I know the difference has to do with how the grains grow on the stock, but I'm not completely sure what that difference is. It also seems like 2-row is more commonly used as a base malt, but I've seen some recipes that say it's ok to substitute 6-row instead.

Biologically, what's the difference between the two? In terms of brewing, what's the difference between using 2-row malt as opposed to 6-row malt as the base for a beer?

2 Answers 2


Taste wise you're going to get a slightly more grainy flavor out of 6 row.

Biologically 6 row has more diastic power and is better used for converting starchy adjuncts. You also will get about 2ppg more out of 6 row than you will 2 row.

But quite frankly, today's 2 row is well modified and has enough diastic power to convert a large amount of starchy adjuncts. 2 row malt has enough enzymes to convert around 10% of it's own weight in adjuncts with no enzymes.

For example. 10lbs of 2 row can convert 1 lb. of adjuncts.



  • Favored by European brewers
  • Lower protein content
  • Yields greater theoretical extract
  • Tend to be more uniform in kernel size (better for less-sophisticated mills)


  • Grows better in the U.S. and is cheaper, so used by big domestic breweries
  • More enzymes and husks help with adjunct cereals (so good for e.g. an oatmeal stout)
  • Higher protein content
  • Often sorted into different kernel sizes

More info at: http://www.brewingtechniques.com/bmg/schwarz.html

  • Wow, that linked article was extremely informative! Thanks.
    – Jeff Roe
    Commented Jun 3, 2011 at 14:15
  • Keep in mind that the BT article is very old and much has changed in the years since it was written.
    – Denny Conn
    Commented Jul 1, 2011 at 15:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.