George Shirley wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote:
>> suzireb wrote:
>>> Is the Martha Stewart Ham worth the cost?
>>
>> Nope. Same as any other Cooks, Kirkland, or Smithfield wet cured ham.
>> One person reported that they were full of gristle.
>>
>> I've tasted them being offered as samples and they were nothing
>> special at all. not worth the $3-$4. I but the smithfield wet cured
>> hams for $1.39 or less.
>>
>> -sw
> Sometime back Cook's Illustrated rated the Cook's smoked butt ham as the
> best for the money. I've always been pleased with them myself.


I've bought Cook's and they were OK, some of the best
supermarket stuff
available here. I bought a Martha Stewart last fall and we
thought it was awful,
lots of fat and artificial smoke flavor.

gloria p