I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.

Any input would be appreciated.

Joe

Under cooked. Gummy chicken, while edible, is kinda nasty.

Chicken can often take a little more temp than you think, especially if the skin is left on.

Where were you taking your temp reading? 325 for 5 hours should have left you a "fallin' off the bone" chicken. However, 8 lbs. is a HUGE chicken, so while it might have been up to spec (by the book), it probably could have used more time. I'll bet a 5 pound chicken would have been well done.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

See ya!

-Banjo

P.S: Sorry for the top-post (some folks are REALLY touchy about this), but my newsreader is wierd.
"Joe Rizzo" > wrote in message ...
I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.

Any input would be appreciated.

Joe

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:44:06 GMT, "Banjo" >
wrote:

>P.S: Sorry for the top-post (some folks are REALLY touchy about this), but my newsreader is wierd.

It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?

Download and install QuoteFix if you insist on reading Usenet with
Outlook Express.

http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
"Anything, when cooked in large enough batches, will be vile."
--Dag Right-square-bracket-gren, in alt.religion.kibology

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:44:06 GMT, "Banjo" >
> wrote:
>
>> P.S: Sorry for the top-post (some folks are REALLY touchy about
>> this), but my newsreader is wierd.
>
> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>
> Download and install QuoteFix if you insist on reading Usenet with
> Outlook Express.
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

Cool!

>
> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>
Beg pardon? I don't speak snide. And you should be ashamed to do so.

I think it had something to do with his HTML that confused me. I TRIED to
bottom-post, but it kept looking like part of the original message. So I
top-posted, and apologised for it.

Sorry if that wasn't good enough for you.





"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:44:06 GMT, "Banjo" >
> wrote:
>
> >P.S: Sorry for the top-post (some folks are REALLY touchy about this),
but my newsreader is wierd.
>
> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>
> Download and install QuoteFix if you insist on reading Usenet with
> Outlook Express.
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
>
> --
> Kevin S. Wilson
> Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
> "Anything, when cooked in large enough batches, will be vile."
> --Dag Right-square-bracket-gren, in alt.religion.kibology

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:39:13 -0500, "Banjo"
> wrote:

>>
>> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>>
>Beg pardon? I don't speak snide. And you should be ashamed to do so.

Trust me when I say that I'm just filled with shame and bitter
self-recrimination right now.

>I think it had something to do with his HTML that confused me. I TRIED to
>bottom-post, but it kept looking like part of the original message. So I
>top-posted, and apologised for it.

You "apologized" by saying "my newsreader is weird," even though you
are using what is arguably the most common newsreader on Usenet. I
pointed you to software that offers a solution to your inability to
use OE correctly. Other software exists, as well. It's called "A Real
Newsreader."

>Sorry if that wasn't good enough for you.
>
That's okay. You can try harder next time.

BTW, is your delete key b0rken, too, or is there some other reason you
quoted all of the post at the bottom of your follow-up?

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
"Anything, when cooked in large enough batches, will be vile."
--Dag Right-square-bracket-gren, in alt.religion.kibology

You win!

http://www.clint.ca/argue/argue.jpg

You win!

http://www.clint.ca/argue/argue.jpg

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:39:13 -0500, "Banjo"
> wrote:

>>
>> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>>
>Beg pardon? I don't speak snide. And you should be ashamed to do so.

Trust me when I say that I'm just filled with shame and bitter
self-recrimination right now.

>I think it had something to do with his HTML that confused me. I TRIED to
>bottom-post, but it kept looking like part of the original message. So I
>top-posted, and apologised for it.

You "apologized" by saying "my newsreader is weird," even though you
are using what is arguably the most common newsreader on Usenet. I
pointed you to software that offers a solution to your inability to
use OE correctly. Other software exists, as well. It's called "A Real
Newsreader."

>Sorry if that wasn't good enough for you.
>
That's okay. You can try harder next time.

BTW, is your delete key b0rken, too, or is there some other reason you
quoted all of the post at the bottom of your follow-up?

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
"Anything, when cooked in large enough batches, will be vile."
--Dag Right-square-bracket-gren, in alt.religion.kibology

"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:44:06 GMT, "Banjo" >
> wrote:
>
> >P.S: Sorry for the top-post (some folks are REALLY touchy about this), but
my newsreader is wierd.
>
> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>
> Download and install QuoteFix if you insist on reading Usenet with
> Outlook Express.
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

There's an option in OE to put the cursor either at the top or bottom when doing
a Reply Group.

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:44:06 GMT, "Banjo" >
> wrote:
>
>> P.S: Sorry for the top-post (some folks are REALLY touchy about
>> this), but my newsreader is wierd.
>
> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>
> Download and install QuoteFix if you insist on reading Usenet with
> Outlook Express.
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

Cool!

"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:44:06 GMT, "Banjo" >
> wrote:
>
> >P.S: Sorry for the top-post (some folks are REALLY touchy about this), but
my newsreader is wierd.
>
> It somehow manages to disable your cursor keys?
>
> Download and install QuoteFix if you insist on reading Usenet with
> Outlook Express.
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

There's an option in OE to put the cursor either at the top or bottom when doing
a Reply Group.

Sounds way overcooked. Cook chicken to 160° in the thickest part of the thigh, not touching bone, or in the breast touching bone. Or, when you can shake hands easily with a leg.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Louis Cohen
Living la vida loca at N37° 43' 7.9" W122° 8' 42.8"


"Joe Rizzo" > wrote in message ...
I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.

Any input would be appreciated.

Joe

I think an 8lb Chicken qualifies as a roaster, and is probably too big.
They tend to be tougher than a boot.

Joe Rizzo wrote:

> I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5
> hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like
> chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to
> the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting
> upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Joe

Frank Mancuso wrote:
> I think an 8lb Chicken qualifies as a roaster, and is probably too
> big. They tend to be tougher than a boot.



Bingo!


TFM®

"TFM®" > wrote in message
. ..
> Frank Mancuso wrote:
> > I think an 8lb Chicken qualifies as a roaster, and is probably too
> > big. They tend to be tougher than a boot.
>
>
>
> Bingo!
>
>
> TFM®

Eggzactly. The one exception to a low n slow cook for poultry and a brine would
help. But then again, maybe not.

"TFM®" > wrote in message
. ..
> Frank Mancuso wrote:
> > I think an 8lb Chicken qualifies as a roaster, and is probably too
> > big. They tend to be tougher than a boot.
>
>
>
> Bingo!
>
>
> TFM®

Eggzactly. The one exception to a low n slow cook for poultry and a brine would
help. But then again, maybe not.

Frank Mancuso wrote:
> I think an 8lb Chicken qualifies as a roaster, and is probably too
> big. They tend to be tougher than a boot.



Bingo!


TFM®

Joe Rizzo wrote:
> I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about
> 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was
> like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing
> I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it
> roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Joe


It was a hen, not a chicken


TFM®

Yes, it was labeled a roasting hen.
Should I not use them? I figured the way I was cooking it, I was roasting
it.
Joe
"TFM®" > wrote in message
. ..
> Joe Rizzo wrote:
> > I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about
> > 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was
> > like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing
> > I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it
> > roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
> >
> > Any input would be appreciated.
> >
> > Joe
>
>
> It was a hen, not a chicken
>
>
> TFM®
>
>

Yes, it was labeled a roasting hen.
Should I not use them? I figured the way I was cooking it, I was roasting
it.
Joe
"TFM®" > wrote in message
. ..
> Joe Rizzo wrote:
> > I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about
> > 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was
> > like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing
> > I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it
> > roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
> >
> > Any input would be appreciated.
> >
> > Joe
>
>
> It was a hen, not a chicken
>
>
> TFM®
>
>

Joe Rizzo wrote:
> I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5
> hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like
> chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to
> the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting
> upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.

Please lose the HTML.

If, as others have suggested, you bought a stewing hen instead of a
roaster, that would be the problem. If it was a roasting chicken, I'd
wager it was also very dry. I usually roast an 8# roaster for 2 1/2 to 3
hours at that temperature. When I smoke them at 250-275 they take
between 6 and seven hours. Smoked, they are never rubbery (except the
skin) and IME, never dry.

Matthew

Matt:
How is that without HTML
The bird was not dry at all. In fact it was pretty moist. I thought it
would be done in 4 hrs, but I kept it cooking until the internal temp was
180. I wonder if the farmer had this chicken on steroids?

What is the difference between a stewing hen and a roasting hen?
I thought chicken was chicken.

Joe


"Matthew L. Martin" > wrote in message
...
> Joe Rizzo wrote:
> > I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5
> > hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like
> > chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to
> > the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting
> > upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
> >
> > Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Please lose the HTML.
>
> If, as others have suggested, you bought a stewing hen instead of a
> roaster, that would be the problem. If it was a roasting chicken, I'd
> wager it was also very dry. I usually roast an 8# roaster for 2 1/2 to 3
> hours at that temperature. When I smoke them at 250-275 they take
> between 6 and seven hours. Smoked, they are never rubbery (except the
> skin) and IME, never dry.
>
> Matthew
>

Joe Rizzo wrote:

> Matt:
> How is that without HTML

Much better. Thanks.

> The bird was not dry at all. In fact it was pretty moist. I thought it
> would be done in 4 hrs, but I kept it cooking until the internal temp was
> 180. I wonder if the farmer had this chicken on steroids?

I've seen modern roasters dressed for sale up to ~9#. One does have to
wonder.

> What is the difference between a stewing hen and a roasting hen?
> I thought chicken was chicken.
>

A stewing hen or fowl is an older bird, recently retired from egg
laying. A roasting chicken is a young bird, either a hen or a rooster.

Matthew

"Matthew L. Martin" > wrote in message
...
> Joe Rizzo wrote:
>
> > Matt:
> > How is that without HTML
>
> Much better. Thanks.
>
> > The bird was not dry at all. In fact it was pretty moist. I thought it
> > would be done in 4 hrs, but I kept it cooking until the internal temp
was
> > 180. I wonder if the farmer had this chicken on steroids?
>
> I've seen modern roasters dressed for sale up to ~9#. One does have to
> wonder.
>
> > What is the difference between a stewing hen and a roasting hen?
> > I thought chicken was chicken.
> >
>
> A stewing hen or fowl is an older bird, recently retired from egg
> laying. A roasting chicken is a young bird, either a hen or a rooster.
>
> Matthew
>
>

The stewing hen that Matthew refers to are known as boiling fowl in the UK,
and with good reason as they are fit for no other use.

We mainly use them for soup stock, but after boiling for an hour or so, the
meat does become moist and tender and can be added to different dishes. I
shudder to think what would happen if you tried smoking or roasting one of
those birds. Probably turn out foul.

Graeme

"Matthew L. Martin" > wrote in message
...
> Joe Rizzo wrote:
>
> > Matt:
> > How is that without HTML
>
> Much better. Thanks.
>
> > The bird was not dry at all. In fact it was pretty moist. I thought it
> > would be done in 4 hrs, but I kept it cooking until the internal temp
was
> > 180. I wonder if the farmer had this chicken on steroids?
>
> I've seen modern roasters dressed for sale up to ~9#. One does have to
> wonder.
>
> > What is the difference between a stewing hen and a roasting hen?
> > I thought chicken was chicken.
> >
>
> A stewing hen or fowl is an older bird, recently retired from egg
> laying. A roasting chicken is a young bird, either a hen or a rooster.
>
> Matthew
>
>

The stewing hen that Matthew refers to are known as boiling fowl in the UK,
and with good reason as they are fit for no other use.

We mainly use them for soup stock, but after boiling for an hour or so, the
meat does become moist and tender and can be added to different dishes. I
shudder to think what would happen if you tried smoking or roasting one of
those birds. Probably turn out foul.

Graeme

Joe Rizzo wrote:

> Matt:
> How is that without HTML

Much better. Thanks.

> The bird was not dry at all. In fact it was pretty moist. I thought it
> would be done in 4 hrs, but I kept it cooking until the internal temp was
> 180. I wonder if the farmer had this chicken on steroids?

I've seen modern roasters dressed for sale up to ~9#. One does have to
wonder.

> What is the difference between a stewing hen and a roasting hen?
> I thought chicken was chicken.
>

A stewing hen or fowl is an older bird, recently retired from egg
laying. A roasting chicken is a young bird, either a hen or a rooster.

Matthew

Ya know, I replied on topic, made an apology for my faux pas, and generally try to be a contributor to this group. However, some would rather play nanny and beat a dead horse than just let it go.

I am sure I could string those guys along for a while, but I tire of them.

I wonder how many other good BBQ guys they have run off with thier holier-than-thou attitutude, and thier stick in the ass adherence to a "standard" that really don't mean shit.

See ya?

I don't think so.

-Banjo

Banjo wrote:

> I am sure I could string those guys along for a while, but I tire of
> them.

Uh, huh

> I wonder how many other good BBQ guys they have run off with thier
> holier-than-thou attitutude,

OTHER good bbq guys? You ain't amonst that group, Bubba.

> and thier stick in the ass adherence to
> a "standard" that really don't mean shit.

That's what all the "stick-up-their-ass" boneheads say.

> See ya?
>
> I don't think so.

Mean it?

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:45:19 GMT, "Banjo" >
wrote:

>Ya know, I replied on topic, made an apology for my faux pas, and generally try to be a contributor to this group. However, some would rather play nanny and beat a dead horse than just let it go.
>
>I am sure I could string those guys along for a while, but I tire of them.
>
>I wonder how many other good BBQ guys they have run off with thier holier-than-thou attitutude, and thier stick in the ass adherence to a "standard" that really don't mean shit.
>
>See ya?
>
>I don't think so.

Sensitive sonofagun, aren't you? BTW, your left eyelid is beginning to
twitch. It's very distracting.

Apparently, you're now going for a hat-trick of annoying Usenet
posting habits, since your line length is set to more than 80
characters and your posts trails behind it a bunch of HTML crap like
so much toilet paper stuck to your foot.

But you already knew that, didn't you, since you did it on purpose.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
"Anything, when cooked in large enough batches, will be vile."
--Dag Right-square-bracket-gren, in alt.religion.kibology

Banjo wrote:

> I am sure I could string those guys along for a while, but I tire of
> them.

Uh, huh

> I wonder how many other good BBQ guys they have run off with thier
> holier-than-thou attitutude,

OTHER good bbq guys? You ain't amonst that group, Bubba.

> and thier stick in the ass adherence to
> a "standard" that really don't mean shit.

That's what all the "stick-up-their-ass" boneheads say.

> See ya?
>
> I don't think so.

Mean it?

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:45:19 GMT, "Banjo" >
wrote:

>Ya know, I replied on topic, made an apology for my faux pas, and generally try to be a contributor to this group. However, some would rather play nanny and beat a dead horse than just let it go.
>
>I am sure I could string those guys along for a while, but I tire of them.
>
>I wonder how many other good BBQ guys they have run off with thier holier-than-thou attitutude, and thier stick in the ass adherence to a "standard" that really don't mean shit.
>
>See ya?
>
>I don't think so.

Sensitive sonofagun, aren't you? BTW, your left eyelid is beginning to
twitch. It's very distracting.

Apparently, you're now going for a hat-trick of annoying Usenet
posting habits, since your line length is set to more than 80
characters and your posts trails behind it a bunch of HTML crap like
so much toilet paper stuck to your foot.

But you already knew that, didn't you, since you did it on purpose.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
"Anything, when cooked in large enough batches, will be vile."
--Dag Right-square-bracket-gren, in alt.religion.kibology

Sooooooo....

Any verdict on the chicken ? Or are we still discussing HTML and TOP
posting...

e-

wrote:

> Sooooooo....
>
> Any verdict on the chicken ? Or are we still discussing HTML and TOP
> posting...
>

There have been a sufficient number of correct posts on the topic of the
original poster. Correction of style and manners is _always_ on topic.

Matthew

wrote:

> Sooooooo....
>
> Any verdict on the chicken ? Or are we still discussing HTML and TOP
> posting...
>

There have been a sufficient number of correct posts on the topic of the
original poster. Correction of style and manners is _always_ on topic.

Matthew

Sounds way overcooked. Cook chicken to 160° in the thickest part of the thigh, not touching bone, or in the breast touching bone. Or, when you can shake hands easily with a leg.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Louis Cohen
Living la vida loca at N37° 43' 7.9" W122° 8' 42.8"


"Joe Rizzo" > wrote in message ...
I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.

Any input would be appreciated.

Joe

Joe Rizzo wrote:
> I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about
> 5 hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was
> like chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing
> I did to the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it
> roasting upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Joe


It was a hen, not a chicken


TFM®

Joe Rizzo wrote:
> I just cooked a 8 lb chicken on a Big Green Egg. Temp 325, for about 5
> hrs. Internal temp of the chicken was 180 degrees. The meat was like
> chewing rubber. What could I have done wrong. The only thing I did to
> the bird was sprinkle some poultry seasoning on and had it roasting
> upright over a can of Bud on a rack.
>
> Any input would be appreciated.

Please lose the HTML.

If, as others have suggested, you bought a stewing hen instead of a
roaster, that would be the problem. If it was a roasting chicken, I'd
wager it was also very dry. I usually roast an 8# roaster for 2 1/2 to 3
hours at that temperature. When I smoke them at 250-275 they take
between 6 and seven hours. Smoked, they are never rubbery (except the
skin) and IME, never dry.

Matthew

Ya know, I replied on topic, made an apology for my faux pas, and generally try to be a contributor to this group. However, some would rather play nanny and beat a dead horse than just let it go.

I am sure I could string those guys along for a while, but I tire of them.

I wonder how many other good BBQ guys they have run off with thier holier-than-thou attitutude, and thier stick in the ass adherence to a "standard" that really don't mean shit.

See ya?

I don't think so.

-Banjo

Sooooooo....

Any verdict on the chicken ? Or are we still discussing HTML and TOP
posting...

e-