I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
needs to be well done.

(BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
fahrenheit.)

Thanks.

On Dec 23, 4:54*am, pulck > wrote:
> I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
> getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
> needs to be well done.
>
> (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
> fahrenheit.)
>
> Thanks.

Maybe cut off a section off of each end partway through roasting, and
put those pieces in a separate baking dish, and continue to bake.
That way, civilized folks won't have to suffer because of the lowest
common denominator. I realize that it's probably too late to change
your plans, but knowing your in-laws' horrible attitude toward beef,
why aren't you cooking a turkey, or other fowl instead?

--Bryan

"pulck" > wrote in message
...
> I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
> getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
> needs to be well done.
>
> (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
> fahrenheit.)
>
> Thanks.


Cook till the internal temp reaches 120, that will give you very well done
side and a medium rare (more medium than rare) middle. If the sides are not
done enough when cut, simply put them back in the oven for a few minutes.
But frankly anyone who likes meat that well done is missing out on what a
prime rib has to offer. I would cook to 115 internal temperature, then
allow to rest. Remember that the meat will keep on cooking for about 30
minutes so you want it's internal temperature to be about 15 degrees less
than the target temperature. Do not pierce the meat after taking it from
the oven use tongs or your rubber gloved hands. Cover with foil and let
rest. You want the meat juices to pull back into the meat not seep out. If
you like rare meat, pull at 110, then expect to cut the ends and re-cook
them after the resting period.

Cooking times vary. I use the 450 (250C) for 20 minutes then 15 minutes per
pound (sorry, convert to kilo - you have to do something here) at 325F
(165C) for remainder. I make a kosher salt and pepper crust which needs to
be well browned in the oven.

That is the way it is done in restaurants.

Paul

If there are also people that will want something other than "well
done", I would do it normally and then cut off slices for them and put
those back in the hot oven on a tray to colour.

Seems a waste of a rib.

Steve

pulck wrote:
> I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
> getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
> needs to be well done.
>
> (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
> fahrenheit.)
>
> Thanks.

On 23 Dec, 13:04, jay > wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:54:45 -0800 (PST), pulck wrote:
> > I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> > in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
> > getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
> > needs to be well done.
>
> > (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
> > fahrenheit.)
>
> > Thanks.
>
> Get a large roast and leave the center rare. Give them the end cuts. Well
> done roast beef is awful.
>
> Jay

Thanks for all the replies. Very helpful.

Just to defend myself: I'm not hosting Xmas dinner. We've been invited
round to my in-laws who are doing a turkey and everyone else is
bringing something to the dinner. We suggested roast beef. They said
great, but we're not keen on rare beef. I thought slow-cooking it
might make up for the toughness you normally get with over-cooked
beef, but most recipes I've seen - e.g. http://ochef.com/907.htm -
only cater for rare or medium beef.

Anyway, I think the suggestion is good that if the beef is slightly
too rare for them, they can put some cuts back in the oven.

On 23 Dec, 13:04, jay > wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:54:45 -0800 (PST), pulck wrote:
> > I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> > in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
> > getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
> > needs to be well done.
>
> > (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
> > fahrenheit.)
>
> > Thanks.
>
> Get a large roast and leave the center rare. Give them the end cuts. Well
> done roast beef is awful.
>
> Jay

Thanks for all the replies. Very helpful.

Just to defend myself: I'm not hosting Xmas dinner. We've been invited
round to my in-laws who are doing a turkey and everyone else is
bringing something to the dinner. We suggested roast beef. They said
great, but we're not keen on rare beef. I thought slow-cooking it
might make up for the toughness you normally get with over-cooked
beef, but most recipes I've seen - e.g. http://ochef.com/907.htm -
only cater for rare or medium beef.

Anyway, I think the suggestion is good that if the beef is slightly
too rare for them, they can put some cuts back in the oven.

On Dec 23, 5:54*am, pulck > wrote:
> I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> in-laws will not eat anything bloody

Be sure to let your roast "set" for twenty minutes...

Being in the oven is no fun. The high heat, in addition to browning
the outside of the meat (and thereby generating most of the flavor)
also pushes the juices in the meat this way and that. When the meat
comes out of the oven, it continues to cook as the heat in the outer
portions of the meat continues to work its way towards the cooler
center of the roast.

At the same time, as the heat evens out in the meat (and as it begins
to cool), the pressure in the meat diminishes and the fibers are able
to hold more water. So the juices in the meat distribute themselves
more evenly as the roast rests, providing you with more or less evenly
juicy bites, instead of some bites moist and some bites dry.

By the same token, once the roast has rested, you want to use a very
sharp knife to carve it. A dull knife will exert a lot more pressure
and will squeeze those lovely redistributed juices out of the roast
just as if you had squeezed a sponge.

"pulck" > wrote in message
...
> I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
> getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
> needs to be well done.
>
> (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
> fahrenheit.)
>
> Thanks.

You'll get your requested time-and-temp answers but might I suggest my
son-in-law's solution: do two roasts, starting one earlier than the other
for the well-done crowd.

When my husband had his first encounter with my mother's well-done roast, he
almost wept.

Felice

"pulck" > wrote in message
>
> (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
> fahrenheit.)
>
> Thanks.

Sorry, but our ovens here us Fahrenheit style fuel and there is no way to
convert it.

pulck wrote:
> I'd like to try slow roasting a rib of beef for Christmas day, but the
> in-laws will not eat anything bloody. Is there a sure-fire way of
> getting this right? And is this the best way to do a roast beef if it
> needs to be well done.

Simplest way is to have your butcher slice off steaks and let them fry/
broil them to theri liking themselves. Or simply serve your TIAD in-
laws fried bologna sandwiches.

SHELDON

> TBH, I'd take that as a hint of "thanks but no thanks" and wouldn't
> waste beef on them.

Not true. I've made well-done roast beef (as requested) for them
before and they loved it. Some people just don't like rare beef... I
don't understand this either. In fact, I bet if you did a survey
across England, most people would ask for their beef well-done or
medium, not rare (and I find most restaurants in England think "rare"
means "medium").

Fact is, we offered other choices, but they still wanted well-done
beef. Yes, perhaps it is a waste of a beef joint, but this is why I
thought slow roasting it might make a well-done (read "tough") piece
of beef a bit more tender. I even considered doing a pot roast, but I
haven't done one before and didn't want to chance it on Xmas day.

We live 5 mins away, so I'm planning to take the joint out of the oven
just as we leave. That should give it something like the right amount
of time - or perhaps a bit extra - to relax before carving.

Smoked Scottish salmon sounds like a very nice idea, though. If I
lived local to a decent producer I would do likewise.

pulck wrote:

> Fact is, we offered other choices, but they still wanted well-done
> beef. Yes, perhaps it is a waste of a beef joint, but this is why I
> thought slow roasting it might make a well-done (read "tough") piece
> of beef a bit more tender. I even considered doing a pot roast, but I
> haven't done one before and didn't want to chance it on Xmas day.
>
> We live 5 mins away, so I'm planning to take the joint out of the oven
> just as we leave. That should give it something like the right amount
> of time - or perhaps a bit extra - to relax before carving.

Slow roasting a tender cut like a rib roast will risk toughening it up. Just
roast it like you normally would. When you take the roast from the oven,
remove it from the pan and wrap in a couple of layers of foil, followed by
wraps of newspaper, then wraps of toweling. Place it into a picnic cooler
and it will stay nice and warm for the trip.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 11:42:24 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
> wrote:

>Cooking times vary. I use the 450 (250C) for 20 minutes then 15 minutes per
>pound (sorry, convert to kilo - you have to do something here) at 325F
>(165C) for remainder.

The rfc website has a unit converter.
http://www.recfoodcooking.com/cvtunits.html

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:28:43 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"pulck" > wrote in message
>>
>> (BTW I'm in the UK, so centigrade temperatures would be preferable to
>> fahrenheit.)
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>Sorry, but our ovens here us Fahrenheit style fuel and there is no way to
>convert it.
>
use the rfc website.... which pluck can do too.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

In article
>,
pulck > wrote:

> Just to defend myself: I'm not hosting Xmas dinner. We've been invited
> round to my in-laws who are doing a turkey and everyone else is
> bringing something to the dinner. We suggested roast beef. They said
> great, but we're not keen on rare beef. I thought slow-cooking it
> might make up for the toughness you normally get with over-cooked
> beef, but most recipes I've seen - e.g. http://ochef.com/907.htm -
> only cater for rare or medium beef.
>
> Anyway, I think the suggestion is good that if the beef is slightly
> too rare for them, they can put some cuts back in the oven.

Looking at this another way, get a far cheaper cut of beef, say a rolled
roast and slow cook the hell out of it. Rolled roasts make pretty decent
pot roasts. Get a fatty one. They don't look as cheap as a chuck roast
if that matters.

leo

On Dec 23, 7:49�pm, Leonard Blaisdell >
wrote:
> In article
> >,
>
> �pulck > wrote:
> > Just to defend myself: I'm not hosting Xmas dinner. We've been invited
> > round to my in-laws who are doing a turkey and everyone else is
> > bringing something to the dinner. We suggested roast beef. They said
> > great, but we're not keen on rare beef. I thought slow-cooking it
> > might make up for the toughness you normally get with over-cooked
> > beef, but most recipes I've seen - e.g.http://ochef.com/907.htm-
> > only cater for rare or medium beef.
>
> > Anyway, I think the suggestion is good that if the beef is slightly
> > too rare for them, they can put some cuts back in the oven.
>
> Looking at this another way, get a far cheaper cut of beef, say a rolled
> roast and slow cook the hell out of it. Rolled roasts make pretty decent
> pot roasts. Get a fatty one. They don't look as cheap as a chuck roast
> if that matters.

Unless you state which cut "rolled roast" is meaningless.... and it
could very well be chuck... could also be flank, or round, or rib, or
skirt, or sirloin, or...

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:49:45 -0800, Leonard Blaisdell
> wrote:

>Looking at this another way, get a far cheaper cut of beef, say a rolled
>roast and slow cook the hell out of it. Rolled roasts make pretty decent
>pot roasts. Get a fatty one. They don't look as cheap as a chuck roast
>if that matters.

I don't think we get rolled roasts around here... but don't denigrate
chuck roasts, they are pretty damned good.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

In article
>,
Sheldon > wrote:

> Unless you state which cut "rolled roast" is meaningless.... and it
> could very well be chuck... could also be flank, or round, or rib, or
> skirt, or sirloin, or...

Good point, but fine. Use a tougher piece of meat than a standing rib.
The rolled roasts around here are usually sirloin or round. Sorry about
the too general description.
Use cheaper beef that can stand up to long moist baking or braising.

leo

In article >, sf wrote:

> I don't think we get rolled roasts around here... but don't denigrate
> chuck roasts, they are pretty damned good.

How am I going to get myself out of this one? I always choose chuck for
pot roast. Almost always. Top sirloin is grand too. I love pot roast.
But presenting the in-laws with a chuck pot roast instead of a prime rib
is like me presenting you with a zircon instead of a diamond. I'd prefer
presenting an industrial grade diamond and pawning it off as special. A
slow cooked sirloin roast might do that. I'm getting myself in deeper,
aren't I?

leo

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:25:08 -0800, Leonard Blaisdell
> wrote:

>In article >, sf wrote:
>
>> I don't think we get rolled roasts around here... but don't denigrate
>> chuck roasts, they are pretty damned good.
>
>How am I going to get myself out of this one? I always choose chuck for
>pot roast. Almost always. Top sirloin is grand too. I love pot roast.
>But presenting the in-laws with a chuck pot roast instead of a prime rib
>is like me presenting you with a zircon instead of a diamond. I'd prefer
>presenting an industrial grade diamond and pawning it off as special. A
>slow cooked sirloin roast might do that. I'm getting myself in deeper,
>aren't I?
>
LOLOL! Make it a rump roast, Leo.... not sirloin.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first