than diluted to alcoholic strength and gravity:)

My second point to return to; as I wasn't in the scouts I didn't have the difference between fluid US Ounces and Imperial Ounces beat into me; what then is the significance/history of a 440ml can?

BeerNut

Hamndegger wrote: »

I know about Miwadi/Essence is used in this brew

The essence thing is different: it's unfermented, so is shipped off to Diageo's (and their licensed partners') breweries abroad for inclusion in their wort, which is then fermented. UK Guinness (and anywhere else supplied from James's Gate) is actually brewed and fermented as a high-alcohol beer.

Hamndegger wrote: »

as I wasn't in the scouts I didn't have the difference between fluid US Ounces and Imperial Ounces beat into me

Me neither. It's something you pick up quickly as a home brewer, though

Hamndegger wrote: »

what then is the significance/history of a 440ml can?

It's been discussed here a few times and I don't think we ever got to the bottom of it.

rubadub

440ml is 1/3rd more than a 330ml bottle, thats the only relation I ever saw. Which then gets the question why 330ml? well its approx third of a litre.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1983/en/si/0367.html
This 1983 law lists

4. The said Merchandise Marks (Prepacked Goods) (Marking and Quantities) Order, 1973, shall, insofar as it applies to beer of a kind specified in Part II (as amended by Article 3 of this Order) of the First Schedule thereto, have effect as if the following were substituted for the matter in column (2) of that Schedule:


"190 millilitres
250 millilitres
284 millilitres
330 millilitres
350 millilitres
500 millilitres
568 millilitres
750 millilitres
1 litre
2 litres
3 litres
4 litres
5 litres."

I have no idea what it means but it seems 330ml is somewhat recognised.

The law about displaying prices also has 330ml listed.

An offence under section 22(a) of the Prices Act 1958 constituted by a contravention of Article 4 of the Retail Price (Beverages in Licensed Premises) Display Order 1999 ( S.I. No. 263 of 1999 ) — requirement on a person carrying on the business of selling intoxicating liquor by retail for consumption on the premises:

(1) to display a notice specifying the price charged at the premises or in that part of the premises, as the case may be:

(a) per pint or 568 millilitres of at least one kind of draught stout, ale, lager and cider;

(b) per bottle of a capacity of 330 millilitres of at least one kind of stout, ale, lager and cider;

(c) per 35.5 millilitres of at least one kind of whiskey, vodka, and gin;

(d) per bottle of at least one kind of carbonated beverage in bottles of capacity of 200 millilitres;

(e) per bottle of at least one kind of carbonated beverage having a cola base in bottles of a capacity of 200 millilitres;

(f) per bottle of at least one kind of mixer in bottles of a capacity of 113 millilitres;

(g) per bottle of at least one kind of bottled water in bottles of a capacity of 250 millilitres; and

(h) per bottle of at least one kind of wine in bottles of a capacity of 187 millilitres, and

(2) to display a notice or notices specifying the price of the above beverages:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2007/en/si/0689.html

markok84

Rebelheart wrote: »

Got some beer from the north and was tasting the draught cans of Guinness - 'Brewed in Dublin' - last night.

First, why are the cans in the north 440ml rather than 500ml? It's an unusual size.

Second, there was a noticeable difference in the taste in the north. So I checked the can and the alcohol content of draught Guinness in the north is less, at 4.1% (compared to 4.2% here). Why would Guinness do this to their drink? I'd be fairly sure that they have changed something else about the cans north of the border as that .1% surely does not account for the taste difference alone.

Any ideas?

I noticed this last year when I lived up in Belfast. There is an extra burnt flavour off the Guinness from the can up North.

Green Gooner

On the sublect of Guinness Draught cans - would you get the best results (taste wise) by drinking from the can or by pouring?

I think there is a little thing in the can to keep the head or something...but would you be able to pour it properly from the can and get the perfect pint? Any ideas?

BeerNut

No beer is going to taste better from the can -- unless you actively don't want to taste it. Taste is largely aroma, and you don't get aroma with a layer of aluminium between the beer and your nose.

Widget cans are designed for pouring into a glass.

Green Gooner

BeerNut wrote: »

No beer is going to taste better from the can -- unless you actively don't want to taste it. Taste is largely aroma, and you don't get aroma with a layer of aluminium between the beer and your nose.

Widget cans are designed for pouring into a glass.

You've got an appropraite username - very helpfull on thing's to do with alcohol!

However, I put this to you, realistically though, would it not be impossible to pour a pint with a good head from a can? I tried before.....and failed

Green Gooner

BeerNut wrote: »

No beer is going to taste better from the can -- unless you actively don't want to taste it. Taste is largely aroma, and you don't get aroma with a layer of aluminium between the beer and your nose.

Widget cans are designed for pouring into a glass.

You've got an appropriate username - very helpfull on thing's to do with alcohol!

However, I put this to you, realistically though, would it not be impossible to pour a pint with a good head from a can? I tried before.....and failed

BeerNut

Green Gooner wrote: »

would it not be impossible to pour a pint with a good head from a can? I tried before.....and failed

Diageo have put a lot of money into ensuring that canned "Draught Guinness" can be poured to create an exact replica of a pub pint. Follow their instructions to the letter and I don't see what could go wrong. Both can and keg work on the same principle of releasing a pressurised mix of CO2 and nitrogen into the beer before it hits the glass.

mink_man

dont know tbh...

Green Gooner

BeerNut wrote: »

Diageo have put a lot of money into ensuring that canned "Draught Guinness" can be poured to create an exact replica of a pub pint. Follow their instructions to the letter and I don't see what could go wrong. Both can and keg work on the same principle of releasing a pressurised mix of CO2 and nitrogen into the beer before it hits the glass.

thanks! maybe the fact I had a few didnt help with pouring a pint! I was of the opion that the Guinness was design to be consumed from the can.

I didnt know Diageo spent a lot into ensuring that canned "Draught Guinness" can be poured to create an exact replica of a pub pint as I dont think their would be many (except bartenders) who would actually be able to pour it properly.

So for best results, is it better to consume all canned alcohol, be it Guinness, Bulmers, Miller etc from a glass?

BeerNut

Green Gooner wrote: »

I was of the opion that the Guinness was design to be consumed from the can.

IIRC the instructions say chill it then pour in one go into a tilted glass.

Green Gooner wrote: »

So for best results, is it better to consume all canned alcohol, be it Guinness, Bulmers, Miller etc from a glass?

Find out what works best for you. But you won't see people in the ads for any of those products swigging from a can. Draw what conclusions you like from that.

Rebelheart

Well, as the curiosity was getting the better of me, I did a rare thing and asked Guinness directly. Here's the reply:

"Thank you so much for your recent email. We always love to hear from our loyal consumers, their thoughts and comments, as it brings us closer to the people that matter - you!

In regards to your query, the only difference between Guinness sold in the U.K and Ireland is a slight decrease in the alcohol content, as you yourself noted. Guinness sold in the U.K has .1% less alcohol in it than Guinness sold in Ireland. The alcohol content is different and always has been, we have looked into this question before and discovered that it is simply a historical difference between the two markets, but in no way should the subtle difference comprimise the taste. Again, the same is true of Draught Guinness sold in pubs in Ireland and the UK, where the only difference is the ABV change of .1%.

In relation to your query about can size, basically the reason why the cans in Ireland are bigger than those in the UK is historic again and it goes back to when the cans were introduced into the UK market. In the UK, we use a standard 440ml can, however now in the Republic of Ireland the 440ml can was not a legal size. Hence the reason why the 500ml can was used in Ireland as this is recognised as a legal size can.

We produce Guinness in 50 countries worldwide and market it to 150 countries. Although the ABV may change from country to country, and the own countries water supply used to finish production, the same ingreidents and recipe are used in all Guinness throughout the world. Consistent quality is our top priority and I can assure you that the recipe of Guinness and the production methods are the same wherever it is brewed and sold to.

I hope this information is useful to you and that you continue to enjoy Guinness."


Well, ignoring the awfully roguish plámás of the highest order in paragraph 1, and the generic marketing spiel in the last two paragraphs, this has provided no enlightenment whatever for my questions. I'd say they could have googled those answers and got them from this thread, the pups.

PS: I still find it hard to believe that the difference in taste between north and south comes down to that .1% difference in alcohol. Just a gut feeling.

Rebelheart

BeerNut wrote: »

It's because Newry is in a different country to Dublin and Cork, with different packaging requirements and excise rules. The Guinness in Newry is probably processed and packaged at a Diageo cannery in England and shipped back across the Irish Sea.

Beernut,

With all due respect - and I read your posts with more interest and admiration than I read most posts - Newry is in a different state to us. Seán Murphy in Newry is just as Irish and as much a part of Ireland as Seán Murphy of west Cork. If the British had divided Ireland up into 100 states in 1920 (i.e. a mere 90 years ago) it wouldn't mean there were 100 "countries" in Ireland today.

Other than that, keep up the brilliant work, and I'm looking forward to the next Septemberfest - where I hope they will not run out of beer and have ridiculous queues!:mad:

Rebelheart

Green Gooner wrote: »

You've got an appropriate username - very helpfull on thing's to do with alcohol!

However, I put this to you, realistically though, would it not be impossible to pour a pint with a good head from a can? I tried before.....and failed

It's very possible, and indeed probable. When it happens you'll be cursing yourself for paying twice as much to have that fine pint in a local pub.;)

BeerNut

Rebelheart wrote: »

Newry is in a different state to us.

I was using "country" in its political sense, where it is synonymous with "state" -- people generally do.

Rebelheart wrote: »

Seán Murphy in Newry is just as Irish and as much a part of Ireland as Seán Murphy of west Cork.

This is of no relevance to my point.

Rebelheart

BeerNut wrote: »

I was using country and state synonymously -- people generally do.

Unless they are one of the 700,000 Irish people who remain within a British state in Ireland. Their country, as their choice of passport makes clear, remains Ireland. To take a similar analogy, the people of Cork and Dublin were not living in a British country when all of Ireland was under the rule of the British state. No more than Iraq is now an American 'country'.

Anyway, let's move on (with everybody).

rubadub

BeerNut wrote: »

Diageo have put a lot of money into ensuring that canned "Draught Guinness" can be poured to create an exact replica of a pub pint. Follow their instructions to the letter and I don't see what could go wrong.

You will not get a decent replica of a pub pint (with one can and a pint glass), I find it shocking that they did obviously pump in so much money into the whole concept and then failed to realise that most people will be pouring into a PINT glass, and they sell 500ml cans. Presentation is very important with food & some drinks -guinness is one of those drinks where it is important. The drink falls short of the pint and you end up with a scaldy looking head all broken & foamy -if somebody does manage to fill it then it has a massive "bishops collar on it" if you got that in a pub I would not be impressed at all.

Rebelheart wrote: »

. Hence the reason why the 500ml can was used in Ireland as this is recognised as a legal size can.

Maybe this is true, but I never heard it before and sounds like BS to me. Many places are now selling 440ml cans, you can get 568ml cans too. Do they have some sort of legal thing about bottles too? since guinness sell pint bottles of guinness. It seems very unlikely.

Recently O'Briens had 4 packs of guinness with 500ml glasses, I was able to pour AMAZING looking pints with them. I find it does make a real difference to the drinking experience, it might be in my head (pardon the pun) but you could say the same about food presentation too. I do think something happens when the head reaches the top, it is like it is compressed or something, it sort of stops it going up and over the sides, with a pint glass it seems to just keep going up and up and is not as dense a head. The only problem I saw with people pouring into the 500ml glass is they often overflowed it, 500ml is too much! the ideal amount is probably about 530ml in a 568ml glass - I dunno how they could not figure this out, feck all people have a 500ml glass. I just stopped short in the 500ml glass and poured the remainder in after drinking a bit.

A mate of mine pours a shot of water in the bottom of pint glasses to achieve this decent head, he also used to keep a spare opened 330ml can in the fridge, he would pour a little in the glass instead of the water, so as not to dilute it.

BeerNut

rubadub wrote: »

I never heard it before and sounds like BS to me.

It's nonsense. The UK has legal stipulations around draught beer serving, but we don't; and there are no illegal sizes for packaged drinks in either country confederation of quasi-autonomous local government units.

Rebelheart

rubadub wrote: »

You will not get a decent replica of a pub pint (with one can and a pint glass), I find it shocking that they did obviously pump in so much money into the whole concept and then failed to realise that most people will be pouring into a PINT glass, and they sell 500ml cans. Presentation is very important with food & some drinks -guinness is one of those drinks where it is important. The drink falls short of the pint and you end up with a scaldy looking head all broken & foamy -if somebody does manage to fill it then it has a massive "bishops collar on it" if you got that in a pub I would not be impressed at all.

Perhaps you've hit on precisely the reason: in order for it to be presented correctly you end up buying two 500ml cans?

rubadub wrote: »

Maybe this is true, but I never heard it before and sounds like BS to me. Many places are now selling 440ml cans, you can get 568ml cans too. Do they have some sort of legal thing about bottles too? since guinness sell pint bottles of guinness. It seems very unlikely.

I agree entirely. The plot thickens. It seems odd that she would come out with a "reason" which is transparently untrue. Or is there something else going on.


Personally, I think the metric system is the way to go. It is just a hell of a lot easier in every respect. As unpopular as it may be to say it, the 'pint' can easily be replaced with something like a 'Fiveo' or a 'Millo' (to take two examples of many; these would certainly catch on in less salubrious parts of Dublin ). There is plenty of scope for new words and for romanticising them.

Rebelheart

BeerNut wrote: »

and there are no illegal sizes for packaged drinks in either country confederation of quasi-autonomous local government units.

hehe. I always sensed you were a quick learner, BeerNut

rubadub

Rebelheart wrote: »

Perhaps you've hit on precisely the reason: in order for it to be presented correctly you end up buying two 500ml cans?

Hes the only guy I ever heard of doing it, one 330ml can would do about 8x500ml ones. I had a load of them with my 500ml glass again, all perfect. 8 cans for €10 in dunnes at the moment.

Berwick

Green Gooner wrote: »

So for best results, is it better to consume all canned alcohol, be it Guinness, Bulmers, Miller etc from a glass?

I always prefer the glass to the can - if I can!

Blisterman

In England, you can get 550ml cans, which fill a standard pint glass to the brim with head.

As regards the difference between UK and Irish Guinness, I've never noticed it myself in cans, or in Irish pubs where they serve a lot of it.

Of course, you go to a pub, where they serve about 2 pints a week, and it's gonna taste a little stale, from sitting in the lines for so long.

Had a pint here a few weeks ago, which was obviously hooked up to a CO2 tank, rather than the CO2/Nitro mix.
Was fizzy, rather than creamy, with very little head. Was about to send it back, when i decided to have a taste. And boy was I surprised. It was much more flavourful and rich than regular Guinness draught. Even more so than bottled Guinness Original.
It was delicious. Obviously the nitrogen dulls the taste. Pubs should sell it like this. I'd drink it all the time.

Fuzzy Clam

Blisterman wrote: »

Had a pint here a few weeks ago, which was obviously hooked up to a CO2 tank, rather than the CO2/Nitro mix.
Was fizzy, rather than creamy, with very little head. Was about to send it back, when i decided to have a taste. And boy was I surprised. It was much more flavourful and rich than regular Guinness draught. Even more so than bottled Guinness Original.
It was delicious. Obviously the nitrogen dulls the taste. Pubs should sell it like this. I'd drink it all the time.

Unlikely to have been on Co2 only as the gas systems don't allow that. Also, Co2 only would have made the pint unpourable. More likely that the gas mix was wrong. Either a lager gas (43-50% Co2 mix) was used (this can happen when the publican runs out of Guinness gas, or inadvertently connects a wrong cylinder) or the mix was wrong in the cylinder. It happens.
Temp can also be a factor. Nitrogen should have no effect on taste.

It's unusual that there was little head. That usually indicates less Co2 although if it was fizzier it may have more Co2.
Was it very cold?

BeerNut

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

Nitrogen should have no effect on taste

:eek: Nitrogen has a massive deleterious effect on taste. It traps the flavour compounds in the beer, keeping them away from the drinker's taste sensors.

Blisterman

It had a small foamy head, which dissapated fairly quickly.

And I don't see how the system would not allow CO2 only tanks. I've tapped kegs before. The keg connectors are different, but the actual gas tubing is all the same.

thelynchfella

BeerNut wrote: »

:eek: Nitrogen has a massive deleterious effect on taste. It traps the flavour compounds in the beer, keeping them away from the drinker's taste sensors.

+1

Nitrogen totally ruins stout in my opinion

Fuzzy Clam

Blisterman wrote: »

And I don't see how the system would not allow CO2 only tanks. I've tapped kegs before. The keg connectors are different, but the actual gas tubing is all the same.

This has nothing to do with tapping kegs. Nor has it anything to do with the tubing (which is not all the same).
There are several gas systems used in pubs (prepare to be bored).

The first uses mixed gases only, so not relevant here.

Another uses pre mixed gas for Guinness, to which Co2 is added for lagers. If the mixed gas cylinder is empty, the system won't allow Co2 to pass to the kegs.

The next system mixes both gases for Guinness and lagers. Same thing, if no N2 then Co2 cannot pass.

There are other considerations as well.

The tubing sizes are different as is the pressure from the Co2 reg which is a lot greater.
If a publican was stupid enough to try to pipe a Co2 cylinder up to the ring main, he would have to overcome these issues.

It doesn't happen.

Fuzzy Clam

thelynchfella wrote: »

+1

Nitrogen totally ruins stout in my opinion

How do know the nitrogen ruins the stout?

BeerNut

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

How do know the nitrogen ruins the stout?

By comparing the same beer in nitro and non-nitro forms. Even the flavour difference between bottled and draught Guinness -- which is far from the most flavoursome stout out there -- is very noticeable. But put O'Hara's or Porterhouse Plain in their cask form next to the nitro versions and the ruinous effect of nitro is very apparent, in my experience.

Fuzzy Clam

Bottled and Draught Guinness are different brews and the other 2 you mention probably are too.

BeerNut

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

Bottled and Draught Guinness are different brews and the other 2 you mention probably are too.

I can assure you the other two aren't. I've had Porterhouse Plain from the conditioning tanks in the brewery before it got kegged for nitro serve. Irish microbreweries serve so little on cask it makes no sense to brew separately for it. What makes you think Guinness Extra Stout and Guinness Draught are different base beers?

There is a very basic piece of science behind the nitro effect: air is mostly nitrogen with very little CO2. So the nitrogen isn't going leap out of the glass carrying flavour compounds with it; CO2 is.

thelynchfella

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

How do know the nitrogen ruins the stout?

well for one o'haras and PH Plain taste much better from a cask than it does on draught.

Fuzzy Clam

thelynchfella wrote: »

well for one o'haras and PH Plain taste much better from a cask than it does on draught.

I'm not refuting that. You haven't answered the question though.

thelynchfella

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

I'm not refuting that. You haven't answered the question though.

i did answer it.....i meant with regards taste nitrogen ruins stout

brianthebard

Rebelheart wrote: »

Well, as the curiosity was getting the better of me, I did a rare thing and asked Guinness directly. Here's the reply:

"Thank you so much for your recent email. We always love to hear from our loyal consumers, their thoughts and comments, as it brings us closer to the people that matter - you!

In regards to your query, the only difference between Guinness sold in the U.K and Ireland is a slight decrease in the alcohol content, as you yourself noted. Guinness sold in the U.K has .1% less alcohol in it than Guinness sold in Ireland. The alcohol content is different and always has been, we have looked into this question before and discovered that it is simply a historical difference between the two markets, but in no way should the subtle difference comprimise the taste. Again, the same is true of Draught Guinness sold in pubs in Ireland and the UK, where the only difference is the ABV change of .1%.

In relation to your query about can size, basically the reason why the cans in Ireland are bigger than those in the UK is historic again and it goes back to when the cans were introduced into the UK market. In the UK, we use a standard 440ml can, however now in the Republic of Ireland the 440ml can was not a legal size. Hence the reason why the 500ml can was used in Ireland as this is recognised as a legal size can.

We produce Guinness in 50 countries worldwide and market it to 150 countries. Although the ABV may change from country to country, and the own countries water supply used to finish production, the same ingreidents and recipe are used in all Guinness throughout the world. Consistent quality is our top priority and I can assure you that the recipe of Guinness and the production methods are the same wherever it is brewed and sold to.

I hope this information is useful to you and that you continue to enjoy Guinness."


Well, ignoring the awfully roguish plámás of the highest order in paragraph 1, and the generic marketing spiel in the last two paragraphs, this has provided no enlightenment whatever for my questions. I'd say they could have googled those answers and got them from this thread, the pups.

PS: I still find it hard to believe that the difference in taste between north and south comes down to that .1% difference in alcohol. Just a gut feeling.

Difference in taste is most likely caused by the different waters used.

BeerNut

brianthebard wrote: »

Difference in taste is most likely caused by the different waters used.

I very much doubt that. Big breweries use reverse osmosis and can recreate any water profile they want. Water chemistry is one of those things that varies naturally and therefore cannot be left to its own devices when trying to create a consistent homogenous product.

brianthebard

BeerNut wrote: »

I very much doubt that. Big breweries use reverse osmosis and can recreate any water profile they want. Water chemistry is one of those things that varies naturally and therefore cannot be left to its own devices when trying to create a consistent homogenous product.

Well you've already pointed out earlier in the thread that the beer is all brewed in the one place then finished in each country its sold. Unless you believe that people are imagining a difference then it can only be the water which causes a difference in taste. Being the biggest/main ingredient it would make sense since this is the only variable.

BeerNut

brianthebard wrote: »

Unless you believe that people are imagining a difference

That seems to me to be the most likely explanation. Has anyone who asserts that there's a difference ever tested to see if it's really there?

brianthebard

Lol I definitely think its possibly just in people's heads, but it would be pretty hard to test a pint from Dublin and Belfast side by side. Someone should do a blind taste test after their next trip to de Nord.

BeerNut

brianthebard wrote: »

it would be pretty hard to test a pint from Dublin and Belfast side by side.

The OP was concerned about cans, which is easy enough tested. You would do it as a triangle test: three glasses given to the subject blind and they have to pick which is not the same as the other two.

leex

Interesting thread. I have noticed a large difference in expiry dates between UK purchased Guinness cans and Irish ones - both purchased in the most popular supermarket chains. Purchased cans in Asda Enniskillen that had 8 months of a shelf life.

Antrim_Man

BeerNut wrote: »

It's because Newry is in a different country to Dublin and Cork, with different packaging requirements and excise rules. The Guinness in Newry is probably processed and packaged at a Diageo cannery in England and shipped back across the Irish Sea.

Jeezo, I always thought it was in Ireland