Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
Moonshiners #2 Proofing: Myth or Reality
Anyone that has seen the TV show or any Popcorn Sutton videos, has seen a fella shake a jar of "Shine" and say "Yup! This hare's 180 pruuf or better"
Anyone believe this?
I'll let you all think about it, and I'll tell you "Sumptin" fer real..."
I can proof a bottle to within 10 points by shaking it.
(Yes Blog. My mama's proud!)
Post up a video of you shaking a clear bottle of liquor at a KNOWN (not assumed) proof, and Lets see what happens.
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by Zombie]
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
Luke
Harmless
Posts: 20
Registered: 25-9-2014
Location: Australia
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
whats the difference between known and assumed? Is an alcometer enough to prove the alcohol content?
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
Yes. 100% correct.
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Zombie  | Anyone that has seen the TV show or any Popcorn Sutton videos, has seen a fella shake a jar of "Shine" and say "Yup! This hare's 180 pruuf or better"
Anyone believe this?
|
Yes. But it remains an inaccurate method for ABV determination.
What's your point with this thread?
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
Well, you have a pretty firm belief that thumpers can not work as advertised, and I was thinking what else fro "hillbilly lure" is surrounded by
clouds.
While shaking a bottle may not be precise, is is close enough for drinking Whiskey.
Anyone here willing to take the time, can prove thumpers work, and I can prove that ABV can be proofed by shaking bottles.
No real point. Just having fun.
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
You keep missing the REAL point, though: that thumper mythologies arise in part because people don't adequately test their assumptions and then
conclude that 'it works'.
See also reams and reams of quack remedies, amulets, snake oil merchandise etc that whole hordes of people swear by.
Go on, admit it, you've got a 'lucky rabbit's paw' somewhere! 
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
Quote BlogFast:
"people don't adequately test their assumptions and then conclude that 'it works'."
I've been saying exactly that for 7 hours!
Blog, I love ya sir, and Honestly I respect you as well but you must have been a teacher or professor, or department head somewhere for far to long.
It's like asking for a raise up in here...
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by Zombie]
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
subsecret
Hazard to Others
Posts: 424
Registered: 8-6-2013
Location: NW SC, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Human Sadness - Julian Casablancas & the Voidz
|
|
Making an estimate is not unreasonable, but to correctly estimate the concentration seems a little bit optimistic. It would take a buttload of
experience to be accurate to within 5 percent alcohol.
But if you checked yourself with an alcometer, I commend you on your skill.
Fear is what you get when caution wasn't enough.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Awesomeness | [...]
but to correctly estimate the concentration seems a little bit optimistic. It would take a buttload of experience to be accurate to within 5 percent
alcohol.
|
No, it f*cking well doesn't. There are plenty fairly accurate methods out there for EtOH determination. Even a good hydrometer, operated properly,
would probably afford the needed accuracy.
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by blogfast25]
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
10% is realistic. I have checked w/ a meter, and it's pretty impressive when a hillbilly says he has 160% liquor, and you shut him down w/ the shake
of a bottle.
I've never tried it over the "net" tho. so it should prove interesting.
It's actually easy to learn.
Buy a bottle of EverClear 180 proof. Divide that into two equal bottles. Add 1 ounce of water to one, note the new proof, and shake it.
Note the size, and life span of the bubbles.
Now repeat with the pure product.
Add another ounce to the dilute bottle, and repeat the process.
The higher the proof, the larger, and longer lived the bubbles.
Lower proof = smaller, and shorter lived bubbles
By the time you finish drinking the bottles, you will have an eye for it, and recognize the different proof's by a shake or three. I usually judge on
the second shake, and verify my instinct on the third.
Everybody's got to be good at something!
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Zomb, please BEHAVE!
|
|
|
subsecret
Hazard to Others
Posts: 424
Registered: 8-6-2013
Location: NW SC, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Human Sadness - Julian Casablancas & the Voidz
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25 | | Quote: Originally posted by Awesomeness | [...]
but to correctly estimate the concentration seems a little bit optimistic. It would take a buttload of experience to be accurate to within 5 percent
alcohol.
|
No, it f*cking well doesn't. There are plenty fairly accurate methods out there for EtOH determination. Even a good hydrometer, operated properly,
would probably afford the needed accuracy.
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by blogfast25] |
I'm talking about the taste test, not the hydrometer.
Fear is what you get when caution wasn't enough.
|
|
|
morganbw
National Hazard
Posts: 561
Registered: 23-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
A hydrometer is best but shaking and observing the bubbles has been going along for a long time. It is subjective but these guys get pretty damn good,
including my father who spent time in a federal prison over moonshine.
Dang, I have a nice picture of an actual moonshine/thumper still that I wanted to share but I have not yet taken the time to figure out how to do the
pictures.
It was from several years ago and the only time in my life that I witnessed this.
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by morganbw]
[Edited on 16-2-2015 by morganbw]
|
|
|
Zombie
Forum Hillbilly
Posts: 1700
Registered: 13-1-2015
Location: Florida PanHandle
Member Is Offline
Mood: I just don't know...
|
|
My grandfather taught me. so between us... 137 years of shaking jars.
They tried to have me "put to sleep" so I came back to return the favor.
Zom.
|
|
|
morganbw
National Hazard
Posts: 561
Registered: 23-11-2014
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Here is picture of a still in operation. It did not have a firebox because it was a temporary setup.
|
|
|
hyfalcon
International Hazard
Posts: 1003
Registered: 29-3-2012
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Damn if that don't kinda look like Tickle on the left.
|
|
|
ave369
Eastern European Lady of Mad Science
Posts: 596
Registered: 8-7-2015
Location: No Location
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
In my country, moonshiners proof their product by burning it in a spoon. By the easiness or difficulty with which the fluid catches fire, by the
appearance of the flame and the remains after it sputters out, an experienced moonshiner can tell the concentration of EtOH with a precision of 5%. I
have this skill and can proof moonshine with strength from 35% to 90% with this method.
Here's a simplified guide:
* If it does not catch fire in any circumstances: it is 30% or less.
* If it catches fire for a short moment if it's pre-heated in a spoon with a match: 35%.
* If it catches fire if pre-heated in a spoon with a match, and burns for several seconds: 40% (vodka).
* If it catches fire without pre-heating and burns for some seconds: 45%.
* If it catches fire without pre-heating and burns for long, leaving a significant amount of oily, smelly water: 50%.
* If it easily catches fire and burns almost fully, leaving a damp stain of moisture on the spoon: 70%.
* If it readily ignites and burns out completely, leaving nothing: 90% and more.
And telling 55% from 65%, 70% from 80% is a matter of experience and skill, it cannot be really formulated as an algorithm.
[Edited on 9-7-2015 by ave369]
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The problem is not that these methods don't work but that for scientific purposes they are poor measurands. As recognised also by the ATF, of
course!
|
|
|
aga
Forum Drunkard
Posts: 7030
Registered: 25-3-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
Fun idea Zombie, but pointless.
Guessing within 10% isn't as impressive in a scientific arena as being accurate to 0.1 w%.
A halfwit monkey (like me) with a calibrated ethanol refractomer will beat your Guess every time.
A sober scientist (such as bloggers) using this procedure http://www.outreach.canterbury.ac.nz/chemistry/ethanol.shtml
would wipe the floor with both of us.
Then we get down to GC, NMR etc at which point the notion of being amazed to get within 10% has long long gone.
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Actually, apart from the 'sober' bit, that's a bit debatable. Both refractometry and iodometry would beat 'bubbles' pants down in both accuracy and
reproducibility. But between refractometry and iodometry it could be a close shave (assuming experienced analyst, 'correct' hardware etc).
There are of course ways of organising such contests. And with EtOH there's the added problem of Primary Standards: EtOH is inherently somewhat
hygroscopic AND volatile, that makes preparing Standard Solutions somewhat difficult.
|
|
|
ave369
Eastern European Lady of Mad Science
Posts: 596
Registered: 8-7-2015
Location: No Location
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
There are, of course, better methods of measuring. One can use an alcometer on the final product. One can use a thermometer to measure the temperature
of vapors going through the thumper, and get the current strength of the dripping distillate from this: it greatly helps to control the process of
distillation. But if the thermometer is damaged or destroyed, and I still need to somehow control the still and know what's going on in it, the
fire-spoon method helps.
And concerning telling foreshots and feints from the main batch, I don't know any more modern methods than smelling drops of the distillate.
[Edited on 10-7-2015 by ave369]
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by ave369 |
And concerning telling foreshots and feints from the main batch, I don't know any more modern methods than smelling drops of the distillate.
[Edited on 10-7-2015 by ave369] |
GC or GC/MS to identify non-EtOH components.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
