Comparison of flours - WW-T110-85% sifted-BF
So in an attempt to see if I can come up with a reasonable ersatz French Wheat Type 80, which is itself comparable to German 1050, I can either buy it from Central Milling not objectionable), or use my own flour to either blend or bolt.
Just a note, but I've seen this in more than one place. Basically, in one form or another, as MC says on her website Farine:
If no high-extraction (I believe, as with others, she's talking about a type 80) flour is available, use 80% organic all-purpose flour and 20% organic whole wheat flour after sifting out the coarser bran particles.
With my home-milled whole wheat, I am getting 90% yield from my 1/30" sieve, and 85% yield with my 1/50" sieve.
Request for guidance. I know we're in the land of the lost because ash, protein, and separation of bran from germ with my home (stone) mill are all non-starters.
It's very hard to tell; I did the best I could to try to show the array of flours, and their visual differences are less than what I would have expected. From left: (1) my home-milled WW (a 50:50 blend of hard red spring and hard red winter wheat); (2) Central Milling's Type 110; (3) My "85% yield" flour; (4) KA AP flour:
What are your thoughts, in terms of the best way to get a good medium flour as a staple "1050" in my kitchen?
Edit: I don't have a photo for it, but, spitballing MC's comment, I could take my 90% yield flour and blend it 20:80 with AP. Thoughts?
If you search TFL hard enough, there's a post with links to someone's blog where he did just such an experiment, comparing high extraction flour from a commercial roller mill to what he could to with home-milling, sifting, and mixing.
The conclusion was, as I remember it, is that it's not the same. You can't get close because the roller mill "peels" the bran off as well as the outer aleurone layers, and uses the inner aleurone layers as contributing to the ash. Whereas the home miller gets all/most of the aleurone layers, plus a fraction of the outer bran.
It would likely, just guessing, take a machine called a "grain peeler" for a home-miller to approximate the peeling effect of a commercial mill.
Proof Bread of Arizona has a video of the mill/miller from whom they get their flour. That is a stone mill operation. But they do use a "peeler" on the grain prior to the grain going into the stone mill. That is in addition to sifting the output of the stone mill. That is where I learned about it.
I then duck-ed it, and found Chinese made grain peelers in the under $2000 range.
Meh. Might as well pay the price for commercial high-extraction.
As for me, my goal is to get near 100% WW anyway.
Wow! Thanks for the tremendous information Dave. I thought as much. I do recall here and there some people's reflections regarding whether this comes close to the commercial standard. I understand it can't and you've answered my dithering. Thanks much again.
Paul
TBH, the only real way to know is to bake a loaf and see if you like it.
Yep. Agreed. I think I will try MC's notion of coarse sifting WW and adding that to BF in various amounts for ersatz flours. I've actually always liked just blending WW to BF, but these have almost always been rustic bakes like miches, etc. I do have some CM T80 coming and it would be good to bake with each of several methods the same formula.