Sqwertz wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 15:35:09 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> > On 8/6/2017 3:01 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> >> On Sun, 06 Aug 2017 11:21:28 -0500, cshenk wrote:
> >>
> >>> Sqwertz wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> > > >
> >>>> On Sat, 5 Aug 2017 17:45:10 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > > >
> >>>>> If you don't cook brisket hot enough to break down the collagen
> it >>>>> is tough enough to make tires out of it. Overall, it was a
> good >>>>> looking brisket.
> > > > >
> >>>> With sous vide you don't have to cook it to 190F+ to make it
> tender. >>>> You can make it tender cooking it at 132F. People who
> don't do sous >>>> vide have a really hard time grasping this concept
> (and even the people who >>>> do have a hard time with it until they
> try it).
> > > >
> >>> Steve, to me Sous Vide is just unique new name for low and slow
> crock >>> pot cooking.
> >>
> >> And you couldn't be more wrong.
> >
> > Probably over simplified . . .
> > The difference that I see is the liquid. Crock pot has the meat in
> > the liquid and it will give up some of its flavor to it. SV has
> > the product sealed and the liquid bath surrounds it but does not
> > interact with anything but heat. You would get a different result,
> > especially with something like steak.
>
> And the precise temperature control is a large part of it. Water
> circulates around the meat in the bag creating an exact temperature in
> contact with the meat (through the bag). You can tell the difference
> between a steak cooked at 130F and 131F. Temperature ups and down
> will create very imprecise results.
>
> Not to mention a crock post doesn't get below 165F, so you will only
> ever get well done meat out of a crock pot.
>
> -sw

LOL, new version crockpots....

--