Morning folks,
Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education, and
since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.

On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter with
sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought that
since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a stabilizing
force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm going to do a
rack today, and I am really interested in this because of the ungodly
mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.

Please forgive me for starting a new thread on a discussion that started
recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird from
deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too? Man, am I
getting off topic, or what!

Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.

Dave

Dave Turner wrote:
> Morning folks,
> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education, and
> since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>
> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
> that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter with
> sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought that
> since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a stabilizing
> force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm going to do a
> rack today, and I am really interested in this because of the ungodly
> mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.
>
> Please forgive me for starting a new thread on a discussion that started
> recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird from
> deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too? Man, am I
> getting off topic, or what!
>
> Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.
>
> Dave

As an addition, I got T-bird figured out...thanks anyway!

Dave

Dave Turner wrote:
> Morning folks,
> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education, and
> since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>
> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
> that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter with
> sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought that
> since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a stabilizing
> force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm going to do a
> rack today, and I am really interested in this because of the ungodly
> mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.
>
> Please forgive me for starting a new thread on a discussion that started
> recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird from
> deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too? Man, am I
> getting off topic, or what!
>
> Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.
>
> Dave

It tends to limit the temp swings from opening the door to tend fire,
etc. Think of it as a big thermal flywheel.

Yes, you can run hotter with sand, or save fuel, and just bring it up to
where you need it.

On your other topic:

View->threads->unread (at least on mu 'nix box) YMMV

Shawn Martin wrote:
> Dave Turner wrote:
>> Morning folks,
>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education,
>> and since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>>
>> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
>> that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter
>> with sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought
>> that since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a
>> stabilizing force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm
>> going to do a rack today, and I am really interested in this because
>> of the ungodly mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.
>>
>> Please forgive me for starting a new thread on a discussion that
>> started recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird
>> from deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too?
>> Man, am I getting off topic, or what!
>>
>> Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.
>>
>> Dave
>
> It tends to limit the temp swings from opening the door to tend fire,
> etc. Think of it as a big thermal flywheel.
>
> Yes, you can run hotter with sand, or save fuel, and just bring it up to
> where you need it.
>
> On your other topic:
>
> View->threads->unread (at least on mu 'nix box) YMMV

Thanks Shawn,
I'm going to try sand today and see how it works for me. Tin foil over
the sand will be much better for cleanup. I'll post back after dinner &
let you know how it worked out. Every time I 'que it's a crap shoot, but
I'm learning.

You are right about the T-bird thing. I discovered it after writing the
original post. I kept trying to solve it through folder properties with
no luck. All is good now.

Thanks,

Dave

Dave Turner wrote:
> Shawn Martin wrote:
>> Dave Turner wrote:
>>> Morning folks,
>>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education,
>>> and since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to
>>> ask. On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect
>>> does that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run
>>> hotter with sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I
>>> thought that since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted
>>> as a stabilizing force whereas sand can go much higher in
>>> temperature. I'm going to do a rack today, and I am really
>>> interested in this because of the ungodly mess that is left in the
>>> water pan to be cleaned up. Please forgive me for starting a new thread
>>> on a discussion that
>>> started recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird
>>> from deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too?
>>> Man, am I getting off topic, or what!
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>
>> It tends to limit the temp swings from opening the door to tend fire,
>> etc. Think of it as a big thermal flywheel.
>>
>> Yes, you can run hotter with sand, or save fuel, and just bring it
>> up to where you need it.
>>
>> On your other topic:
>>
>> View->threads->unread (at least on mu 'nix box) YMMV
>
> Thanks Shawn,
> I'm going to try sand today and see how it works for me. Tin foil over
> the sand will be much better for cleanup. I'll post back after dinner
> & let you know how it worked out. Every time I 'que it's a crap
> shoot, but I'm learning.
>
> You are right about the T-bird thing. I discovered it after writing
> the original post. I kept trying to solve it through folder
> properties with no luck. All is good now.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave

Simple question, are you supposed to use PLAY sand that has been cleaned or
does it even matter?

--
Moe Jones
HVAC Service Technician
Energy Equalizers Inc.
Houston, Texas
www.EnergyEqualizers.com

In article <tdGvi.13685$eY.1820
@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>, says...
> Morning folks,
> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education, and
> since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>
> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
> that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter with
> sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought that
> since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a stabilizing
> force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm going to do a
> rack today, and I am really interested in this because of the ungodly
> mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.
>
<snip>

The idea is to dampen wide swings in temperature in your
smoker with a heat sink.

What happens with water is that it absorbs heat, slowing
down the rise in temperature in your smoker. At boiling
point it becomes steam but will still absorb heat. The
drawback is the steam escapes out the flue wasting heat
energy. Eventually you run dry and have to replenish,
which further wastes heat energy by opening the door to
fill the water pan.

Sand also absorbs heat but doesn't evaporate so energy
isn't wasted through evaporation or replenishment,
lessening fuel use.

When you open the smoker to add/remove food, add fuel,
mop, etc., you cause a temperature drop, the heat sink
releases heat to the smoker to bring the temperature back
up to operating temps more quickly to lower the overall
cooking time.

They're are folks here that will tell you that heat sinks
aren't necessary and they would be correct, they aren't.
What I find the heat sink does for you is to allow you to
be a bit less zealous in your pit tending.

You can make good barbecue with/without water,
with/without sand, with/without ant heatsink at all. It
all depends on how you want to do it.

> Dave
>


Bill
--
Gmail and Google Groups. This century's answer to AOL and
WebTV.

Moe Jones wrote:
> Dave Turner wrote:
>> Shawn Martin wrote:
>>> Dave Turner wrote:
>>>> Morning folks,
>>>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education,
>>>> and since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to
>>>> ask. On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect
>>>> does that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run
>>>> hotter with sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I
>>>> thought that since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted
>>>> as a stabilizing force whereas sand can go much higher in
>>>> temperature. I'm going to do a rack today, and I am really
>>>> interested in this because of the ungodly mess that is left in the
>>>> water pan to be cleaned up. Please forgive me for starting a new thread
>>>> on a discussion that
>>>> started recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird
>>>> from deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too?
>>>> Man, am I getting off topic, or what!
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.
>>>>
>>>> Dave
>>> It tends to limit the temp swings from opening the door to tend fire,
>>> etc. Think of it as a big thermal flywheel.
>>>
>>> Yes, you can run hotter with sand, or save fuel, and just bring it
>>> up to where you need it.
>>>
>>> On your other topic:
>>>
>>> View->threads->unread (at least on mu 'nix box) YMMV
>> Thanks Shawn,
>> I'm going to try sand today and see how it works for me. Tin foil over
>> the sand will be much better for cleanup. I'll post back after dinner
>> & let you know how it worked out. Every time I 'que it's a crap
>> shoot, but I'm learning.
>>
>> You are right about the T-bird thing. I discovered it after writing
>> the original post. I kept trying to solve it through folder
>> properties with no luck. All is good now.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dave
>
> Simple question, are you supposed to use PLAY sand that has been cleaned or
> does it even matter?
>
I usually use a clean mortar sand from the cement section of a home
depot or some such. It's much cheaper that way, and it WILL get grungy
and need to be changed sometimes. (It's amazing the things that can
poke a hole in aluminum foil)

Bill wrote:
> In article <tdGvi.13685$eY.1820
> @newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>, says...
>> Morning folks,
>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education, and
>> since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>>
>> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
>> that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter with
>> sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought that
>> since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a stabilizing
>> force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm going to do a
>> rack today, and I am really interested in this because of the ungodly
>> mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.
>>
> <snip>
>
> The idea is to dampen wide swings in temperature in your
> smoker with a heat sink.
>
> What happens with water is that it absorbs heat, slowing
> down the rise in temperature in your smoker. At boiling
> point it becomes steam but will still absorb heat. The
> drawback is the steam escapes out the flue wasting heat
> energy. Eventually you run dry and have to replenish,
> which further wastes heat energy by opening the door to
> fill the water pan.
>
> Sand also absorbs heat but doesn't evaporate so energy
> isn't wasted through evaporation or replenishment,
> lessening fuel use.
>
> When you open the smoker to add/remove food, add fuel,
> mop, etc., you cause a temperature drop, the heat sink
> releases heat to the smoker to bring the temperature back
> up to operating temps more quickly to lower the overall
> cooking time.
>
> They're are folks here that will tell you that heat sinks
> aren't necessary and they would be correct, they aren't.
> What I find the heat sink does for you is to allow you to
> be a bit less zealous in your pit tending.
>
> You can make good barbecue with/without water,
> with/without sand, with/without ant heatsink at all. It
> all depends on how you want to do it.
>
>> Dave
>>
>
>
> Bill
It all makes sense. The only thing that was on my mind is that I haven't
yet bothered to buy a decent smoker, so controlling temperature is not
as easy for me as for some. I have a small Char-Broil that is open on
the bottom, and has only one damper on the top. I intend to get a WSM
but have not done so yet. I grill more than anything else on my Weber
performer and one-touch, and am satisfied with the results I get, but I
need to move on to doing more barbecue.

Thanks to all for the info...

Dave

Dave Turner wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> In article <tdGvi.13685$eY.1820
>> @newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>, says...
>>> Morning folks,
>>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education,
>>> and since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>>>
>>> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect
>>> does that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run
>>> hotter with sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I
>>> thought that since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted
>>> as a stabilizing force whereas sand can go much higher in
>>> temperature. I'm going to do a rack today, and I am really interested
>>> in this because of the ungodly mess that is left in the water pan to
>>> be cleaned up.
>>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> The idea is to dampen wide swings in temperature in your smoker with
>> a heat sink.
>>
>> What happens with water is that it absorbs heat, slowing down the
>> rise in temperature in your smoker. At boiling point it becomes steam
>> but will still absorb heat. The drawback is the steam escapes out the
>> flue wasting heat energy. Eventually you run dry and have to
>> replenish, which further wastes heat energy by opening the door to
>> fill the water pan.
>>
>> Sand also absorbs heat but doesn't evaporate so energy isn't wasted
>> through evaporation or replenishment, lessening fuel use.
>>
>> When you open the smoker to add/remove food, add fuel, mop, etc., you
>> cause a temperature drop, the heat sink releases heat to the smoker to
>> bring the temperature back up to operating temps more quickly to lower
>> the overall cooking time.
>> They're are folks here that will tell you that heat sinks aren't
>> necessary and they would be correct, they aren't. What I find the heat
>> sink does for you is to allow you to be a bit less zealous in your pit
>> tending.
>>
>> You can make good barbecue with/without water, with/without sand,
>> with/without ant heatsink at all. It all depends on how you want to do
>> it.
>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>
>>
>> Bill
> It all makes sense. The only thing that was on my mind is that I haven't
> yet bothered to buy a decent smoker, so controlling temperature is not
> as easy for me as for some. I have a small Char-Broil that is open on
> the bottom, and has only one damper on the top. I intend to get a WSM
> but have not done so yet. I grill more than anything else on my Weber
> performer and one-touch, and am satisfied with the results I get, but I
> need to move on to doing more barbecue.
>
> Thanks to all for the info...
>
> Dave


check out this smoker. If I recall correctly, one of our posters built
one a while back for about $35.00 He said it was the best smoker he had
ever used.

Shawn Martin wrote:
> Dave Turner wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>>> In article <tdGvi.13685$eY.1820
>>> @newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>, says...
>>>> Morning folks,
>>>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education,
>>>> and since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>>>>
>>>> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect
>>>> does that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run
>>>> hotter with sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I
>>>> thought that since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted
>>>> as a stabilizing force whereas sand can go much higher in
>>>> temperature. I'm going to do a rack today, and I am really
>>>> interested in this because of the ungodly mess that is left in the
>>>> water pan to be cleaned up.
>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> The idea is to dampen wide swings in temperature in your smoker with
>>> a heat sink.
>>>
>>> What happens with water is that it absorbs heat, slowing down the
>>> rise in temperature in your smoker. At boiling point it becomes steam
>>> but will still absorb heat. The drawback is the steam escapes out the
>>> flue wasting heat energy. Eventually you run dry and have to
>>> replenish, which further wastes heat energy by opening the door to
>>> fill the water pan.
>>>
>>> Sand also absorbs heat but doesn't evaporate so energy isn't wasted
>>> through evaporation or replenishment, lessening fuel use.
>>>
>>> When you open the smoker to add/remove food, add fuel, mop, etc.,
>>> you cause a temperature drop, the heat sink releases heat to the
>>> smoker to bring the temperature back up to operating temps more
>>> quickly to lower the overall cooking time.
>>> They're are folks here that will tell you that heat sinks aren't
>>> necessary and they would be correct, they aren't. What I find the
>>> heat sink does for you is to allow you to be a bit less zealous in
>>> your pit tending.
>>>
>>> You can make good barbecue with/without water, with/without sand,
>>> with/without ant heatsink at all. It all depends on how you want to
>>> do it.
>>>
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bill
>> It all makes sense. The only thing that was on my mind is that I
>> haven't yet bothered to buy a decent smoker, so controlling
>> temperature is not as easy for me as for some. I have a small
>> Char-Broil that is open on the bottom, and has only one damper on the
>> top. I intend to get a WSM but have not done so yet. I grill more than
>> anything else on my Weber performer and one-touch, and am satisfied
>> with the results I get, but I need to move on to doing more barbecue.
>>
>> Thanks to all for the info...
>>
>> Dave
>
>
> check out this smoker. If I recall correctly, one of our posters built
> one a while back for about $35.00 He said it was the best smoker he had
> ever used.
Man, am I loosing it! Here's the link

http://www.bigdrumsmokers.com/

(Damn! Haven't even started drinking yet.)

Shawn Martin wrote:
> Shawn Martin wrote:
>> Dave Turner wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> In article <tdGvi.13685$eY.1820
>>>> @newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>, says...
>>>>> Morning folks,
>>>>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free
>>>>> education, and since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I
>>>>> have to ask.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect
>>>>> does that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run
>>>>> hotter with sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I
>>>>> thought that since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted
>>>>> as a stabilizing force whereas sand can go much higher in
>>>>> temperature. I'm going to do a rack today, and I am really
>>>>> interested in this because of the ungodly mess that is left in the
>>>>> water pan to be cleaned up.
>>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> The idea is to dampen wide swings in temperature in your smoker
>>>> with a heat sink.
>>>>
>>>> What happens with water is that it absorbs heat, slowing down the
>>>> rise in temperature in your smoker. At boiling point it becomes
>>>> steam but will still absorb heat. The drawback is the steam escapes
>>>> out the flue wasting heat energy. Eventually you run dry and have to
>>>> replenish, which further wastes heat energy by opening the door to
>>>> fill the water pan.
>>>>
>>>> Sand also absorbs heat but doesn't evaporate so energy isn't wasted
>>>> through evaporation or replenishment, lessening fuel use.
>>>>
>>>> When you open the smoker to add/remove food, add fuel, mop, etc.,
>>>> you cause a temperature drop, the heat sink releases heat to the
>>>> smoker to bring the temperature back up to operating temps more
>>>> quickly to lower the overall cooking time.
>>>> They're are folks here that will tell you that heat sinks aren't
>>>> necessary and they would be correct, they aren't. What I find the
>>>> heat sink does for you is to allow you to be a bit less zealous in
>>>> your pit tending.
>>>>
>>>> You can make good barbecue with/without water, with/without sand,
>>>> with/without ant heatsink at all. It all depends on how you want to
>>>> do it.
>>>>
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>> It all makes sense. The only thing that was on my mind is that I
>>> haven't yet bothered to buy a decent smoker, so controlling
>>> temperature is not as easy for me as for some. I have a small
>>> Char-Broil that is open on the bottom, and has only one damper on the
>>> top. I intend to get a WSM but have not done so yet. I grill more
>>> than anything else on my Weber performer and one-touch, and am
>>> satisfied with the results I get, but I need to move on to doing more
>>> barbecue.
>>>
>>> Thanks to all for the info...
>>>
>>> Dave
>>
>>
>> check out this smoker. If I recall correctly, one of our posters
>> built one a while back for about $35.00 He said it was the best
>> smoker he had ever used.
> Man, am I loosing it! Here's the link
>
> http://www.bigdrumsmokers.com/
>
> (Damn! Haven't even started drinking yet.)

OMG, why not? It's the weekend, and it's after church, so it's time to
get crackin'!
Seriously, those smokers are interesting, but unfortunately my BW would
never allow me to have anything that looked vaguely industrial. After
all, the neighbors would talk (or be jealous).
Dave

I dont hve any sand but I do throw 4 - 5 bricks in there when I want a
higher temperature (say for chicken)
In my WSM, I tend to cook at 250 for water, 300 with bricks, 350 with
nothing (lower vents all closed)

"Dave Turner" > wrote in message
t...
> Shawn Martin wrote:
>> Dave Turner wrote:
>>> Morning folks,
>>> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education, and
>>> since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>>>
>>> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
>>> that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter with
>>> sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought that
>>> since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a stabilizing
>>> force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm going to do a
>>> rack today, and I am really interested in this because of the ungodly
>>> mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.
>>>
>>> Please forgive me for starting a new thread on a discussion that started
>>> recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird from
>>> deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too? Man, am I
>>> getting off topic, or what!
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>
>> It tends to limit the temp swings from opening the door to tend fire,
>> etc. Think of it as a big thermal flywheel.
>>
>> Yes, you can run hotter with sand, or save fuel, and just bring it up to
>> where you need it.
>>
>> On your other topic:
>>
>> View->threads->unread (at least on mu 'nix box) YMMV
>
> Thanks Shawn,
> I'm going to try sand today and see how it works for me. Tin foil over the
> sand will be much better for cleanup. I'll post back after dinner & let
> you know how it worked out. Every time I 'que it's a crap shoot, but I'm
> learning.
>
> You are right about the T-bird thing. I discovered it after writing the
> original post. I kept trying to solve it through folder properties with no
> luck. All is good now.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave

In article <PcJvi.33127$2v1.25210
@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, says...
>
<snip>

> Seriously, those smokers are interesting, but unfortunately my BW would
> never allow me to have anything that looked vaguely industrial. After
> all, the neighbors would talk (or be jealous).
> Dave
>

Now is when Walmart, Home Depot, Target, and other stores
start putting the barbecue stuff on sale to make room for
the fall/winter stuff. A cheap starter smoker can be had
for under a hundred dollars. Not to dissuade you from a
WSM; I've got one and it works very well, but you might
want to get your feet wet for less money to start with.

Or look out for a WSM on sale.

http://www.shopping.com/xPC-Weber-Sm...untain-Cooker-
Smoker-2820

http://tinyurl.com/2ep24n

An example of other smokers:

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/catalog.gsp?cat=4885
&fromPageCatId=119049&catNavId=4089

http://tinyurl.com/2ec9t4


Bill
--
Gmail and Google Groups. This century's answer to AOL and
WebTV.

Bill wrote:
> In article <PcJvi.33127$2v1.25210
> @newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, says...
> <snip>
>
>> Seriously, those smokers are interesting, but unfortunately my BW would
>> never allow me to have anything that looked vaguely industrial. After
>> all, the neighbors would talk (or be jealous).
>> Dave
>>
>
> Now is when Walmart, Home Depot, Target, and other stores
> start putting the barbecue stuff on sale to make room for
> the fall/winter stuff. A cheap starter smoker can be had
> for under a hundred dollars. Not to dissuade you from a
> WSM; I've got one and it works very well, but you might
> want to get your feet wet for less money to start with.
>
> Or look out for a WSM on sale.
>
> http://www.shopping.com/xPC-Weber-Sm...untain-Cooker-
> Smoker-2820
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2ep24n
>
> An example of other smokers:
>
> http://www.walmart.com/catalog/catalog.gsp?cat=4885
> &fromPageCatId=119049&catNavId=4089
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2ec9t4
>
>
> Bill
Which is what I'm doing now. I only paid $38 for this Char-Broil at Home
Depot. My ribs have been on now for almost 1 1/2 hours now with sand,
and is holding steady at 250 F. I'm using half kingsford and half
Lazzaris lump, with Hickory chunks in tin foil, and I lit it up with the
Minion method. This isn't my first cook with this little unit, I did a
chuck roast last weekend. The family ate it all, but my BW thought it
had a little too much smoke. I guess I have to agree, since I smoked it
the entire cook. Live and learn. But I have to say it turned out moist
and very tender, having cooked the 4# critter 6 hours at 200-225F. I
pulled it at 175 internal, and it was wonderful (IMHO), although the
smoke was very strong. Now, where did I put that beer...

Onward...

Dave

wouldn't a couple (fire) bricks do the same job?

h wrote:
> wouldn't a couple (fire) bricks do the same job?
>
>
From what I've seen, it would probably turn out about the same.
Dave

Dave Turner wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> In article <PcJvi.33127$2v1.25210
>> @newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, says...
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Seriously, those smokers are interesting, but unfortunately my BW
>>> would never allow me to have anything that looked vaguely industrial.
>>> After all, the neighbors would talk (or be jealous).
>>> Dave
>>>
>>
>> Now is when Walmart, Home Depot, Target, and other stores start
>> putting the barbecue stuff on sale to make room for the fall/winter
>> stuff. A cheap starter smoker can be had for under a hundred dollars.
>> Not to dissuade you from a WSM; I've got one and it works very well,
>> but you might want to get your feet wet for less money to start with.
>>
>> Or look out for a WSM on sale.
>>
>> http://www.shopping.com/xPC-Weber-Sm...untain-Cooker-
>> Smoker-2820
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/2ep24n
>>
>> An example of other smokers:
>>
>> http://www.walmart.com/catalog/catalog.gsp?cat=4885
>> &fromPageCatId=119049&catNavId=4089
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/2ec9t4
>>
>>
>> Bill
> Which is what I'm doing now. I only paid $38 for this Char-Broil at Home
> Depot. My ribs have been on now for almost 1 1/2 hours now with sand,
> and is holding steady at 250 F. I'm using half kingsford and half
> Lazzaris lump, with Hickory chunks in tin foil, and I lit it up with the
> Minion method. This isn't my first cook with this little unit, I did a
> chuck roast last weekend. The family ate it all, but my BW thought it
> had a little too much smoke. I guess I have to agree, since I smoked it
> the entire cook. Live and learn. But I have to say it turned out moist
> and very tender, having cooked the 4# critter 6 hours at 200-225F. I
> pulled it at 175 internal, and it was wonderful (IMHO), although the
> smoke was very strong. Now, where did I put that beer...
>
> Onward...
>
> Dave

Well, dinners over and I can report that the BW and the UGS were very
pleased. I had to cut the rack in half, because it was too big to fit in
the smoker in one piece, and that made the cook only half successful.
The thicker end was placed at the top, and the thinner end was put on
the second shelf, and unfortunately the one on the top shelf turned out
a little tough on the outside. Flavor was great, but just a little
tough. OTH, the piece on the second shelf was, shall we say, marvelous.
Tender, juicy, flavorful & the UGS was in wonderment about the ability
to eat the bones.

I can also say (following the original subject matter) that Water is a
thing of the past for me. I had no trouble maintaining the temp I
wanted, and cleanup is a matter of changing the tin foil.

The drawback of this little smoker is not being able to see the food on
the second shelf. I think a new larger one is in the near future,
particularly since I looked at the links that Bill sent. I'm going to
watch the ads, and most likely move up within a few weeks.

Thanks to all for the advice and encouragement, and to Dave Bugg my best
wishes for a speedy recovery for his mom.

Dave

On Aug 12, 8:12 pm, Dave Turner > wrote:
> Dave Turner wrote:
> > Bill wrote:
> >> In article <PcJvi.33127$2v1.25210
> >> @newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, says...
> >> <snip>
>
> >>> Seriously, those smokers are interesting, but unfortunately my BW
> >>> would never allow me to have anything that looked vaguely industrial.
> >>> After all, the neighbors would talk (or be jealous).
> >>> Dave
>
> >> Now is when Walmart, Home Depot, Target, and other stores start
> >> putting the barbecue stuff on sale to make room for the fall/winter
> >> stuff. A cheap starter smoker can be had for under a hundred dollars.
> >> Not to dissuade you from a WSM; I've got one and it works very well,
> >> but you might want to get your feet wet for less money to start with.
>
> >> Or look out for a WSM on sale.
>
> >> http://www.shopping.com/xPC-Weber-Sm...untain-Cooker-
> >> Smoker-2820
>
> >> http://tinyurl.com/2ep24n
>
> >> An example of other smokers:
>
> >> http://www.walmart.com/catalog/catalog.gsp?cat=4885
> >> &fromPageCatId=119049&catNavId=4089
>
> >> http://tinyurl.com/2ec9t4
>
> >> Bill
> > Which is what I'm doing now. I only paid $38 for this Char-Broil at Home
> > Depot. My ribs have been on now for almost 1 1/2 hours now with sand,
> > and is holding steady at 250 F. I'm using half kingsford and half
> > Lazzaris lump, with Hickory chunks in tin foil, and I lit it up with the
> > Minion method. This isn't my first cook with this little unit, I did a
> > chuck roast last weekend. The family ate it all, but my BW thought it
> > had a little too much smoke. I guess I have to agree, since I smoked it
> > the entire cook. Live and learn. But I have to say it turned out moist
> > and very tender, having cooked the 4# critter 6 hours at 200-225F. I
> > pulled it at 175 internal, and it was wonderful (IMHO), although the
> > smoke was very strong. Now, where did I put that beer...
>
> > Onward...
>
> > Dave
>
> Well, dinners over and I can report that the BW and the UGS were very
> pleased. I had to cut the rack in half, because it was too big to fit in
> the smoker in one piece, and that made the cook only half successful.
> The thicker end was placed at the top, and the thinner end was put on
> the second shelf, and unfortunately the one on the top shelf turned out
> a little tough on the outside. Flavor was great, but just a little
> tough. OTH, the piece on the second shelf was, shall we say, marvelous.
> Tender, juicy, flavorful & the UGS was in wonderment about the ability
> to eat the bones.
>
> I can also say (following the original subject matter) that Water is a
> thing of the past for me. I had no trouble maintaining the temp I
> wanted, and cleanup is a matter of changing the tin foil.
>
> The drawback of this little smoker is not being able to see the food on
> the second shelf. I think a new larger one is in the near future,
> particularly since I looked at the links that Bill sent. I'm going to
> watch the ads, and most likely move up within a few weeks.
>
> Thanks to all for the advice and encouragement, and to Dave Bugg my best
> wishes for a speedy recovery for his mom.
>
> Dave- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

WSM are worth every penny. Much better quality than other water
smokers of the same type. I use the clay pot disk base instead of
water or sand. I wrap it in foil and set it on top of the water pan.
It cleans up real easy, temperatures are steady and easily controled,
and I use much less fuel. No difference in food moistness compared to
water.

Dave Turner wrote:
> Morning folks,
> Been following the group discussions trying to get a free education, and
> since none of you are able to read my mind I guess I have to ask.
>
> On the use of sand as opposed to water in the smoker, what effect does
> that have on temperature control? Would the unit tend to run hotter with
> sand, or do I not understand the principal involved? I thought that
> since water will usually hover at 212 degrees it acted as a stabilizing
> force whereas sand can go much higher in temperature. I'm going to do a
> rack today, and I am really interested in this because of the ungodly
> mess that is left in the water pan to be cleaned up.
>
> Please forgive me for starting a new thread on a discussion that started
> recently, but I haven't figured out how to stop Thunderbird from
> deleting read messages. Maybe I could get some help there too? Man, am I
> getting off topic, or what!
>
> Thanks in advance for the guidance about sand.
>
> Dave

I did sand as a necessity on a desert camp-out once. Since then I have
stopped using water all together. Even in our ultra-low humidity Sand
seems to keep the cook juicy and tender.

JWBoothe wrote:
> On Aug 12, 8:12 pm, Dave Turner > wrote:
>> Dave Turner wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>> In article <PcJvi.33127$2v1.25210
>>>> @newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, says...
>>>> <snip>
>>>>> Seriously, those smokers are interesting, but unfortunately my BW
>>>>> would never allow me to have anything that looked vaguely industrial.
>>>>> After all, the neighbors would talk (or be jealous).
>>>>> Dave
>>>> Now is when Walmart, Home Depot, Target, and other stores start
>>>> putting the barbecue stuff on sale to make room for the fall/winter
>>>> stuff. A cheap starter smoker can be had for under a hundred dollars.
>>>> Not to dissuade you from a WSM; I've got one and it works very well,
>>>> but you might want to get your feet wet for less money to start with.
>>>> Or look out for a WSM on sale.
>>>> http://www.shopping.com/xPC-Weber-Sm...untain-Cooker-
>>>> Smoker-2820
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2ep24n
>>>> An example of other smokers:
>>>> http://www.walmart.com/catalog/catalog.gsp?cat=4885
>>>> &fromPageCatId=119049&catNavId=4089
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2ec9t4
>>>> Bill
>>> Which is what I'm doing now. I only paid $38 for this Char-Broil at Home
>>> Depot. My ribs have been on now for almost 1 1/2 hours now with sand,
>>> and is holding steady at 250 F. I'm using half kingsford and half
>>> Lazzaris lump, with Hickory chunks in tin foil, and I lit it up with the
>>> Minion method. This isn't my first cook with this little unit, I did a
>>> chuck roast last weekend. The family ate it all, but my BW thought it
>>> had a little too much smoke. I guess I have to agree, since I smoked it
>>> the entire cook. Live and learn. But I have to say it turned out moist
>>> and very tender, having cooked the 4# critter 6 hours at 200-225F. I
>>> pulled it at 175 internal, and it was wonderful (IMHO), although the
>>> smoke was very strong. Now, where did I put that beer...
>>> Onward...
>>> Dave
>> Well, dinners over and I can report that the BW and the UGS were very
>> pleased. I had to cut the rack in half, because it was too big to fit in
>> the smoker in one piece, and that made the cook only half successful.
>> The thicker end was placed at the top, and the thinner end was put on
>> the second shelf, and unfortunately the one on the top shelf turned out
>> a little tough on the outside. Flavor was great, but just a little
>> tough. OTH, the piece on the second shelf was, shall we say, marvelous.
>> Tender, juicy, flavorful & the UGS was in wonderment about the ability
>> to eat the bones.
>>
>> I can also say (following the original subject matter) that Water is a
>> thing of the past for me. I had no trouble maintaining the temp I
>> wanted, and cleanup is a matter of changing the tin foil.
>>
>> The drawback of this little smoker is not being able to see the food on
>> the second shelf. I think a new larger one is in the near future,
>> particularly since I looked at the links that Bill sent. I'm going to
>> watch the ads, and most likely move up within a few weeks.
>>
>> Thanks to all for the advice and encouragement, and to Dave Bugg my best
>> wishes for a speedy recovery for his mom.
>>
>> Dave- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> WSM are worth every penny. Much better quality than other water
> smokers of the same type. I use the clay pot disk base instead of
> water or sand. I wrap it in foil and set it on top of the water pan.
> It cleans up real easy, temperatures are steady and easily controled,
> and I use much less fuel. No difference in food moistness compared to
> water.
>
I have no doubt at all. I've been using Weber equipment for many years,
and although I have used other stuff from time to time, I feel that
overall Weber has always been the most consistent, both in quality and
in what you can expect from it. I think a WSM is what I will end up with
soon.
Dave