the "proof" is out there

[drthrust]

here's an interesting snippet from an old chemistry book (investigating chemistry l.davis 1973) which i found in an old junk shop...

 

 

"you may of noticed that some spirits are said to be 70% proof or 40% proof, etc..."

 

this does not mean that such solutions contain 40 percent or 70 percent alcohol. the term is derived from an old method of determining the alcohol content of a solution, as such solutions were taxed according to the amount of alcohol they contained.

 

the method consisted of pouring the "alcoholic liquor" over gunpowder and then applying a flame.if the gunpowder was left dry enough to ignite it was "proof" that the liquor under test did not contain much water. the liquor was then said to be "proof"

 

if the gunpowder was left to damp it was said to be "underproof".

 

has anybody heard of this before?

[DeepOvertone]

Yes, Alton Brown (TV chef)did a small segment where he actually demonstrated that. It was pretty cool.

[nater]

Yes, I had heard it came from the prohibition era and was used to prove something was alcohol and not just colored water.

[Richtee]

 

"you may of noticed that some spirits are said to be 70% proof or 40% proof, etc..."

 

this does not mean that such solutions contain 40 percent or 70 percent alcohol.

No, it means they are 35 or 20% alcohol in those cases. "Proof" in the other case is a qualitive measurement, in the modern case it is indeed quantitive.

 

Crap, why din't they just have a snort?

Edited June 14, 2011 by Richtee

[Peret]

I didn't know it involved pouring liquor on gunpowder, but I knew it involved the flammability - 100 proof liquor will supposedly burn. There was a difference, though, between British and American units. In British measures, 100% alcohol is "175 proof", and in the US it's "200 proof". That must be because the Brits used the gunpowder method and the US just applied a match to a glass of warm liquor. The practice originated in the British navy, which paid the tars partly in rum - no doubt that helped them cope with the other two features of Navy life, sodomy and the lash. There would of course be no shortage of gunpowder available.

 

Labeling spirits today as overproof or underproof is derived from the early method of treating Jamaica rum in the naval victualling yards before it was issued to the warships. The rum used to arrive in England at 140 degrees overproof after which it was reduced to 95.5 degrees underproof by having water added to it. A small amount of the mixture was poured over some grains of gunpowder and then a magnifying glass was used to ignite it. If the burning alcoholmanaged to stay alight then it was said to be "proof". And if it didn't light then it was underproof. If it exploded then it was overproof. Proof spirit today is legally defined as that which has a specific gravity of 12/13 (92.3 percent) at 51ºF, and of course they don't do the gunpowder/magnifying glass test any more.

 

Also on the page where I found that, I read that until 1991 the Navy also issued 300 cigarettes a month to anyone who wanted them. That creates an interesting picture of gun crews blind drunk on rum, staggering about with a cigarette in one hand and a ten pound powder cartridge in the other.

[nater]

I... - 100 proof liquor will supposedly burn...

 

I paid for medic school by bartending. Most liquors will flare up when touched with a flame. While Sambuca is traditionally served with 3 coffee beans floating on top, it is common to prepare it with a flame as well. Most liqueurs like that are not over 100 proof. Flaming drinks are usually made with 151 proof rum, I used to float some on top of blended drinks for fun.

 

When cooking with alcohol, it is easy to flambe dishes with cognac or rum which are usually around 80 proof. If you really want to create a show, make bananas foster, and after you ignite the rum in the sauce toss a small dash of cinnamon into the flame.

Edited June 14, 2011 by nater

[Mumbles]

I've also seen the 100 american proof as a flamability limit. It does seemed oddly convenient as a flamability limit. Probably more appropriately a flash point. Though on at least a few occasions, I was unable to light strait 80proof booze. I've heard rumors of BP tests.

[Blackthumb]

Think the BP test is a waste of good liquor as well as BP.....unless, of course, it burns, flashes, pops and smokes!

[Richtee]

I've also seen the 100 american proof as a flamability limit. It does seemed oddly convenient as a flamability limit. Probably more appropriately a flash point. Though on at least a few occasions, I was unable to light strait 80proof booze. I've heard rumors of BP tests.

Well, if you warm the liquid... even a pan of stronger wine will flash, Mumb... what with the alchohol flashing off.

[Megabusa]

As I remember it, gunpowder was wet with the liquor being tested. The point at which the gunpowder would still only just burn was classed (in England) as 100 proof.

 

Any less alcohol i.e. 99 proof, the gunpowder would be too wet to burn.

 

This is what I remember being taught, never tried it - seems a waste of 2 perfectly good items !!

 

Phil.