Immersion or Inverse Wort Chiller

[Travis]

Let's get this discussion started.

I'm a little new to the brewing scene and I've just wonder what your take on this is. Is the Inverse/Counter Flow Wort Chiller better than the Immersion Chiller. Please only people that have tried them or read a lot about them.

[jackh]

With the counterflow type you get the benefit of a much quicker chilling timeframe. This is great if you have a way to filter out the trub during the runoff from your kettle and saves a lot of time on brew day.
The immersion type allows the wort time to settle and if you do a whirlpool prior to transfer you get a lot less extra precipitate in your fermenter.
One other drawback of the counterflow is that unless you have a pump you are limited to the siphon effect of gravity to get the wort through your counterflow.
I hope this helps.

[kevminator]

Quicker cooling=counterflow
easier to use=immersion
easier cleaning/sanitizing=immersion
less water usage=counterflow
less cost=immersion
less storage space=counterflow

[Ambacht]

Originally Posted by Travis

Let's get this discussion started.

I'm a little new to the brewing scene and I've just wonder what your take on this is. Is the Inverse/Counter Flow Wort Chiller better than the Immersion Chiller. Please only people that have tried them or read a lot about them.

Immersion cools the whole batch, but after it cools the wort down a bit, it becomes inefficient and ends up taking more water. You put the coils into the boiling wort, so it is more sanitary.

Counterflow cools a small part of the batch quickly, but the rest of the batch sits slowly cooling. You have to carefully clean the counterflow chiller to prevent contaminating your batch. This is how most commercial breweries cool their wort because it more energy efficient.