Well, since the heat knocked us out of our fishing trip, we
decided to smoke that other butt in the freezer. We put it on
this a.m., about an hour ago. Although the first one was edible,
I'm hoping for much better results this time around.

DH was supposed to be trying his hand at the smoker today, but I
can see wer're going to be feuding all day because he doesn't
seem to see how important keeping the temp within the range. (I
just went outside and found the temp of the smoker to be 305!

I want to have the meat in the 220 to 230 range. DH says it
doesn't matter, and he doesn't want to baby-sit the cooker all
day.

Guess I'm stuck baby-sitting the cooker today. If it weren't for
the fact that our DD LOVES pork barbecue so much, I'd let him go
ahead and do it his way.

Sheesh!

Karen C.

"Karen C." > wrote in message
...
> Well, since the heat knocked us out of our fishing trip, we
> decided to smoke that other butt in the freezer. We put it on
> this a.m., about an hour ago. Although the first one was edible,
> I'm hoping for much better results this time around.
>
> DH was supposed to be trying his hand at the smoker today, but I
> can see wer're going to be feuding all day because he doesn't
> seem to see how important keeping the temp within the range. (I
> just went outside and found the temp of the smoker to be 305!
>
> I want to have the meat in the 220 to 230 range. DH says it
> doesn't matter, and he doesn't want to baby-sit the cooker all
> day.
>
> Guess I'm stuck baby-sitting the cooker today. If it weren't for
> the fact that our DD LOVES pork barbecue so much, I'd let him go
> ahead and do it his way.
>
> Sheesh!
>
> Karen C.
>
>

Sorry Karen, but IMO he is right. People spend too much time trying to keep
the temp in too small a cooking range. If the pit wants to cook at 305° let
it, don't keep fussing with it trying to keep it lower. If you think it is
too high make a smaller fire.
I have cooked 100's if not 1000's of BUTTS and I doubt if any one of
themwere cooked under 300°, most in the 325° range.
Let it rock, you will like it anyway.

"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
> You think 90-92F is _high_? What a bunch of whimps! :-)

Heck, it's an arctic breeze, compared to what we've had the last
few weeks. But we went fishing yesterday and didn't get so much
as a bite. I finally switched to nightcrawlers and fished on the
bottom, thinking I'd at least get a catfish. Zilch. I figure
we'll wait a week or so and let the water temp cool down, then
give it another go.

> > I want to have the meat in the 220 to 230 range. DH says it
> > doesn't matter, and he doesn't want to baby-sit the cooker
all
> > day.
>
> Handcuff him tot he smoker next to a cooler full of beer. That
> whimp!

That's a much kinder word than I'd use to describe him right now
<g>.

If DD weren't already salivating, wanting pork sandwiches all
week (she even eats them for breakfast, before school!), I'd let
him find out what it would be like to do it his way. I think it
may come to that, anyway, in the future.

(What gets me is I don't even like pork BBQ that much. I'm a
brisket gal <g>.)

Karen C.

"Big Jim" > wrote in message
...
> Sorry Karen, but IMO he is right.

I ain't EVEN gonna tell him you said that <g>.

> People spend too much time trying to keep
> the temp in too small a cooking range. If the pit wants to cook
at 305° let
> it, don't keep fussing with it trying to keep it lower. If you
think it is
> too high make a smaller fire.

That's the problem; he made a stinkin' bonfire! I had to shovel
some of it out. I think what was really making it blaze was the
big hickory chunks. He had about four of them that were each the
size of a Pepsi can.

> I have cooked 100's if not 1000's of BUTTS and I doubt if any
one of
> themwere cooked under 300°, most in the 325° range.
> Let it rock, you will like it anyway.

Thanks! I'd like it a lot better if it were a good hunk of
brisket, though <g>.

Karen C.

Karen C. wrote:

>
> That's the problem; he made a stinkin' bonfire! I had to shovel
> some of it out. I think what was really making it blaze was the
> big hickory chunks. He had about four of them that were each the
> size of a Pepsi can.

> Karen C.
>
>

That's too much smoke - particularly Hickory. I cooked one last night
with a golfball sized piece of Hickory, two Cherry - same size, and a
small handful of apple - it was shredded. The smoke ring was 1/4" -
3/8" all around in a small picnic and the flavor was great.

Dan

On Sep 3, 9:10 am, "Karen C." > wrote:
> "Big Jim" > wrote in message

>
> > I have cooked 100's if not 1000's of BUTTS and I doubt if any
> one of
> > themwere cooked under 300°, most in the 325° range.
> > Let it rock, you will like it anyway.
>
> Thanks! I'd like it a lot better if it were a good hunk of
> brisket, though <g>.
>

Butt is probably the least heat sensitive cut for BBQ.
Ribs I try to keep it lower than 260, butts 300ish. Butt listen to
BigJ, he's the definition of pro cooker.

"frohe" > wrote in message
...
> Karen C. wrote:
> > I want to have the meat in the 220 to 230 range. DH says it
> > doesn't matter, and he doesn't want to baby-sit the cooker
all
> > day.
>
> Heck, I don't blame him. Bump the temp up to 300-325 and get
the same great
> results in less time.

Well, I know I *could* do bump it up; but it just seems to me
that all the books I've been reading say you should keep it in a
lower range for optimal results. I figure if I'm going to mess
with it, and if I can control it, I'd just as soon to have the
optimal results.

[And, yes, I know I'm a big control freak <g>.]

Karen C.

"Tutall" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Butt is probably the least heat sensitive cut for BBQ.
Ribs I try to keep it lower than 260, butts 300ish. Butt listen
to
BigJ, he's the definition of pro cooker.>

Thanks for your feedback. I have no doubt it tastes good at 300,
but I was just afraid to go that high.

I did a lot better with the temp control this time than the first
time, but I can see it's going to take some practice to figure
out how to do it properly.

Karen C.

As it turned out, I had to fire DH because he just wasn't much
interested in the details. He just figured you threw the pork on
the grill, put the lid on it, and threw some lump and water in
the smoker every few hours. This surprised the heck out of me
because he's as big a pork eater as DD. (He's also the best cook
in the family and is very attentive to details when it comes to
food.)

The funny thing is that I'd told him, yesterday a.m., that it was
a long process and that, since we'd gotten such a late start
(9:30 a.m.), we'd have to fix something else for that night's
supper. He must have thought I was kidding because he came up to
me about 6:30 p.m. and asked me when supper was going to be
ready. I said, "Huh?" and he asked when the pork would be ready.
I told him he'd better get something else together for supper
because I was working on *tomorrow night's supper*. LOL! Talk
about a letdown!

Anyway, it took 15-3/4 hours to reach 195. I couldn't believe
how much of a difference there was with this second try. I had a
heck of a time getting it off of the grill because it fell apart
on me. I wrapped it in foil and a towel and threw it in the
cooler and hurried off to bed. It was still quite warm when I
got up at 6 and put it in the refrigerator.

I do believe I'm going to let DH have the pleasure of pulling it
this evening for our supper <g>.

There are only a handful of things I can cook better than DH.
However, if smell is any indicator, I just may have found
something else for that list <g>. I already know it's going to
be a whole lot better than my first butt!

Thanks to you folks for all of your help! I appreciate it very
much!

Karen C.

On 3-Sep-2007, "Big Jim" > wrote:

> "Karen C." > wrote in message
> ...
> > Well, since the heat knocked us out of our fishing trip, we
> > decided to smoke that other butt in the freezer. We put it on
> > this a.m., about an hour ago. Although the first one was edible,
> > I'm hoping for much better results this time around.
> >
> > DH was supposed to be trying his hand at the smoker today, but I
> > can see wer're going to be feuding all day because he doesn't
> > seem to see how important keeping the temp within the range. (I
> > just went outside and found the temp of the smoker to be 305!
> >
> > I want to have the meat in the 220 to 230 range. DH says it
> > doesn't matter, and he doesn't want to baby-sit the cooker all
> > day.
> >
> > Guess I'm stuck baby-sitting the cooker today. If it weren't for
> > the fact that our DD LOVES pork barbecue so much, I'd let him go
> > ahead and do it his way.
> >
> > Sheesh!
> >
> > Karen C.
> >
> >
>
> Sorry Karen, but IMO he is right. People spend too much time trying to
> keep
> the temp in too small a cooking range. If the pit wants to cook at 305°
> let
> it, don't keep fussing with it trying to keep it lower. If you think it is
>
> too high make a smaller fire.
> I have cooked 100's if not 1000's of BUTTS and I doubt if any one of
> themwere cooked under 300°, most in the 325° range.
> Let it rock, you will like it anyway.

What Jim said. My pit has a sweet spot at about 275° dome temp (NB
Silver offset). That means it runs without fuss or attention at that temp.
Its near 300° near the firebox and more like 250° or less at the far end.
Everything gets cooked at those temperatures more or less. Big
pieces get placed close to the fire. Butts cook in 5 to 7 hours, ribs 4
or less. I don't pay much attention to time. Mostly, I use time to know
when to check on the fire, but mostly I just watch the dome temp and
leave it the hell alone until it starts to drop off. Then, it's time to add
fuel.
I don't F#$% with the vents to get it back to temp. I just dump in some
fuel and get back to my A/C livingroom. I check on the meat the first
time at about 4 hours. Then I might turn big pieces 180° to even out
the heat. One exception is if I have ribs stacked in there. Then I
shuffle them about every two hours to even out the exposure.
--
Brick(Save a tree, eat a Beaver)

"Karen C." > wrote in message
...
> "frohe" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Karen C. wrote:
>> > I want to have the meat in the 220 to 230 range. DH says it
>> > doesn't matter, and he doesn't want to baby-sit the cooker
> all
>> > day.
>>
>> Heck, I don't blame him. Bump the temp up to 300-325 and get
> the same great
>> results in less time.
>
> Well, I know I *could* do bump it up; but it just seems to me
> that all the books I've been reading say you should keep it in a
> lower range for optimal results. I figure if I'm going to mess
> with it, and if I can control it, I'd just as soon to have the
> optimal results.
>
> [And, yes, I know I'm a big control freak <g>.]
>
> Karen C.
>
>

Forget the books. They are written to sell.
Listen to folks that know what they are doing.
--
James A. "Big Jim" Whitten

www.lazyq.com

"Karen C." > wrote in message
...
> As it turned out, I had to fire DH because he just wasn't much
> interested in the details. He just figured you threw the pork on
> the grill, put the lid on it, and threw some lump and water in
> the smoker every few hours. This surprised the heck out of me
> because he's as big a pork eater as DD. (He's also the best cook
> in the family and is very attentive to details when it comes to
> food.)
>
> Karen C.
>
>

Karen, looks like he has a case that will stand up in court.
That is exactly how one should cook BBQ. Don't try making it complicated
with all the fussing.
LISTEN to DH
He has it figured out.
Of course you can cook it anyway you want. BUTT.
--
James A. "Big Jim" Whitten

www.lazyq.com

"Brick" > wrote in message
news:7hdDi.6952$3R5.2626@trnddc05...
> What Jim said. My pit has a sweet spot at about 275° dome temp
(NB
> Silver offset). That means it runs without fuss or attention at
that temp.
> Its near 300° near the firebox and more like 250° or less at
the far end.
> mostly I just watch the dome temp and
> leave it the hell alone until it starts to drop off. Then, it's
time to add
> fuel.

Hmmm . . . I'm using a SMW, and I have a (Maverick) thermometer
probe at the rack, not far from the meat but not touching. Then
I have the other probe in the meat. Is there a reason I should
have another thermometer at the top of the dome?

> Everything gets cooked at those temperatures more or less. Big
> pieces get placed close to the fire. Butts cook in 5 to 7
hours, ribs 4
> or less. . . .

I don't know how you guys do it! The thought of cooking a bunch
of stuff at one time gives me a headache <g>.

> I don't pay much attention to time.

I learned that lesson with my first attempt <g>.

> I don't F#$% with the vents to get it back to temp. I just dump
in some
> fuel and get back to my A/C livingroom. I check on the meat the
first
> time at about 4 hours. . . . shuffle them about every two hours
to even out the exposure.

I can only dream of the time when I'm that confident in what I'm
doing! LOL!

Thanks!

Karen C.

"Big Jim" > wrote in message
...
> Karen, looks like he has a case that will stand up in court.
> That is exactly how one should cook BBQ. Don't try making it
complicated
> with all the fussing.
> LISTEN to DH
> He has it figured out.

LOL! I am NOT going to tell him you said this <g>.

> Of course you can cook it anyway you want. BUTT.

I'm sold; I'll be happy to let him do the next one his way <g>.

Karen C.

"Big Jim" > wrote in message
...
> Forget the books. They are written to sell.
> Listen to folks that know what they are doing.

Duly noted!

Thanks!

Karen C.

"Karen C." > wrote in message
...
> "Big Jim" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Forget the books. They are written to sell.
>> Listen to folks that know what they are doing.
>
> Duly noted!
>
> Thanks!
>
> Karen C.
>

I'm certainly NOT an expert like BigJ, having done only a fraction of the
amount of BBQ that he has... and when I first started, I was hung up on
making sure the temp was "this" or "that". I have a GOSM, gas fired smoker,
and I was constantly fiddling with the damper on top, or the regulator...
then read a few things in here about not being so fussy with it, and just
started letting it go. In fact, the last two butts I did, prob. cooked at
around 325, and I didn't take them out right when they hit 195 either...
didn't pull 'em out til the bone turned easily. Definitely the best two
I've done, and in shorter time than pretty much any of the others.

Now if I could just get a brisket to turn out as good. It's always VERY
tender, but I can't seem to keep it nice and juicy, especially in the flat.


>

"Dan" <intrceptor@gmaildotcom> wrote in message
.. .
> That's too much smoke - particularly Hickory.

Uh-oh! The amount of hickory chunks is where DH and I disagreed
most. He wanted to keep seeing smoke all day from the smoker.
He said you always see that coming from the smokehouse at the BBQ
joint we frequent. I would have put in more than the four
chunks, but I remember reading where you can oversmoke and make
it not fit to eat.

Fortunately, DH can (and does) eat just about anything, so I'm
sure it won't go to waste, even if DD and I don't like
yesterday's efforts <g>.

> I cooked one last night
> with a golfball sized piece of Hickory, two Cherry - same size,
and a
> small handful of apple - it was shredded. The smoke ring was
1/4" -
> 3/8" all around in a small picnic and the flavor was great.

So do you put all of the chunks and chips in at the same time,
when first starting up, or do you spread it out over the cook?

And that's the total amount of chunks and chips you put on? IOW,
no additional chunks nor chips?

Thanks!

Karen C.

"kilikini" > wrote in message
...
> Ha ha, good for you! I'm proud of you. :~)

Thanks; but don't be proud of me, just yet; I'll let you know how
successful I was after tonight's supper <g>.

Karen C.

"kilikini" > wrote in message
...
> You'll get there. You've just only gotten started, sweetie!

> I can't wait to hear the results of this last butt, though.
> kili <----- anxiously awaiting your dinner. :~)

Well, it's GOT to be better than the first one, which was no
better than the pork loins I'd cooked in the crockpot in the
past. (No worse, either, though, so at least it was edible <g>.)

A few times during the cook, DD told me, "That smells
gooooooood," so I'm anxious to get her verdict. (Can't count on
DH's because he'll eat anything but Fritos and mincemeat--and
he'll eat Fritos in a pinch.)

Karen C.

"43fan" > wrote in message
. ..
> I'm certainly NOT an expert like BigJ, having done only a
fraction of the
> amount of BBQ that he has... and when I first started, I was
hung up on
> making sure the temp was "this" or "that". I have a GOSM, gas
fired smoker,
> and I was constantly fiddling with the damper on top, or the
regulator...
> then read a few things in here about not being so fussy with
it, and just
> started letting it go. In fact, the last two butts I did,
prob. cooked at
> around 325, and I didn't take them out right when they hit 195
either...
> didn't pull 'em out til the bone turned easily. Definitely the
best two
> I've done, and in shorter time than pretty much any of the
others.

That's good to hear. Being a control freak, it's not easy to
think about letting it go, but I'm sure I won't be so anal about
it, once I get more comfortable with controlling temps. I had a
few good stretches where it seemed as if the heat was staying
good and steady for quite awhile, and I thought that was pretty
neat. I think what will really help me there is to find some
good lump. So far, I haven't found any locally, so I may just
have to order it.

> Now if I could just get a brisket to turn out as good. It's
always VERY
> tender, but I can't seem to keep it nice and juicy, especially
in the flat.
>

THAT'S what I want to learn to do, eventually, as I'm more into
brisket than anything else. I'm going to stick with pig and
chicken for awhile, though. (Haven't tried the chicken yet, but
it's next on the list.) I do want to do a ham, soon, though.

Thanks for your feedback. It helps!

Karen C.

"Karen C." > wrote:
> "frohe" > wrote in message
> > Karen C. wrote:
> > > [ . . . ]
> [And, yes, I know I'm a big control freak <g>.]

Does that include DH? <ducking>

--
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families!

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !
~Semper Fi~

"Nick Cramer" > wrote in message
...
> > [And, yes, I know I'm a big control freak <g>.]
>
> Does that include DH? <ducking>

LOL! Ha! I learned, long ago, that NOBODY can control him <g>.

Karen C.

Karen C. wrote:
> "Dan" <intrceptor@gmaildotcom> wrote in message
> .. .
>> That's too much smoke - particularly Hickory.
>
> Uh-oh! The amount of hickory chunks is where DH and I disagreed
> most. He wanted to keep seeing smoke all day from the smoker.
> He said you always see that coming from the smokehouse at the BBQ
> joint we frequent. I would have put in more than the four
> chunks, but I remember reading where you can oversmoke and make
> it not fit to eat.
>
> Fortunately, DH can (and does) eat just about anything, so I'm
> sure it won't go to waste, even if DD and I don't like
> yesterday's efforts <g>.
>
>> I cooked one last night
>> with a golfball sized piece of Hickory, two Cherry - same size,
> and a
>> small handful of apple - it was shredded. The smoke ring was
> 1/4" -
>> 3/8" all around in a small picnic and the flavor was great.
>
> So do you put all of the chunks and chips in at the same time,
> when first starting up, or do you spread it out over the cook?
>
> And that's the total amount of chunks and chips you put on? IOW,
> no additional chunks nor chips?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Karen C.
>
>

The local BBQ joints are adding new meat all of the time so they need
constant smoke. The consensus is that when cooking pork butts or beef
brisket the smoke only penetrates the meat during the first hour or so.

I bought some large boxes of hickory and apple that were cut and split
into small pieces. I called them golf ball size since that's the
closest object I could compare them to. The apple I have is shredded
like mulch. I used one piece of hickory, two cherry, and a small
handful of apple - about the same amount as the hickory Sunday night for
a 7# picnic (butt). The smoke lasted maybe 45-60 minutes and I had a
nice smoke ring. I didn't add any more smoking wood after that.

Are you using lump or briquettes? That makes a huge difference in
flavor, too.

Dan


Dan

"Dan" <intrceptor@gmaildotcom> wrote in message
.. .
> The local BBQ joints are adding new meat all of the time so
they need
> constant smoke.

That makes a whole lot of sense to me, but DH just isn't buying
it.

> The consensus is that when cooking pork butts or beef
> brisket the smoke only penetrates the meat during the first
hour or so.

I do recall reading that someone in the group had said the meat
will only take on smoke the first hour. But then I wondered how
that could be, considering people have said you can over smoke if
you're not careful.

> I bought some large boxes of hickory and apple that were cut
and split
> into small pieces. I called them golf ball size since that's
the
> closest object I could compare them to. The apple I have is
shredded
> like mulch. I used one piece of hickory, two cherry, and a
small
> handful of apple - about the same amount as the hickory Sunday
night for
> a 7# picnic (butt). The smoke lasted maybe 45-60 minutes and I
had a
> nice smoke ring. I didn't add any more smoking wood after
that.

This is good to know. I'm going to try the apple and cherry
woods soon.

> Are you using lump or briquettes? That makes a huge difference
in
> flavor, too.

Definitely lump--although I can't find a good brand around here.
Cowboy and Frontier are all I've found so far. I did spot
Kingsford's Charwood last week, but I seem to recall reading that
it ain't that great. I'm going to special order a decent brand
if I don't find some locally soon.

Thanks a bunch!

Karen C.

DH works construction, so we had a late supper. Although I'm not
much on pork barbecue, I'd have to say it's pretty good. (Sure
beats the crockpot sandwiches, for sure!)

The only complaint I have about it was the bark was too dry; but
the rest of it was nice and moist. I had to discard most of the
bark, but it was still plenty smoky tasting for me. (DH put all
the rejected bark in a plastic baggie and put it in the
refrigerator. Said he was going to eat it later. LOL!)

DD really liked it too. She agreed with me, that the pork had
enough smoky taste. (So since I discarded most of the bark, I
think that we had too much hickory to begin with.)

DH, OTOH, said it needed more smoke. If I know him, he'll try to
sneak in a bunch of hickory next time we cook. With that in
mind, I think I'll give him full reign and let him do it his way
next time.

Now I want to smoke a ham <g>.

Karen C.

"kilikini" > wrote in message
...
> We always chop up the bark into the meat. It helps make the
bark moister
> and adds more smoke flavor to the whole thing. Another bonus
is that mixing
> it in makes the bark less tough. I'm not a big bark fan,
either, but this
> way I find it totally edible.

Thanks! I'll give that a try. I think I'd like it--if I could
just chew it <g>. I really do like the bark with my brisket.

Should I be basting with apple juice throughout the smoke?

Karen C.

"frohe" > wrote in message
...
> DoItBest Hardware sells Royal Oak at its stores. If the local
store does
> carry it for some reason, they can order it in for ya.
>
> Visit http://doitbest.com/StoreLocator.dib to find a store near
you.

They didn't even know what Royal Oak Lump was when I dropped in
for it about a month ago. I've got a few other places to check
when I can get out to the other side of town, so I'll look there
before I special order.

Thanks!

Karen C.

"frohe" > wrote in message
...
> Keep cookin then. Confidence comes with lots of practice.

Will do! Thanks!

Karen C.

"kilikini" > wrote in message
...
> IMO, I'd say, the less you lift the lid on the smoker, the
better off you
> are. We don't usually baste, so maybe someone else can jump in
here.

Yeah, that would just make for longer cooking time--which was
plenty long, as it was (15-3/4 hours). But I'm thinking I'm
missing something and that's the reason for the tough bark.

Thanks!

Karen C.

"Karen C." > wrote in message
...
> The funny thing is that I'd told him, yesterday a.m., that it was
> a long process and that, since we'd gotten such a late start
> (9:30 a.m.), we'd have to fix something else for that night's
> supper. He must have thought I was kidding because he came up to
> me about 6:30 p.m. and asked me when supper was going to be
> ready. I said, "Huh?" and he asked when the pork would be ready.
> I told him he'd better get something else together for supper
> because I was working on *tomorrow night's supper*. LOL! Talk
> about a letdown!
>
> Anyway, it took 15-3/4 hours to reach 195. I couldn't believe
> how much of a difference there was with this second try. I had a
> heck of a time getting it off of the grill because it fell apart
> on me. I wrapped it in foil and a towel and threw it in the
> cooler and hurried off to bed. It was still quite warm when I
> got up at 6 and put it in the refrigerator.
>
>
> Karen C.
>
>

Karen, that is why I never start butts in the morning anymore. Now I always
start my butts at night and do an over-night smoke. I usually throw the
butt(s) in the smoker around 6/7/8 pm, then it usually takes an hour or two
to get the smoker to settle down where it will maintain a pretty constant
210-220, and then it's off to bed to let the smoker do it's thing. I get up
around 8 am or so to check internal temps. By this time, the first butt
(closer to the heat source) is usually around 165/170 F internal temp and
nearing the home stretch. I take the butts to 195 before pulling them from
the smoker, then it's foiled, toweled, and into the cooler for a couple
hours until it's time to eat. When doing a single butt, they are always
done by noon. When doing two butts, the second usually takes an additional
couple of hours to hit 195. By starting them at night, and smoking
over-night, they are usually ready for lunch and/or dinner the next day.
I've always had the same problem as you when starting them in the morning, I
never managed to get them done in time for dinner that same day. By
starting them the night before I have the option of having them for lunch OR
dinner. (usually both)

I agree that butts are terribly forgiving when it comes to cooking temps.
Cooked low and slow or at much higher temps, it usually doesn't matter a
whole lot. I also agree that on long smokes like these, its best to let the
smoker cook how it wants to cook rather than trying to constantly fight it,
the butt doesn't seem to mind.

I've also found my maverick smoker thermometer to be invaluable during these
long smokes.

Matt

"Karen C." > wrote in message
...
> "kilikini" > wrote in message
> ...
>> IMO, I'd say, the less you lift the lid on the smoker, the
> better off you
>> are. We don't usually baste, so maybe someone else can jump in
> here.
>
> Yeah, that would just make for longer cooking time--which was
> plenty long, as it was (15-3/4 hours). But I'm thinking I'm
> missing something and that's the reason for the tough bark.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Karen C.
>
>
Karen, I baste my butts with apple juice if I have some on hand, if not, I
don't worry about it. But I only do it a couple times, once every couple
hours at most. Before smoking, I slather my butts with some plain mustard
before adding the rub. The reason I use the mustard is because it allows me
to put more rub on the butt and it holds the rub in place better than
without it. I like a thick bark on my butts, and the mustard allows me to
put the rub on thick. You don't taste any of the mustard in the final
product, it's there only to get more rub to adhere, at least thats what I
use it for.

As far as chopping the bark, I do that too, but I usually leave it on the
side when serving. I take the whole butt, remove most of the bark and then
chop it seperately, and then put it in it's own small bowl. I then pull the
rest of the butt, leaving in a little bit of the bark for good measure.
When serving, I just place the small bowl of chopped bark next to the pulled
pork. If guests like their BBQ a bit hotter, they have the option of adding
a bit of spicy bark to their pork, if they don't like it as hot, then they
can go without the bark. This seems to keep everyone happy.

Matt

kilikini wrote:
> Karen C. wrote:
>> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> Should I be basting with apple juice throughout the smoke?
>>
>> Karen C.
>
> IMO, I'd say, the less you lift the lid on the smoker, the better off you
> are.

Amen.

> We don't usually baste, so maybe someone else can jump in here.

Basting the meat doesn't do a thing for the interior, it just
affects the outside (at most). Basting with apple juice might
add a little sweetness to the outside of the bark but that's it.
I'm a big believer in closing the lid and leaving the meat alone
until it's time to check for done-ness; for a butt, I use remote
thermometer and take the meat off when it's around 185-190.

For ribs (pork ribs, if anyone has to ask), I keep an eye on the
cooker temp and know to check baby backs around 3.5 hours and spares
around 5.5 hours if the temperature is running where it normally
does.

Dana

On Sep 4, 7:41 pm, "Karen C." > wrote:
> "Dan" <intrceptor@gmaildotcom> wrote in message

> > The consensus is that when cooking pork butts or beef
> > brisket the smoke only penetrates the meat during the first
>
> hour or so.
>
> I do recall reading that someone in the group had said the meat
> will only take on smoke the first hour. But then I wondered how
> that could be, considering people have said you can over smoke if
> you're not careful.
>

Well, first couple of hours not just the first one is the normal
concensus. But as to your question on how meat can be oversmoked?

What I've observed is that the smoke will condense and leave a layer
directly on the meat itself. I'm pretty sure that it's this
condensation is what most people refer to when they say something was
oversmoked.

Karen C. wrote:

>
> "frohe" > wrote in message
> ...
> > DoItBest Hardware sells Royal Oak at its stores. If the local
> store does
> > carry it for some reason, they can order it in for ya.
> >
> > Visit http://doitbest.com/StoreLocator.dib to find a store near
> you.
>
> They didn't even know what Royal Oak Lump was when I dropped in
> for it about a month ago.

Just go to the web site and look up the SKU number. Then call the store
of choice and they will probably order it for you.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Karen C. wrote:

> "kilikini" > wrote in message
> ...
> > We always chop up the bark into the meat. It helps make the
> bark moister
> > and adds more smoke flavor to the whole thing. Another bonus
> is that mixing
> > it in makes the bark less tough. I'm not a big bark fan,
> either, but this
> > way I find it totally edible.
>
> Thanks! I'll give that a try. I think I'd like it--if I could
> just chew it <g>. I really do like the bark with my brisket.
>
> Should I be basting with apple juice throughout the smoke?

I use a WSM with Minion Method for butts, and I'm really in the minimal
fussing class. I just wander out now and then to check the temps of the
rig and meat, and throw in more smokewood as needed.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Karen C. wrote:
> "frohe" > wrote in message
> ...
>> DoItBest Hardware sells Royal Oak at its stores. If the local
> store does
>> carry it for some reason, they can order it in for ya.
>>
>> Visit http://doitbest.com/StoreLocator.dib to find a store near
> you.
>
> They didn't even know what Royal Oak Lump was when I dropped in
> for it about a month ago. I've got a few other places to check
> when I can get out to the other side of town, so I'll look there
> before I special order.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Karen C.
>
>

I order Wicked Good Weekend Warrior Blend from wickedgoodcharcoal.com.
I used to get the Competition Blend but they don't offer it anymore.
The WWB is easier to light and I don't notice any difference in taste.
It has a good rating on nakedwhiz.com and it burns for a long time at a
pretty consistent temperature.

Dan

"Default User" > wrote in message
...
> Just go to the web site and look up the SKU number. Then call
the store
> of choice and they will probably order it for you.

Good thinking. That would definitely beat wasting time going all
over town.

Thanks!

Karen C.

"Dan" <intrceptor@gmaildotcom> wrote in message
.. .
> I order Wicked Good Weekend Warrior Blend from
wickedgoodcharcoal.com.
> I used to get the Competition Blend but they don't offer it
anymore.
> The WWB is easier to light and I don't notice any difference in
taste.
> It has a good rating on nakedwhiz.com and it burns for a long
time at a
> pretty consistent temperature.

Sounds like the way to go! Thanks!

Karen C.

"Denny Wheeler" > wrote in
message ...
> Is there a Wal-mart around? They regularly carry Royal Oak
lump
> ("natural hardwood charcoal" is a more well-known term, I
suspect) and
> probably would order some for you.

Yes, there is. I'll take a look and see what they have. Thanks!

Karen C.

"Tutall" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Well, first couple of hours not just the first one is the
normal
> concensus. But as to your question on how meat can be
oversmoked?
>
> What I've observed is that the smoke will condense and leave a
layer
> directly on the meat itself. I'm pretty sure that it's this
> condensation is what most people refer to when they say
something was
> oversmoked.

It did seem as if the inside of the meat had a good smoky flavor
to it, too, but that may be just because I included a bit of the
bark in the mix.

I think our challenge is going to be that DH likes things a lot
smokier than DH or I do. I only used a small portion of the bark
when I pulled the pork (because the rest of it was tough), but DH
saved the discarded bark for himself. It was waaaaaaay to smoky
smelling for my taste, but . . .

Karen C.