Cook's illustrated has had two articles in the past year about the low
temp[225F] roasting of steaks and roasts, with or without browning after.
The results were so good with a low temp. Standing Rib Roast that I thought
I'd post my results.
We had a small 5.5 lb 2 rib roast from the short end, probably ribs 8 & 9.
After salting I slathered the cut sides with a very fine film of rendered
bacon fat. I roasted it, bone in, fat side up, at 225F for 45 minutes per
pound, or just over 4 hours, to an internal temp of just over 120F. Then it
went into a warm oven at about 150F for 30 minutes while we made the
Yorkshire pudding.

The result was pink rare meat from edge to edge, the best we've ever had.
The cut end, even with this low temp. had a slight surface crust or "char",
and the meat was rare immediately underneath. I have the feeling that bacon
fat contributes in some fashion to low temp. browning.

The only negative component was that the fat did not render as well as you
want it to, I'm sure because the oven just wasn't hot enough to melt beef
fat. Next time I'll trim much more fat than I would have in the past, and
render that separately to make the Yorkshire pudding.

A bottle of 1977 Chambolle Musigny with the roast reached to higher powers.

Theron

On 2009-02-03, Theron > wrote:
> Cook's illustrated has had two articles in the past year about the low
> temp[225F] roasting......
>
> The result was pink rare meat from edge to edge.....

Old news in rfc, but thanx for bringing it up for the benefit of the new
folks. Glad you had a good roast.

nb

"Theron" > wrote in message
>
> The only negative component was that the fat did not render as well as you
> want it to, I'm sure because the oven just wasn't hot enough to melt beef
> fat. Next time I'll trim much more fat than I would have in the past, and
> render that separately to make the Yorkshire pudding.

That is a problem with cooking on the cooler side to a rare state. More
heat either at beginning or end would help, but then you'd have the more
well done outer ring . Depends on how much you're willing to compromise.

On Mon, 2 Feb 2009 21:42:31 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote:
>
>"Theron" > wrote in message
>>
>> The only negative component was that the fat did not render as well as you
>> want it to, I'm sure because the oven just wasn't hot enough to melt beef
>> fat. Next time I'll trim much more fat than I would have in the past, and
>> render that separately to make the Yorkshire pudding.
>
>That is a problem with cooking on the cooler side to a rare state. More
>heat either at beginning or end would help, but then you'd have the more
>well done outer ring . Depends on how much you're willing to compromise.
>
Personally, I can't imagine anyone who is so picky they couldn't eat a
ring of "better done" meat. I like experiencing all the stages of
doneness.

Weren't the chateaubriands of old cooked between two other pieces of
meat to make them perfectly rare all the way through? Maybe he needs
to try that method.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Theron" > wrote in message
>>
>> The only negative component was that the fat did not render as well as
>> you want it to, I'm sure because the oven just wasn't hot enough to melt
>> beef fat. Next time I'll trim much more fat than I would have in the
>> past, and render that separately to make the Yorkshire pudding.
>
> That is a problem with cooking on the cooler side to a rare state. More
> heat either at beginning or end would help, but then you'd have the more
> well done outer ring . Depends on how much you're willing to compromise.
>
I was expecting to compromise in some fashion when I started. I was
concerned about cool cooking, especially with a +$50 rib roast. I was very
surprised to see a nice brown, though thin "char" on the surface of both cut
ends when the temp rose above 120F, along with a nice rare texture
immediately underneath. It turned out better than any standing rib roast we
have ever done. The only thing I would do differently the next time is to
trim more external fat, not the fat on the surface, just the fat on the
bottom and the ends. I don't think the high temp. beginning or end,
especially for a standing rib roast, does anything.

Theron



Theron

"Theron" > wrote in message
> . I don't think the high temp. beginning or end, especially for a standing
> rib roast, does anything.
>
> Theron

They why is it discussed here at least three times a year with staunch
advocated for each method? And why then, did you not to it if it makes no
difference?

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> "Theron" > wrote in message
> > . I don't think the high temp. beginning or end, especially for a standing
> > rib roast, does anything.
> >
> > Theron
>
> They why is it discussed here at least three times a year with staunch
> advocated for each method? And why then, did you not to it if it makes no
> difference?

Yes, and having used the high temp to start method recently myself, I
can confirm that it definitely does something, and not just set off my
smoke detector.

Theron > wrote:

> A bottle of 1977 Chambolle Musigny with the roast reached to higher powers.

Is this a typo, perhaps? Maybe 1997? 2007?

Burgundy wines are generally not very long-lived and 1977 was not a
great vintage, anyway. The best Chambolle is light and nearly ethereal
- and even shorter-lived than other Burgundies. Even Leroy did not
produce Chambolle which would have been worth cellaring for long that
year. Many wines unfortunately taste diluted. I do not even think that
any Chambolle-Musigny from 1978, a truly great vintage, would be still
drinkable, let alone enjoyable, now. I would hesitate to try any of the
more robust wines from that vintage now even from the likes of producers
or merchants traditionally aiming for long-lived wines, such as DRC,
Doudet-Naudin, or Remoissenet.

Victor
"Not all the Dukes of waterish Burgundy shall take this unprized,
precious maid from me."

"Victor Sack" > wrote in message
...
> Theron > wrote:
>
>> A bottle of 1977 Chambolle Musigny with the roast reached to higher
>> powers.
>
> Is this a typo, perhaps? Maybe 1997? 2007?
>
> Burgundy wines are generally not very long-lived and 1977 was not a
> great vintage, anyway. The best Chambolle is light and nearly ethereal
> - and even shorter-lived than other Burgundies. Even Leroy did not
> produce Chambolle which would have been worth cellaring for long that
> year. Many wines unfortunately taste diluted. I do not even think that
> any Chambolle-Musigny from 1978, a truly great vintage, would be still
> drinkable, let alone enjoyable, now. I would hesitate to try any of the
> more robust wines from that vintage now even from the likes of producers
> or merchants traditionally aiming for long-lived wines, such as DRC,
> Doudet-Naudin, or Remoissenet.
>
> Victor
>
>
It was my last bottle of 1977 Chambolle Musigny and it was excellent. The
bottle has been thrown, so I can't tell you who the producer was. There was
almost no ullage. The cork was in great shape. The wine had that soft
velvety taste, with excellent fruit, and just the right degree of acidity.
I wish I had more, but alas!

Theron

Theron > wrote:

> The result was pink rare meat from edge to edge, the best we've ever had.
> The cut end, even with this low temp. had a slight surface crust or "char",
> and the meat was rare immediately underneath.

I've been promoting this method here for years, like I said. It's
how all the competent steak houses cook whole prime rib roasts.
I do mine at 250F and get the same result - but I use a high heat at
first to blister the fat and it makes for a better render.

-sw

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> Theron > wrote:
>
> > The result was pink rare meat from edge to edge, the best we've ever had.
> > The cut end, even with this low temp. had a slight surface crust or "char",
> > and the meat was rare immediately underneath.
>
> I've been promoting this method here for years, like I said. It's
> how all the competent steak houses cook whole prime rib roasts.
> I do mine at 250F and get the same result - but I use a high heat at
> first to blister the fat and it makes for a better render.
>
> -sw

How long do you use the high heat at first? A curious mind wants to
know

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice

Sky > wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>> Theron > wrote:
>>
>>> The result was pink rare meat from edge to edge, the best we've ever had.
>>> The cut end, even with this low temp. had a slight surface crust or "char",
>>> and the meat was rare immediately underneath.
>>
>> I've been promoting this method here for years, like I said. It's
>> how all the competent steak houses cook whole prime rib roasts.
>> I do mine at 250F and get the same result - but I use a high heat at
>> first to blister the fat and it makes for a better render.
>
> How long do you use the high heat at first? A curious mind wants to
> know

15-20 minutes. It barely permeates the meat. It just gives it a
good crust and helps loosen the fat cap.

-=sw

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> Sky > wrote:
>
> > Sqwertz wrote:
> >>
> >> Theron > wrote:
> >>
> >>> The result was pink rare meat from edge to edge, the best we've ever had.
> >>> The cut end, even with this low temp. had a slight surface crust or "char",
> >>> and the meat was rare immediately underneath.
> >>
> >> I've been promoting this method here for years, like I said. It's
> >> how all the competent steak houses cook whole prime rib roasts.
> >> I do mine at 250F and get the same result - but I use a high heat at
> >> first to blister the fat and it makes for a better render.
> >
> > How long do you use the high heat at first? A curious mind wants to
> > know
>
> 15-20 minutes. It barely permeates the meat. It just gives it a
> good crust and helps loosen the fat cap.
>
> -=sw

Thanks. That makes sense. It's about what I'd do too, but I rarely get
a chance to buy a standing rib roast (sigh). I even saw one at the
store tonight, and I was sorely tempted

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice

"Sky" > wrote in message
...
> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>> Sky > wrote:
>>
>> > Sqwertz wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Theron > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> The result was pink rare meat from edge to edge, the best we've ever
>> >>> had.
>> >>> The cut end, even with this low temp. had a slight surface crust or
>> >>> "char",
>> >>> and the meat was rare immediately underneath.
>> >>
>> >> I've been promoting this method here for years, like I said. It's
>> >> how all the competent steak houses cook whole prime rib roasts.
>> >> I do mine at 250F and get the same result - but I use a high heat at
>> >> first to blister the fat and it makes for a better render.
>> >
>> > How long do you use the high heat at first? A curious mind wants to
>> > know
>>
>> 15-20 minutes. It barely permeates the meat. It just gives it a
>> good crust and helps loosen the fat cap.
>>
>> -=sw
>
> Thanks. That makes sense. It's about what I'd do too, but I rarely get
> a chance to buy a standing rib roast (sigh). I even saw one at the
> store tonight, and I was sorely tempted
>
> Sky
>
>
If you start at a high temp, 425F +/- and ten minutes later turn the heat
down, it takes a long time, I'd guess at least an hour, before the oven
temp.drops 250F or lower. What surprised me about this is that a temp of
225F from beginning to end[meat temp of 122F] left a nice char on the cut
ends of the standing rib roast. As well, 225F was plenty hot enough to do
the job. I think 250F is a bit high.

Theron