Here's how I do it using an electric smoker. Better than 90% of the BBQ
joints around here.


1 Boston butt pork roast 5-6 lbs (weight not critical), skin removed.

Rub:

8 TB light brown sugar
3 TB salt
1 TB chili powder
1 tsp each black pepper, cayenne pepper, Old Bay seasoning
1/2 tsp each thyme, onion powder, cinnamon

Wood:

3 or 4 chunks hickory wood soaked in water overnight.

Combine rub ingredients and pat/rub all over the pork roast. Wrap in
foil and refrigerate overnight.

I use a Brinkman electric water smoker. Fill the pan 2/3 with water and
place the rack on the lower position, just above the water pan. Plug in
(outdoors of course) and let heat for 30 minutes. Meanwhile take the
pork out of the fridge, remove foil, and let warm to room temp while the
smoker heats. Place pork on the smoker rack and cover the smoker. Use
the side door to place a wood chunk on the bottom. You want it near (an
inch or so) but not actually touching the electric element. In half an
hour or so you will see wisps of white smoke escaping around the edges
of the smoker lid. The idea is to have the wood smoulder but never
flame. When the wood is gone replace with another piece. For strongest
smoky flavor keep the smoke coming for the full cooking period. For a
lighter smoke flavor you can stop the smoke halfway thru.

These electric smokers are pretty good at maintaining the correct temp,
around 260-280. Do not open to peek too often! Cook for 8 hours. Remove
pork and re-wrap in the foil. Place in a baking pan and in a 300 degree
oven for 1-2 hours. Remove from oven and let sit, wrapped, for 1 hour
before pulling.

Sauce:

1 qt apple cider vinegar
1 scant cup ketchup
2/3c packed brown sugar
1 tsp garlic powder
1 TB salt
1 TB crushed red pepper
1 tsp ground black pepper
1/8 tsp ground cloves

Combine in a small saucepan and heat until sugar and salt are dissolved.
Mix some with meat after pulling and pass the remainder at the table.


--
Peter Aitken

Peter A wrote:
> Here's how I do it using an electric smoker. Better than 90% of the BBQ
> joints around here.
>
>
> 1 Boston butt pork roast 5-6 lbs (weight not critical), skin removed.
>
> Rub:
>
> 8 TB light brown sugar
> 3 TB salt
> 1 TB chili powder
> 1 tsp each black pepper, cayenne pepper, Old Bay seasoning
> 1/2 tsp each thyme, onion powder, cinnamon
>
> Wood:
>
> 3 or 4 chunks hickory wood soaked in water overnight.
>
> Combine rub ingredients and pat/rub all over the pork roast. Wrap in
> foil and refrigerate overnight.
>
> I use a Brinkman electric water smoker. Fill the pan 2/3 with water and
> place the rack on the lower position, just above the water pan. Plug in
> (outdoors of course) and let heat for 30 minutes. Meanwhile take the
> pork out of the fridge, remove foil, and let warm to room temp while the
> smoker heats. Place pork on the smoker rack and cover the smoker. Use
> the side door to place a wood chunk on the bottom. You want it near (an
> inch or so) but not actually touching the electric element. In half an
> hour or so you will see wisps of white smoke escaping around the edges
> of the smoker lid. The idea is to have the wood smoulder but never
> flame. When the wood is gone replace with another piece. For strongest
> smoky flavor keep the smoke coming for the full cooking period. For a
> lighter smoke flavor you can stop the smoke halfway thru.
>
> These electric smokers are pretty good at maintaining the correct temp,
> around 260-280. Do not open to peek too often! Cook for 8 hours. Remove
> pork and re-wrap in the foil. Place in a baking pan and in a 300 degree
> oven for 1-2 hours. Remove from oven and let sit, wrapped, for 1 hour
> before pulling.
>
> Sauce:
>
> 1 qt apple cider vinegar
> 1 scant cup ketchup
> 2/3c packed brown sugar
> 1 tsp garlic powder
> 1 TB salt
> 1 TB crushed red pepper
> 1 tsp ground black pepper
> 1/8 tsp ground cloves
>
> Combine in a small saucepan and heat until sugar and salt are dissolved.
> Mix some with meat after pulling and pass the remainder at the table.
>
>
Why do you pull all the skin off? I would think you would lose all that natural
flavor and juice.

Chris
Eastern NC

jay wrote:
> On Tue, 1 May 2007 17:18:41 -0400, Peter A wrote:
>
>> Remove
>> pork and re-wrap in the foil. Place in a baking pan and in a 300
>> degree oven for 1-2 hours. Remove from oven and let sit, wrapped,
>> for 1 hour before pulling.
>
> Why don't you just leave it on the smoker for a couple hours longer?
> The smoker is 280F and the oven is 300F. Seems like unnecessary
> steps with extra cleanup involved.

'Cause he don't know 'Q from his ass.

--
"So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
Dave
www.davebbq.com

In article >,
says...
> > Remove
> > pork and re-wrap in the foil. Place in a baking pan and in a 300 degree
> > oven for 1-2 hours. Remove from oven and let sit, wrapped, for 1 hour
> > before pulling.
>
> Why don't you just leave it on the smoker for a couple hours longer? The
> smoker is 280F and the oven is 300F. Seems like unnecessary steps with
> extra cleanup involved.
>
> jay
>

The first time I tried this the mosquitoes came out in force after 8
hours, so I did not want to go outside any more. It works, that's what's
important. No extra clean up because the pork is wrapped in foil while
in the oven - a different environment from the smoker which may affect
the taste.

--
Peter Aitken

In article >,
says...
> > The first time I tried this the mosquitoes came out in force after 8
> > hours, so I did not want to go outside any more. It works, that's what's
> > important. No extra clean up because the pork is wrapped in foil while
> > in the oven - a different environment from the smoker which may affect
> > the taste.
>
> Ok..I liked the flavors/ingredients in the sauce that you posted. I have
> cooked a lot of pork but I have never done "pulled" pork. 1QT of vinegar
> sounds like a lot in relation to the portions of the other ingredients.
> Was that correct at 1QT? Is it really sour? I am going to give this a
> try. Thanks..
>
> jay
>

North Carolina has 2 BBQ traditions, eastern which has a vinegar/hot
pepper based sauce, and western which is tomato based. I live in the
middle of the state so invented this hybrid. With the sugar, it ends up
being more of a sweet-sour taste.

But you are right - a quart of vinegar sounds like a lot. I wonder if I
wrote it down wrong. I'd try with 1 cup and see how it tastes, please
let me know.

--
Peter Aitken

Peter A wrote:
> Here's how I do it using an electric smoker. Better than 90% of the BBQ
> joints around here.
>
>
> 1 Boston butt pork roast 5-6 lbs (weight not critical), skin removed.
>
> Rub:
>
> 8 TB light brown sugar
> 3 TB salt
> 1 TB chili powder
> 1 tsp each black pepper, cayenne pepper, Old Bay seasoning
> 1/2 tsp each thyme, onion powder, cinnamon
>
> Wood:
>
> 3 or 4 chunks hickory wood soaked in water overnight.
>
> Combine rub ingredients and pat/rub all over the pork roast. Wrap in
> foil and refrigerate overnight.
>
> I use a Brinkman electric water smoker. Fill the pan 2/3 with water and
> place the rack on the lower position, just above the water pan. Plug in
> (outdoors of course) and let heat for 30 minutes. Meanwhile take the
> pork out of the fridge, remove foil, and let warm to room temp while the
> smoker heats. Place pork on the smoker rack and cover the smoker. Use
> the side door to place a wood chunk on the bottom. You want it near (an
> inch or so) but not actually touching the electric element. In half an
> hour or so you will see wisps of white smoke escaping around the edges
> of the smoker lid. The idea is to have the wood smoulder but never
> flame. When the wood is gone replace with another piece. For strongest
> smoky flavor keep the smoke coming for the full cooking period. For a
> lighter smoke flavor you can stop the smoke halfway thru.
>
> These electric smokers are pretty good at maintaining the correct temp,
> around 260-280. Do not open to peek too often! Cook for 8 hours. Remove
> pork and re-wrap in the foil. Place in a baking pan and in a 300 degree
> oven for 1-2 hours. Remove from oven and let sit, wrapped, for 1 hour
> before pulling.
>
> Sauce:
>
> 1 qt apple cider vinegar
> 1 scant cup ketchup
> 2/3c packed brown sugar
> 1 tsp garlic powder
> 1 TB salt
> 1 TB crushed red pepper
> 1 tsp ground black pepper
> 1/8 tsp ground cloves
>
> Combine in a small saucepan and heat until sugar and salt are dissolved.
> Mix some with meat after pulling and pass the remainder at the table.
>
>

This sounds fantastic Peter...I've got no smoker though.

--
"I'm thinking that if this dilemma grows any more horns, I'm going to
shoot it and put it up on the wall."

- Harry Dresden

In article >, ost
says...
> You really need to take the temp of the pork butt to know when
> it's done. You can't rely on time alone. Two pork butts, of the
> same weight will never take the same amount of time to cook (maybe
> if they're from the same pig).
>
> For pulled pork, the butt needs to get to 190F-195F internally.
>

Crapola. You obviously do not understand the process of slow cooking,
which is very different from cooking meat, such as a rib roast, that is
inherently tender. Slow cooking, such as for stews, requires that the
meat be kept at cooking temp for a long period so the collagen in the
meat breaks down making it tender. Bringing the butt to a certain temp
is not enough - it's cooking it for long enough that is the key.

--
Peter Aitken

Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 07:03:48 +0200, ravenlynne wrote:
>
>> This sounds fantastic Peter...I've got no smoker though.
>
> I don't recommend the electric Brinkman, but you can get the
> wood-fired Brinkman Gourmet for under $45 at a Home Depot or
> Lowe's. It doubles as a small grill, too.
>
> -sw

Wonder if they'll ship here. Not a whole lot of those in Italy.

--
"All of those faeries and duels and mad queens and so on, and no one
quoted old Billy Shakespeare. Not even once."
- Harry Dresden

Steve Wertz wrote:

> On Wed, 2 May 2007 11:40:24 -0400, Peter A wrote:
>
> > In article >, ost
> > says...
> >> You really need to take the temp of the pork butt to know when
> >> it's done. You can't rely on time alone. Two pork butts, of the
> >> same weight will never take the same amount of time to cook (maybe
> >> if they're from the same pig).
> >>
> >> For pulled pork, the butt needs to get to 190F-195F internally.
> >
> > Crapola. You obviously do not understand the process of slow
> > cooking, which is very different from cooking meat, such as a rib
> > roast, that is inherently tender. Slow cooking, such as for stews,
> > requires that the meat be kept at cooking temp for a long period so
> > the collagen in the meat breaks down making it tender. Bringing the
> > butt to a certain temp is not enough - it's cooking it for long
> > enough that is the key.
>
> Yeah you're right. I've only smoked 700-1,000 lbs of pork at home
> in my life.
>
> Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
> have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
> and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
> can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
> it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
>
> Dave was right. You are in idiot (or whatever choice words he
> said). I suspect he's tried to set you right on this before and
> you still didn't listen.

Temperature is not only the right way, it's the EASY way when you have
probe thermometer.

The only time I've used an oven as part of cooking a butt was my first
time (using the Weber kettle). I wasn't good at setting the temp on
that, and I started too late in the day, so I didn't get it done by the
time I wanted to quit and go to bed. I brought it in and finished in
the oven the next day, not wanting to refire the grill.




Brian

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

> > Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
> > have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
> > and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
> > can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
> > it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
>

Then why have I done it by time, not temperature, dozens of times and it
is always great? And why do you never, and I mean NEVER, see a
thermometer used in the various well-known BBQ joints around here? The
pit bosses would laugh you into the next county if you suggested a
thermometer.

People have been cooking BBQ and other meats by the time/temperature
method for centuries, I suppose they were all wrong too.

Your method may work fine, but so does mine. For you to say it doesn't
just reveals your ignorance.


--
Peter Aitken

Peter A wrote:
>>> Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
>>> have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
>>> and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
>>> can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
>>> it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
>>
>
> Then why have I done it by time, not temperature, dozens of times and
> it is always great? And why do you never, and I mean NEVER, see a
> thermometer used in the various well-known BBQ joints around here? The
> pit bosses would laugh you into the next county if you suggested a
> thermometer.

They go by tenderness and pullability. They grab a bone and twist. Or they
flip the carcass and see how it slides on the rack. Or they take a rack of
ribs and bend 'em to see if they crack. They never go by time alone.

> People have been cooking BBQ and other meats by the time/temperature
> method for centuries, I suppose they were all wrong too.

No, you only *think* people went by time/temperature. They actually went by
when the meat was done. And for several shoulders of the same weight, that
could be a spread of several hours.

> Your method may work fine, but so does mine. For you to say it doesn't
> just reveals your ignorance.

Right. Your method of timed bbq works just fine. <snork>

--
"So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
Dave
www.davebbq.com

In article >, ost
says...
> > People have been cooking BBQ and other meats by the time/temperature
> > method for centuries, I suppose they were all wrong too.
>
> You said temperature...
>

Cooking temperature, you nitwit, not internal temperature. Sheesh, you
and Dave have about 1/2 of a wit between you.

--
Peter Aitken

Peter A wrote:

>
> > > Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
> > > have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
> > > and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
> > > can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
> > > it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
> >
>
> Then why have I done it by time, not temperature, dozens of times and
> it is always great? And why do you never, and I mean NEVER, see a
> thermometer used in the various well-known BBQ joints around here?
> The pit bosses would laugh you into the next county if you suggested
> a thermometer.

Likely true, but you draw wrong conclusion. What those pitmasters will
tell you is, "It's done when it's done." They cook by touch and feel,
and sticking it with a fork. Not by time.

> Your method may work fine, but so does mine. For you to say it
> doesn't just reveals your ignorance.

Nonsense. Strict time on BBQ is folly. Temperature is one way of doing
it quite easily for anybody.



Brian

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

Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Tue, 1 May 2007 17:18:41 -0400, Peter A wrote:
>
>> These electric smokers are pretty good at maintaining the correct
>> temp, around 260-280. Do not open to peek too often! Cook for 8
>> hours. Remove pork and re-wrap in the foil. Place in a baking pan
>> and in a 300 degree oven for 1-2 hours. Remove from oven and let
>> sit, wrapped, for 1 hour before pulling.
>
> You really need to take the temp of the pork butt to know when
> it's done. You can't rely on time alone. Two pork butts, of the
> same weight will never take the same amount of time to cook (maybe
> if they're from the same pig).
>
> For pulled pork, the butt needs to get to 190F-195F internally.
>
> -sw

--
"So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Peter A wrote:
>>> Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
>>> have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
>>> and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
>>> can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
>>> it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
>>
>
> Then why have I done it by time, not temperature, dozens of times and
> it is always great? And why do you never, and I mean NEVER, see a
> thermometer used in the various well-known BBQ joints around here? The
> pit bosses would laugh you into the next county if you suggested a
> thermometer.
>
> People have been cooking BBQ and other meats by the time/temperature
> method for centuries, I suppose they were all wrong too.
>
> Your method may work fine, but so does mine. For you to say it doesn't
> just reveals your ignorance.

--
"So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
Dave
www.davebbq.com

"Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
...
> Peter A wrote:
>>>> Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
>>>> have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
>>>> and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
>>>> can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
>>>> it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
>>>
>>
>> Then why have I done it by time, not temperature, dozens of times and
>> it is always great? And why do you never, and I mean NEVER, see a
>> thermometer used in the various well-known BBQ joints around here? The
>> pit bosses would laugh you into the next county if you suggested a
>> thermometer.
>>
>> People have been cooking BBQ and other meats by the time/temperature
>> method for centuries, I suppose they were all wrong too.
>>
>> Your method may work fine, but so does mine. For you to say it doesn't
>> just reveals your ignorance.
>
> --
> "So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
> Dave
> www.davebbq.com
>

Haven't mastered our newsreader yet, have we?

In article >,
says...
> Likely true, but you draw wrong conclusion. What those pitmasters will
> tell you is, "It's done when it's done." They cook by touch and feel,
> and sticking it with a fork. Not by time.
>
>

You and others seem determined to ignore the central fact in this
debate. My time-based BBQ cooking technique always (that means 100% of
the time) produces tender, moist, flavorful pulled pork that is better
than what I can get at 90% of the many BBQ joints here in central North
Carolina. And, please don't pull up the feeble-minded argument that I
don't know good BBQ, given where I live and my love of BBQ.

I am done with this thread.


--
Peter Aitken

"Peter A" > wrote in message


> I am done with this thread.
>
>

Admitting defeat?

Good. You know nothing about BBQ.

BOB

cybercat wrote:
> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Peter A wrote:
>>>>> Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
>>>>> have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
>>>>> and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
>>>>> can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
>>>>> it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then why have I done it by time, not temperature, dozens of times
>>> and it is always great? And why do you never, and I mean NEVER, see
>>> a thermometer used in the various well-known BBQ joints around
>>> here? The pit bosses would laugh you into the next county if you
>>> suggested a thermometer.
>>>
>>> People have been cooking BBQ and other meats by the time/temperature
>>> method for centuries, I suppose they were all wrong too.
>>>
>>> Your method may work fine, but so does mine. For you to say it
>>> doesn't just reveals your ignorance.
>>
>> --
>> "So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
>> Dave
>> www.davebbq.com
>>
>
> Haven't mastered our newsreader yet, have we?

Yeah, sure, that's what it is.

--
"So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Steve Wertz wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2 May 2007 19:55:22 -0400, cybercat wrote:
>
> > "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Peter A wrote:
> >>>>> Note where I said, "You can't rely on time alone". Yes, you do
> >>>>> have to cook it slow for BBQ, but you can cook it at 350-375,
> >>>>> and it will still be pullable when it reaches 190.. But in no way
> >>>>> can you say "cook a pork butt [for pulled pork] for 7 hours and
> >>>>> it'll be done.", which simply is not true.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Then why have I done it by time, not temperature, dozens of times and
> >>> it is always great? And why do you never, and I mean NEVER, see a
> >>> thermometer used in the various well-known BBQ joints around here? The
> >>> pit bosses would laugh you into the next county if you suggested a
> >>> thermometer.
> >>>
> >>> People have been cooking BBQ and other meats by the time/temperature
> >>> method for centuries, I suppose they were all wrong too.
> >>>
> >>> Your method may work fine, but so does mine. For you to say it doesn't
> >>> just reveals your ignorance.
> >>
> >> --
> >> "So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
> >> Dave
> >> www.davebbq.com
> >>
> >
> > Haven't mastered our newsreader yet, have we?
>
> I looks like Dave is throwing him the wolves at
> alt.food.barbecue: Where the *real* pros and people who actually
> want to learn the secrets to good BBQ hang out.
>
> -sw

I'm afraid I haven't seen much bbq content on a.f.b in a couple years...
Used to be good when I first looked at it mid '04, but not any more.

On Thu, 03 May 2007 02:25:50 GMT, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>I'm afraid I haven't seen much bbq content on a.f.b in a couple years...
>Used to be good when I first looked at it mid '04, but not any more.

Play to their strengths. Ask 'em how they feel about black people.

Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Thu, 03 May 2007 09:01:22 -0600, Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 03 May 2007 02:25:50 GMT, "Pete C." >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm afraid I haven't seen much bbq content on a.f.b in a couple
>>> years... Used to be good when I first looked at it mid '04, but not
>>> any more.
>>
>> Play to their strengths. Ask 'em how they feel about black people.
>
> Oops. I must have smelled him creeping towards us.

Pungent, ain't he?

--
"So long, so long, and thanks for all the fish!"
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Steve Wertz wrote:
>
> On Thu, 03 May 2007 02:25:50 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
>
> > I'm afraid I haven't seen much bbq content on a.f.b in a couple years...
> > Used to be good when I first looked at it mid '04, but not any more.
>
> That's funny. I see dozens of threads int he last couple months
> regarding BBQ.

Perhaps my SNET/SBC/ATT/Whoever-the-hell-they-are-this-month news server
has issues since I don't recall seeing that level of activity.

> Are you sure your reading alt.food.barbecue and
> not alt.food.barbeque?

Yep.

>
> There were a few bad months when we had KSW crying, whining, and
> trolling all the time, but things are getting better.

I hope things are getting better, they were good when I first looked at
the group. Getting back into 'Q season now, down to one foodsaver pack
of brisket in the freezer left from my last 'Q run. Going to have to do
another big batch soon, was very nice having the freezer stocked over
the winter.

Pete C.

On Thu, 03 May 2007 09:01:22 -0600, Kevin S. Wilson >
wrote:

>On Thu, 03 May 2007 02:25:50 GMT, "Pete C." >
>wrote:
>
>>I'm afraid I haven't seen much bbq content on a.f.b in a couple years...
>>Used to be good when I first looked at it mid '04, but not any more.
>
>Play to their strengths. Ask 'em how they feel about black people.

i thought with a vinegar-based sauce laced with red pepper flakes?

your pal,
blake

"Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
...
>
> Pungent, ain't he?

AKA, "aue de kibology".

Funny aroma.

Graeme