I have three problems with my newly purchased 18.5" WSM.

1. The water pan is too deep vertically, almost eight inches deep. When it's
in place over the charcoal it dips down and you can't see and therefore
service the charcoal on the back side. It would have been so easy for them
to creat a water pan with a flat bottom, as on the 22.5 WSM. I'm surprised
that according to Weber service I'm the first to complain about this. If
you've thoughts, let me know.

2. This is a fundamental problem I have with most charcoal bullet smokers
that rely on the water pan to sustain a temp. of 250F, or whatever you wish
for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of charcoall is burned and
basically wasted heating water to the simmer to maintain the temp.

3. There are no handles on the smoker body. If you have to lift the body out
to add charcoal for a very long smoke it's difficult. That would be helped
greatly with handles attached to the sides of the body.

If I had it to do again I'd strongly consider purchasing either an offset
smoker, or a gas smoker. My wife won't allow the offset in our patio.

Kent
--
,constantly struggling with my level of ignorance

On 2010-02-27, Kent > wrote:


> for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of charcoall is burned and
> basically wasted heating water to the simmer to maintain the temp.

Use hot water in the first place. Quicker to heat water on stove than
with pricey charcoal. Sand is an alternative. Heat in oven.

nb

notbob wrote:
> On 2010-02-27, Kent > wrote:
>
>
>> for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of charcoall is burned and
>> basically wasted heating water to the simmer to maintain the temp.
>
> Use hot water in the first place. Quicker to heat water on stove than
> with pricey charcoal. Sand is an alternative. Heat in oven.
>
> nb

Charcoal is pretty cheap. I use sand and don't worry about it. I usually
use the minion method and really don't have much of an issue with it

As for handles, I agree which is why I mounted handles on mine - very
simple 5 minute job drill to holes and you're done.

I wanted thermometers too so I put one at each grate level - again -
five minutes - two holes - done.

http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL413.../103771621.jpg

--
Steve

"Steve Calvin" > wrote in message
...
> notbob wrote:
>> On 2010-02-27, Kent > wrote:
>>
>>
>>> for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of charcoall is burned
>>> and basically wasted heating water to the simmer to maintain the temp.
>>
>> Use hot water in the first place. Quicker to heat water on stove than
>> with pricey charcoal. Sand is an alternative. Heat in oven.
>>
>> nb
>
> Charcoal is pretty cheap. I use sand and don't worry about it. I usually
> use the minion method and really don't have much of an issue with it
>
> As for handles, I agree which is why I mounted handles on mine - very
> simple 5 minute job drill to holes and you're done.

Garage door handles fit on the existing holes and screws for the racks. No
drilling required. Just measure and get the right garage door handles. I
bought longer screws, and mine are stainless steel.
>
> I wanted thermometers too so I put one at each grate level - again - five
> minutes - two holes - done.
>
> http://pic50.picturetrail.com/VOL413.../103771621.jpg
>
> --
> Steve

Kent wrote:

> 2. This is a fundamental problem I have with most charcoal bullet smokers
> that rely on the water pan to sustain a temp. of 250F, or whatever you wish
> for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of charcoall is burned and
> basically wasted heating water to the simmer to maintain the temp.
>

Don't use water. Use sand with hd foil over the top to keep it
clean.

> 3. There are no handles on the smoker body. If you have to lift the body out
> to add charcoal for a very long smoke it's difficult. That would be helped
> greatly with handles attached to the sides of the body.
>

Agreed

--
Mort

"Mort" > wrote in message
...
> Kent wrote:
>
>> 2. This is a fundamental problem I have with most charcoal bullet smokers
>> that rely on the water pan to sustain a temp. of 250F, or whatever you
>> wish for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of charcoall is
>> burned and basically wasted heating water to the simmer to maintain the
>> temp.
>>
>
> Don't use water. Use sand with hd foil over the top to keep it
> clean.
>
>> 3. There are no handles on the smoker body. If you have to lift the body
>> out to add charcoal for a very long smoke it's difficult. That would be
>> helped greatly with handles attached to the sides of the body.
>>
>
> Agreed
>
> --
> Mort
>
>
Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds mass, which
must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get hotter than you want
it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant temp, will maintain a
constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand would. It will certainly slow
the temp. rise, though it should get hotter and hotter with time.

Kent

"Kent" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mort" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Kent wrote:
>>
>>> 2. This is a fundamental problem I have with most charcoal bullet
>>> smokers that rely on the water pan to sustain a temp. of 250F, or
>>> whatever you wish for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of
>>> charcoall is burned and basically wasted heating water to the simmer to
>>> maintain the temp.
>>>
>>
>> Don't use water. Use sand with hd foil over the top to keep it
>> clean.
>>
>>> 3. There are no handles on the smoker body. If you have to lift the body
>>> out to add charcoal for a very long smoke it's difficult. That would be
>>> helped greatly with handles attached to the sides of the body.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed
>>
>> --
>> Mort
>>
>>
> Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds mass,
> which must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get hotter than
> you want it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant temp, will
> maintain a constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand would. It will
> certainly slow the temp. rise, though it should get hotter and hotter with
> time.
>
> Kent
>
>
Try it and see. Using your logic, you could NEVER get the temperature over
212 if you are using water in the pan. Oh, and using your logic, thousands
of WSM users are all wrong, and have been doing it wrong for many, many
years.

-sw

"Kelvin" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Kent" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Mort" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Kent wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2. This is a fundamental problem I have with most charcoal bullet
>>>> smokers that rely on the water pan to sustain a temp. of 250F, or
>>>> whatever you wish for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of
>>>> charcoall is burned and basically wasted heating water to the simmer to
>>>> maintain the temp.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't use water. Use sand with hd foil over the top to keep it
>>> clean.
>>>
>>>> 3. There are no handles on the smoker body. If you have to lift the
>>>> body out to add charcoal for a very long smoke it's difficult. That
>>>> would be helped greatly with handles attached to the sides of the body.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mort
>>>
>>>
>> Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds mass,
>> which must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get hotter than
>> you want it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant temp, will
>> maintain a constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand would. It will
>> certainly slow the temp. rise, though it should get hotter and hotter
>> with time.
>>
>> Kent
>>
>>
> Try it and see. Using your logic, you could NEVER get the temperature
> over 212 if you are using water in the pan. Oh, and using your logic,
> thousands of WSM users are all wrong, and have been doing it wrong for
> many, many years.
>
> -sw
>
Not true. The charcoal is just like a burner on your stove. The temperature
of the burner is always hotter than the water simmering. More heat than the
just the water heat goes to the food being smoked especially because
everything, including the charcoal burner is covered in an enclosed space.

Kent

"Kent" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Kelvin" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Kent" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Mort" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Kent wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 2. This is a fundamental problem I have with most charcoal bullet
>>>>> smokers that rely on the water pan to sustain a temp. of 250F, or
>>>>> whatever you wish for low temperature smoking. I think an awful lot of
>>>>> charcoall is burned and basically wasted heating water to the simmer
>>>>> to maintain the temp.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Don't use water. Use sand with hd foil over the top to keep it
>>>> clean.
>>>>
>>>>> 3. There are no handles on the smoker body. If you have to lift the
>>>>> body out to add charcoal for a very long smoke it's difficult. That
>>>>> would be helped greatly with handles attached to the sides of the
>>>>> body.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Agreed
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Mort
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds mass,
>>> which must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get hotter than
>>> you want it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant temp, will
>>> maintain a constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand would. It will
>>> certainly slow the temp. rise, though it should get hotter and hotter
>>> with time.
>>>
>>> Kent
>>>
>>>
>> Try it and see. Using your logic, you could NEVER get the temperature
>> over 212 if you are using water in the pan. Oh, and using your logic,
>> thousands of WSM users are all wrong, and have been doing it wrong for
>> many, many years.
>>
>> -sw
>>
> Not true. The charcoal is just like a burner on your stove. The
> temperature of the burner is always hotter than the water simmering. More
> heat than the just the water heat goes to the food being smoked especially
> because everything, including the charcoal burner is covered in an
> enclosed space.
>
> Kent
>
KENT! TRY IT AND ****ING SEE!

You sure are the most anal person in the history of Usenet.

Forget "your" ****ing theories, and try something without analyzing it to
death. Wake up and take a walk in the real world. Maybe your brain was
affected by all of that chicken that you brined in your
backyard/carport/garage.

-sw

On 2010-02-28, Kent > wrote:

> Not true. The charcoal is just like a burner on your stove.

Maybe in your parallel universe. In mine, charcoal is insanely
expensive, propane is not.

nb

Kelvin wrote:

> Try it and see. Using your logic, you could NEVER get the temperature over
> 212 if you are using water in the pan. Oh, and using your logic, thousands
> of WSM users are all wrong, and have been doing it wrong for many, many
> years.
>
> -sw

You're getting better but I would have added more personal insults.
-sw's don't come *that* easy.

-sw

Kent wrote:

> Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds mass, which
> must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get hotter than you want
> it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant temp, will maintain a
> constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand would. It will certainly slow
> the temp. rise, though it should get hotter and hotter with time.

There is a particular way it will "control" the temp,
though control might not be exactly the right word.

Mainly, it will dampen temp swings. This makes fire control
a simpler matter and much more forgiving. This is good. We
like not having to constantly fiddle with the rig.

Just as a datapoint, the thing you'll be asked
should you call Cookshack, Bradley, etc and report a
"thermostat" problem is for a full enumeration of what's
been in the oven. If you're only cooking a few small items,
i.e. the total mass of stuff in the oven is low, they'll tell
you to put more stuff in. It doesn't matter what, anything
will do. More food, pan o water, rocks, it don't matter.

Greater mass "helps" the thermostat coordinate when to
pump in more heat and the result is a much more steady
and predictable average oven temp within a tighter temp
range. The same effect occurs when you substitute the
thermostat with human judgment.

--
Mort

"Mort" > wrote in message
...
> Kent wrote:
>
>> Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds mass,
>> which must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get hotter than
>> you want it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant temp, will
>> maintain a constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand would. It will
>> certainly slow the temp. rise, though it should get hotter and hotter
>> with time.
>
> There is a particular way it will "control" the temp,
> though control might not be exactly the right word.
>
> Mainly, it will dampen temp swings. This makes fire control
> a simpler matter and much more forgiving. This is good. We
> like not having to constantly fiddle with the rig.
>
> Just as a datapoint, the thing you'll be asked
> should you call Cookshack, Bradley, etc and report a
> "thermostat" problem is for a full enumeration of what's
> been in the oven. If you're only cooking a few small items,
> i.e. the total mass of stuff in the oven is low, they'll tell
> you to put more stuff in. It doesn't matter what, anything
> will do. More food, pan o water, rocks, it don't matter.
>
> Greater mass "helps" the thermostat coordinate when to
> pump in more heat and the result is a much more steady
> and predictable average oven temp within a tighter temp
> range. The same effect occurs when you substitute the
> thermostat with human judgment.
>
> --
> Mort
>
>
I think you've made very good points As you point out, a stable temp,.
provided by the increased mass is going to give you a more stable temp. Have
you done this in the WSM for a long, 8 hrs or so, cook? I'm going to find a
clay pot to replace the water pan, or at least sit in it. It should act
somewhat like a pizza stone.

Thanks for your thoughts,

Kent

Kent wrote:

> I think you've made very good points As you point out, a stable temp,.
> provided by the increased mass is going to give you a more stable temp. Have
> you done this in the WSM for a long, 8 hrs or so, cook? I'm going to find a
> clay pot to replace the water pan, or at least sit in it. It should act
> somewhat like a pizza stone.

Typical Kunt Style. Get good advice, then try something completely
off-the-wall different. Rinse and repeat every 3 years.

-sw

On 2/27/2010 7:09 PM, Kent wrote:
snip
> Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds mass, which
> must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get hotter than you want
> it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant temp, will maintain a
> constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand would. It will certainly slow
> the temp. rise, though it should get hotter and hotter with time.
>
> Kent
I don't use hot water nor sand, I did this instead, but do suggest
wrapping it in foil to help keep it clean, it does come apart and can go
in a dishwasher,

http://sites.google.com/site/theprac...ouble-drip-pan

--
regards, mike
piedmont, The Practical BBQ'r
http://sites.google.com/site/thepracticalbbqr/
(mawil55)

Kent wrote:

> Does the sand really control temp for a long time? The sand adds
> mass, which must heat up slowly. At some point the sand has to get
> hotter than you want it to. Water, at a constant simmer at a constant
> temp, will maintain a constant smoking temp. I can't see how sand
> would. It will certainly slow the temp. rise, though it should get
> hotter and hotter with time.

Why does a kamado work so successfully? Or why does an offset pit made of
thicker steel work better than one of a thinner guage (everything else being
equal?).

Temp is controlled by vent and chimney opening. Temperature recovery and
swings are controlled by mass. The WSM with sand in the water pan has been
discussed, like, forever on AFB and on the Virtual Bullet. People like it.
I've done it and my bbq sessions typically last 12-14 hours with it.
Together with the 'minion method' of loading charcoal, I've never had to do
a fuel re-load.

I suggest that you review the google-group archives for the huge number of
past discussions that have been conducted here on those things about the WSM
that are new to you. Perhaps go to the Virtual Bullet site and do the same.
It may seem to you that this is all new stuff, and possibly
contradictory..... butbelieve me, it only SEEMS that way.

--
Dave
What is best in life? "To crush your enemies, see them driven before
you, and to hear the lamentation of the women." -- Conan

Kent wrote:

> had it to do again I'd strongly consider purchasing either an offset
> smoker, or a gas smoker. My wife won't allow the offset in our patio.

Seeing an offset on the patio, that would certainly confirm what the
neighbors always suspected: inbreeding.

-sw