Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.

> wrote:

> Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the
> label/cooking directions. The label says "ready to cook",
> so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham that I
> just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
> than planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per
> pound. It's a 12 pound ham. That works out to 300 minutes or
> five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've never had anything
> in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable?

Yes, that's reasonable. Cook it as directed (use an oven thermometer
if you have one). You should be fine. It may well turn
out better than a pre-cooked ham might have.


Steve

On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 05:18:48 +0000 (UTC), (Steve Pope)
wrote:

> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the
>> label/cooking directions. The label says "ready to cook",
>> so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham that I
>> just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
>> than planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per
>> pound. It's a 12 pound ham. That works out to 300 minutes or
>> five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've never had anything
>> in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
>> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable?
>
>Yes, that's reasonable. Cook it as directed (use an oven thermometer
>if you have one). You should be fine. It may well turn
>out better than a pre-cooked ham might have.
>
>
>Steve
Thanks. I actually have a digital probe thermomter I've never used. I can stick
the probe in and watch the temp from outside the stove. Maybe I made the right
decision after all!

wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 05:18:48 +0000 (UTC), (Steve Pope)
> wrote:
>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the
>>> label/cooking directions. The label says "ready to cook",
>>> so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham that I
>>> just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
>>> than planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per
>>> pound. It's a 12 pound ham. That works out to 300 minutes or
>>> five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've never had anything
>>> in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
>>> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable?
>> Yes, that's reasonable. Cook it as directed (use an oven thermometer
>> if you have one). You should be fine. It may well turn
>> out better than a pre-cooked ham might have.
>>
>>
>> Steve
> Thanks. I actually have a digital probe thermomter I've never used. I can stick
> the probe in and watch the temp from outside the stove. Maybe I made the right
> decision after all!

Definitely use the thermometer. Different pieces of meat heat up
differently, and also your oven temperature may be off. Be careful not
to position the probe in direct contact with the bone. Try to get it to
the "middle" of the meat area. I consider it done at 165F.

It is my experience that it will take somewhat less time than 5 hours. I
believe that this is because the packager must put some margin in the
cooking time to allow for low temperature ovens etc.

If it comes up to temperature too quickly (say in 2 1/2 to 3 hours) then
either your thermometer is no good or you've positioned the probe
incorrectly.

HTH,

EJ in NJ

On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, wrote:

>Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
>label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
>that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
>planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
>ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
>never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
>take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
>labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.

If that's a fresh ham, it's not going to taste at all like what you
expected. So, be prepared.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, wrote:

>Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
>label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
>that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
>planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
>ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
>never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
>take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
>labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.

You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
IQ piece of shit douchebag.

On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:43:08 -0500, wrote:

>Thanks. I actually have a digital probe thermomter I've never used. I can stick
>the probe in and watch the temp from outside the stove. Maybe I made the right
>decision after all!

Is this one with a probe on a wire that stays in the meat and a dial
that stays outside the oven? If it's a regular instant read
thermometer, don't leave it in the oven or you'll ruin it.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"brooklyn1" > wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, wrote:
|
| >Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
| >label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
| >that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
| >planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
| >ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
| >never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
| >take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
| >labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.
|
| You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
| IQ piece of shit douchebag.

Sweetie pie forgot his pills again, and on Christmas of all days.
Just think how miserable he must feel to have to spout garbage
like this. It's almost a shame.

pavane

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, wrote:
>
> >Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions.
> >The
> >label says "ready to cook"

> > This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.

> If that's a fresh ham, it's not going to taste at all like what you
> expected. So, be prepared.

Well, if he said it "looks like a cooked ham", it's not likely to be a
"fresh" ham (uncured and unsmoked).

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 14:24:54 -0500, brooklyn1 > wrote:

>On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, wrote:
>
>>Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
>>label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
>>that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
>>planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
>>ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
>>never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
>>take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
>>labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.
>
>You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
>IQ piece of shit douchebag.
>
Well arent' you a real asshole.

Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the a-hole
who needed to know the manufacturer), apparently was cured but needed to be
cooked. It spent five hours in the oven with the probe thermometer monitoring
it. I basted it the last half hour. I had quite a bit of trepidation about how
it was going to come out (for you who wants to know the make of the ham, you'll
probably have to look up trepidation as it has several sylables). But it came
out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be doing it
again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal! Happy
Holidays to all minus one.

In article >,
wrote:

> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
> a-hole
> who needed to know the manufacturer), apparently was cured but needed to be
> cooked. It spent five hours in the oven with the probe thermometer monitoring
> it. I basted it the last half hour. I had quite a bit of trepidation about
> how
> it was going to come out (for you who wants to know the make of the ham,
> you'll
> probably have to look up trepidation as it has several sylables). But it came
> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be doing it
> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal! Happy
> Holidays to all minus one.

Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 14:24:54 -0500, brooklyn1 >
> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, wrote:
>>
>>>Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking
>>>directions. The
>>>label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a
>>>cooked ham
>>>that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
>>>than
>>>planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12
>>>pound
>>>ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to
>>>me. I've
>>>never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked
>>>didn't
>>>take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better
>>>read
>>>labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.
>>>Thanks.
>>
>>You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
>>IQ piece of shit douchebag.
>>
> Well arent' you a real asshole.

He really is.

<rfdjr1@ wrote
> brooklyn1 wrote:

>>You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
>>IQ piece of shit douchebag.
>>
> Well arent' you a real asshole.

Thats just Sheldon at Xmas. You know that kindergarden grade for 'plays
well with others'? He still gets 'progressing towards'.

Hope the ham came out nicely!

<rfdjr1 wrote

> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
> a-hole
> who needed to know the manufacturer), apparently was cured but needed to
> be
> cooked. It spent five hours in the oven with the probe thermometer
> monitoring
> it. I basted it the last half hour. I had quite a bit of trepidation about
> how
> it was going to come out (for you who wants to know the make of the ham,
> you'll
> probably have to look up trepidation as it has several sylables). But it
> came
> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be doing
> it
> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
> Happy

Glad it worked! Don cooked ours 3 hours but it was probably a smaller one
or he used a higher heat. That or it's still a bit rare at the bone (grin).
Thats ok if so as it's been in the fridge and will be chopped down and bits
re-cooked in many meals over the next 2-3 months (frozen and held in 1 cup
or less hunks for use with other meals).

Ours is bone in so we have the lovely bone for the crockpot.

On Dec 24, 11:08*pm, wrote:
> Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
> label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
> that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
> planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
> ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me.. I've
> never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
> labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.

If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
or some semblance thereof.

Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
although many may.

John Kuthe...

"Dan Abel" wrote
> rfdjr1@ wrote:


>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the

(snips)

>> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be
>> doing it
>> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
>> Happy
>> Holidays to all minus one.
>
> Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
> instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
> it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
> never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
> hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
> but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.

Same here Dan. We've found most of the 'pre-cooked' ones have been injected
with all sorts of things (not just a simple salt brine in sensible amounts).
Ham itself in this natural un-cooked state is already 'sweet' tasting with
nothing added. Since it's already as 'sweet' as we want, added injected
sugars and stuff do not suit us.

Definately less price too. The precooked ones ranged all the way up to
2.89/lb. The actually *better* (if you dare to try as the above person
learned how) raw hams were .89/lb with additional money off if a member of
that grocery club. I think it was .59/lb then? Not sure exactly because I
tossed the recipts already. I just remember it was over 11 lbs (11.5?), and
less than 7$ by a bit. I picked the one with the best bone for later use.

Sure, we paid for bone at meat prices. Hehehe we often end up trying to
find bone for just .59/lb anyways (hard to find here in the city). Brand?
Dunno as it had one. Local hog farms likely. Had a warning 'must be
cooked' on the store label and that's all I recall. This one wasnt
pre-brined but we've gotten ones that have been as long as they list that
the brine injection is just salt and water.

Don's usual method is to pre-brine in the fridge for a day or so, using just
water, some salt, a little vinegar and soy sauce. This time I ran late with
the ham shopping so only got it the day before and we didnt bother. He made
a nice ham gravy to go with from the drippings and we let it shine in all
it's simple purity with just that.

I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to me
and the flexibility in what you do with it is higher. If you want to studd
it deep with cloves or star anise, there won't be any competing flavors from
what the 'factory' _thought_ you wanted it pre-flavored with.

John Imbecile Kuthe wrote:
>
>If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already.

Imbecile thinks swine walk about with smoked butts... what a maroon.

"John Kuthe" wrote
rfd...wrote:

>> label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a
>> cooked ham
>> that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
>> than
>> planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12
>> pound
>> ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to
>> me. I've

Ah, there's the size and temp. Missed it before. Yes, he had a bigger ham
and a lower temp.

>> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better
>> read
>> labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.
>> Thanks.

RFD, there are some things that take even longer. A pork shoulder for
example done 'southern style' often goes in at 375 for 30-45 mins, then
reduce temp to 225 for 8 hours or more (size dependant, I know by looking
but there's probably stuff on th web showing how long per lb).

> If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
> or some semblance thereof.
> Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
> although many may.

Sorry John but that isn't true where I am nor apparently Dan. Could be in
your part of the country? Here it is sold as 'ham' based on the cut and if
it hasnt been pre-cooked, has to be labeled something like 'must be cooked
before eating' or some semblance there-of. I will say that they are
normally off to the side a bit since the store probably gets a higher markup
for the pre-cooked ones hence tends to put them more where the eye will see
them first. I had to scrabble around behind the gwaltney's to find the
'good one' we got.

cshenk wrote:

>> Well arent' you a real asshole.
>
> Thats just Sheldon at Xmas. You know that kindergarden grade for 'plays
> well with others'? He still gets 'progressing towards'.

To be fair, Sheldon is (non-practicing) Jewish, so Christmas doesn't hold
any special significance for him.

Bob

> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 14:24:54 -0500, brooklyn1 >
> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, wrote:
>>
>>>Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking
>>>directions. The
>>>label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a
>>>cooked ham
>>>that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
>>>than
>>>planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12
>>>pound
>>>ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to
>>>me. I've
>>>never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked
>>>didn't
>>>take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better
>>>read
>>>labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.
>>>Thanks.
>>
>>You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
>>IQ piece of shit douchebag.
>>
> Well arent' you a real asshole.

I see that you have met sheldon. Whatever you might have lacked in
identifying this ham, you sure make up for in character recognition.

> wrote in message
...
> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
> a-hole
> who needed to know the manufacturer), apparently was cured but needed to
> be
> cooked. It spent five hours in the oven with the probe thermometer
> monitoring
> it. I basted it the last half hour. I had quite a bit of trepidation about
> how
> it was going to come out (for you who wants to know the make of the ham,
> you'll
> probably have to look up trepidation as it has several sylables). But it
> came
> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be doing
> it
> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
> Happy
> Holidays to all minus one.
>
>
Was this a whole or a half? I'm guessing whole if it needed five hours.
Cook's hams are a favorite for us. They are very attractively priced at
SuperWalmarts. Make sure you use the bone and remaining uneaten parts to
make ham stock. Ham stock raises "Scalloped Potatoes with Ham" to a whole
new level.

Kent

"cshenk" > wrote in message
...
> "Dan Abel" wrote
>> rfdjr1@ wrote:
>
>
>>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
>
> (snips)
>
>>> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be
>>> doing it
>>> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
>>> Happy
>>> Holidays to all minus one.
>>
>> Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
>> instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
>> it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
>> never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
>> hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
>> but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.
>
> Same here Dan. We've found most of the 'pre-cooked' ones have been
> injected with all sorts of things (not just a simple salt brine in
> sensible amounts). Ham itself in this natural un-cooked state is already
> 'sweet' tasting with nothing added. Since it's already as 'sweet' as we
> want, added injected sugars and stuff do not suit us.
>
> Definately less price too. The precooked ones ranged all the way up to
> 2.89/lb. The actually *better* (if you dare to try as the above person
> learned how) raw hams were .89/lb with additional money off if a member of
> that grocery club. I think it was .59/lb then? Not sure exactly because
> I tossed the recipts already. I just remember it was over 11 lbs (11.5?),
> and less than 7$ by a bit. I picked the one with the best bone for later
> use.
>
> Sure, we paid for bone at meat prices. Hehehe we often end up trying to
> find bone for just .59/lb anyways (hard to find here in the city). Brand?
> Dunno as it had one. Local hog farms likely. Had a warning 'must be
> cooked' on the store label and that's all I recall. This one wasnt
> pre-brined but we've gotten ones that have been as long as they list that
> the brine injection is just salt and water.
>
> Don's usual method is to pre-brine in the fridge for a day or so, using
> just water, some salt, a little vinegar and soy sauce. This time I ran
> late with the ham shopping so only got it the day before and we didnt
> bother. He made a nice ham gravy to go with from the drippings and we let
> it shine in all it's simple purity with just that.
>
> I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to
> me and the flexibility in what you do with it is higher. If you want to
> studd it deep with cloves or star anise, there won't be any competing
> flavors from what the 'factory' _thought_ you wanted it pre-flavored with.
>
Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked hams.
http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham

"cshenk" > wrote in message
...
> "John Kuthe" wrote
> rfd...wrote:
>
>>> label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a
>>> cooked ham
>>> that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
>>> than
>>> planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12
>>> pound
>>> ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to
>>> me. I've
>
> Ah, there's the size and temp. Missed it before. Yes, he had a bigger
> ham and a lower temp.
>
>>> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better
>>> read
>>> labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.
>>> Thanks.
>
> RFD, there are some things that take even longer. A pork shoulder for
> example done 'southern style' often goes in at 375 for 30-45 mins, then
> reduce temp to 225 for 8 hours or more (size dependant, I know by looking
> but there's probably stuff on th web showing how long per lb).
>
>> If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
>> or some semblance thereof.
>> Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
>> although many may.
>
> Sorry John but that isn't true where I am nor apparently Dan. Could be in
> your part of the country? Here it is sold as 'ham' based on the cut and
> if it hasnt been pre-cooked, has to be labeled something like 'must be
> cooked before eating' or some semblance there-of. I will say that they
> are normally off to the side a bit since the store probably gets a higher
> markup for the pre-cooked ones hence tends to put them more where the eye
> will see them first. I had to scrabble around behind the gwaltney's to
> find the 'good one' we got.
>
>
You should be able to eat the Gwaltney Hams without cooking them. In fact
some do. I may try it. Every time I've tried to cook a dry cured Virginia
ham something didn't work out, and I ended up with a bunch of ham
fragments..

Kent

On Dec 26, 9:10*pm, "Kent" > wrote:
> "cshenk" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > "Dan Abel" wrote
> >> rfdjr1@ wrote:
>
> >>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
>
> > (snips)
>
> >>> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be
> >>> doing it
> >>> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
> >>> Happy
> >>> Holidays to all minus one.
>
> >> Glad you liked it! *A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
> >> instead of a cooked one. *Being that it was a holiday season like now,
> >> it was just ridiculously cheap. *It tasted so much better that we've
> >> never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. *Although the uncooked
> >> hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
> >> but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.
>
> > Same here Dan. *We've found most of the 'pre-cooked' ones have been
> > injected with all sorts of things (not just a simple salt brine in
> > sensible amounts). Ham itself in this natural un-cooked state is already
> > 'sweet' tasting with nothing added. *Since it's already as 'sweet' as we
> > want, added injected sugars and stuff do not suit us.
>
> > Definately less price too. *The precooked ones ranged all the way up to
> > 2.89/lb. *The actually *better* (if you dare to try as the above person
> > learned how) raw hams were .89/lb with additional money off if a member of
> > that grocery club. *I think it was .59/lb then? *Not sure exactly because
> > I tossed the recipts already. *I just remember it was over 11 lbs (11..5?),
> > and less than 7$ by a bit. *I picked the one with the best bone for later
> > use.
>
> > Sure, we paid for bone at meat prices. *Hehehe we often end up trying to
> > find bone for just .59/lb anyways (hard to find here in the city). *Brand?
> > Dunno as it had one. *Local hog farms likely. *Had a warning 'must be
> > cooked' on the store label and that's all I recall. *This one wasnt
> > pre-brined but we've gotten ones that have been as long as they list that
> > the brine injection is just salt and water.
>
> > Don's usual method is to pre-brine in the fridge for a day or so, using
> > just water, some salt, a little vinegar and soy sauce. *This time I ran
> > late with the ham shopping so only got it the day before and we didnt
> > bother. *He made a nice ham gravy to go with from the drippings and we let
> > it shine in all it's simple purity with just that.
>
> > I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. *The flavor is just better to
> > me and the flexibility in what you do with it is higher. *If you want to
> > studd it deep with cloves or star anise, there won't be any competing
> > flavors from what the 'factory' _thought_ you wanted it pre-flavored with.
>
> Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked hams.http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham

See where it says "cured"? That means "cooked"! Not necessarily by
heat, there are a number of ways to denature the proteins in meat.

No where in the website does it say "uncooked".

John Kuthe...

"John Kuthe" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 26, 9:10 pm, "Kent" > wrote:
> "cshenk" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > "Dan Abel" wrote
> >> rfdjr1@ wrote:
>
> >>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for
> >>> the
>
> > (snips)
>
> >>> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be
> >>> doing it
> >>> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
> >>> Happy
> >>> Holidays to all minus one.
>
> >> Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
> >> instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
> >> it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
> >> never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
> >> hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
> >> but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.
>
> > Same here Dan. We've found most of the 'pre-cooked' ones have been
> > injected with all sorts of things (not just a simple salt brine in
> > sensible amounts). Ham itself in this natural un-cooked state is already
> > 'sweet' tasting with nothing added. Since it's already as 'sweet' as we
> > want, added injected sugars and stuff do not suit us.
>
> > Definately less price too. The precooked ones ranged all the way up to
> > 2.89/lb. The actually *better* (if you dare to try as the above person
> > learned how) raw hams were .89/lb with additional money off if a member
> > of
> > that grocery club. I think it was .59/lb then? Not sure exactly because
> > I tossed the recipts already. I just remember it was over 11 lbs
> > (11.5?),
> > and less than 7$ by a bit. I picked the one with the best bone for later
> > use.
>
> > Sure, we paid for bone at meat prices. Hehehe we often end up trying to
> > find bone for just .59/lb anyways (hard to find here in the city).
> > Brand?
> > Dunno as it had one. Local hog farms likely. Had a warning 'must be
> > cooked' on the store label and that's all I recall. This one wasnt
> > pre-brined but we've gotten ones that have been as long as they list
> > that
> > the brine injection is just salt and water.
>
> > Don's usual method is to pre-brine in the fridge for a day or so, using
> > just water, some salt, a little vinegar and soy sauce. This time I ran
> > late with the ham shopping so only got it the day before and we didnt
> > bother. He made a nice ham gravy to go with from the drippings and we
> > let
> > it shine in all it's simple purity with just that.
>
> > I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to
> > me and the flexibility in what you do with it is higher. If you want to
> > studd it deep with cloves or star anise, there won't be any competing
> > flavors from what the 'factory' _thought_ you wanted it pre-flavored
> > with.
>
> Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked
> hams.http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham

See where it says "cured"? That means "cooked"! Not necessarily by
heat, there are a number of ways to denature the proteins in meat.

No where in the website does it say "uncooked".

John Kuthe...
>
>
The website is more ambiguous that it should be. However, if you read the
label on the package it will say either "ready to eat" or "ready to cook".
If it's the latter it will give you instructions about cooking. The word
"cured" has nothing to do with cooking. It means nitrates and nitrites have
"bathed" the ham, by immersion, injection, or whatever.

Kent > wrote:

>If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
>or some semblance thereof.
>
>Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
>although many may.

Wow, that's a bald claim.

I translate "prosciutto crudo" as "raw ham". How do you translate
it??

Steve

In article
>,
John Kuthe > wrote:

> On Dec 26, 9:10*pm, "Kent" > wrote:

> > Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked
> > hams.http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham

Well, actually, I think it's a brand of ham. Some are not cooked, some
are.

> See where it says "cured"? That means "cooked"! Not necessarily by
> heat, there are a number of ways to denature the proteins in meat.
>
> No where in the website does it say "uncooked".

But does it say *everywhere* that it is cooked? How about this:

http://cooksham.com/cooking/portioned-or-half-ham

"Preheat oven to 325°F...cook for approximately 25 minutes per pound
until product center reaches 160°F."

Note the word "cook".

How about this one:

http://cooksham.com/cooking/spiral-sliced-ham

"heat at 275°F for approximately 12-15 minutes per pound"

Note that the word "cook" has been replaced with "heat". It's already
cooked.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> Kent > wrote:
>
> >If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
> >or some semblance thereof.
> >
> >Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
> >although many may.
>
> Wow, that's a bald claim.
>
> I translate "prosciutto crudo" as "raw ham". How do you translate
> it??

Steve, I think you failed to note that "John Kuthe"
> is a googlegroper, and Kent appears to have failed
to install quotefix to his OE. Thus the words quoted above belong to
John, not Kent.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Kent > wrote:
>>
>> >If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
>> >or some semblance thereof.
>> >
>> >Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
>> >although many may.
>>
>> Wow, that's a bald claim.
>>
>> I translate "prosciutto crudo" as "raw ham". How do you translate
>> it??

>Steve, I think you failed to note that "John Kuthe"
> is a googlegroper, and Kent appears to have failed
>to install quotefix to his OE. Thus the words quoted above belong to
>John, not Kent.

Oops, sorry Kent. Thanks Dan.

Steve

"Kent" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote

>>>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
>>
>> (snips)

>>> Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
>>> instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
>>> it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
>>> never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
>>> hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
>>> but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.
>>
>> Same here Dan. We've found most of the 'pre-cooked' ones have been
>> injected with all sorts of things (not just a simple salt brine in
>> sensible amounts). Ham itself in this natural un-cooked state is already

>> I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to
>> me and the flexibility in what you do with it is higher. If you want to
>> studd it deep with cloves or star anise, there won't be any competing
>> flavors from what the 'factory' _thought_ you wanted it pre-flavored
>> with.
>>
> Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked hams.
> http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham

Cool! It;s a brand as well? I hadnt realized that and took it as a
nom-de-plume for a type vice a brand. I don't like their brine though. A
good ham doesnt need added sugar. Pre-smoking (I assume cold smoking?) isnt
bad though.

"John Kuthe" wrote
"Kent" wrote:
> "cshenk" wrote in message

> >>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for
> >>> the
>
> > (snips)

>> > I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to

>> Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked
>> hams.http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham

> See where it says "cured"? That means "cooked"! Not necessarily by
> heat, there are a number of ways to denature the proteins in meat.

Dont assume too much here. Dan and I used the term 'a cook's ham' with no
knowledge of it also being a brand. That Kent then reused the name, may be
due to us using it with no relation to the web site.

"Kent" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote

>> your part of the country? Here it is sold as 'ham' based on the cut and
>> if it hasnt been pre-cooked, has to be labeled something like 'must be
>> cooked before eating' or some semblance there-of. I will say that they

> You should be able to eat the Gwaltney Hams without cooking them. In fact
> some do. I may try it. Every time I've tried to cook a dry cured Virginia
> ham something didn't work out, and I ended up with a bunch of ham
> fragments..

Snicker, the dried ones are quite a different tactic indeed.

There are also the spiral sliced ones (pre-cooked, just heat and eat) ut we
dont like those very much. The spiral slices are so thin, you might as well
hit up the deli counter. Flavor of them is largely sugar to us. While I
recognize many enjoy that, we do not.

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:57:24 -0800, Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> cshenk wrote:
>
>>> Well arent' you a real asshole.
>>
>> Thats just Sheldon at Xmas. You know that kindergarden grade for 'plays
>> well with others'? He still gets 'progressing towards'.
>
> To be fair, Sheldon is (non-practicing) Jewish, so Christmas doesn't hold
> any special significance for him.
>
> Bob

....but he does whip up a batch of eggnog spiked with crystal palace.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:16:56 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>"Kent" wrote
>> "cshenk" wrote
>
>>>>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
>>>
>>> (snips)
>
>>>> Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
>>>> instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
>>>> it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
>>>> never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
>>>> hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
>>>> but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.
>>>
>>> Same here Dan. We've found most of the 'pre-cooked' ones have been
>>> injected with all sorts of things (not just a simple salt brine in
>>> sensible amounts). Ham itself in this natural un-cooked state is already
>
>>> I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to
>>> me and the flexibility in what you do with it is higher. If you want to
>>> studd it deep with cloves or star anise, there won't be any competing
>>> flavors from what the 'factory' _thought_ you wanted it pre-flavored
>>> with.
>>>
>> Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked hams.
>> http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham
>
>Cool! It;s a brand as well? I hadnt realized that and took it as a
>nom-de-plume for a type vice a brand. I don't like their brine though. A
>good ham doesnt need added sugar. Pre-smoking (I assume cold smoking?) isnt
>bad though.

About all cured ham is cured with some sugar, sugar is the oldest
preservative known to man, even preceded salt by like ten thousand
years, most bacon is cured with some sort of sugar (curing means to
preserve). If not for the sugar content naturally occuring in fruit
it would rot before it dried... most plums don't contain enough sugar
to become prunes, gotta use prune plums. The only reason nitrites
are used to cure meats is because ordinary table salt won't maintain
that lovely pussy pink spam colour, cured meats would otherwise all be
crone gray... imagine a gray corned beef sammich... without nitrites
all those ball park weenies you suck down would be rotted varicose
vein purple and old fart flaccid grey rather than nubile sweet penis
pink. LOL

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:21:31 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:

>"John Kuthe" wrote
>"Kent" wrote:
>> "cshenk" wrote in message
>
>> >>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for
>> >>> the
>>
>> > (snips)
>
>>> > I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to
>
>>> Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked
>>> hams.http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham
>
>> See where it says "cured"? That means "cooked"! Not necessarily by
>> heat, there are a number of ways to denature the proteins in meat.

BullShit... cured does NOT mean cooked, not in any way whatsoever,
cured means *PRESERVED*.
Can opener morons haven't the slightest clue about food/cooking, nada!
They make it all up, the silly pinheads are dangerous.

>Dan and I used the term 'a cook's ham' with no
>knowledge of it also being a brand.

Kleenex is a brand too... but most people use the term when refering
to any brand of tissue. Same with a Hershey bar refering to any brand
of chocolate bar.

blake murphy wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:57:24 -0800, Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>
>> cshenk wrote:
>>
>>>> Well arent' you a real asshole.
>>>
>>> Thats just Sheldon at Xmas. You know that kindergarden grade for
>>> 'plays well with others'? He still gets 'progressing towards'.
>>
>> To be fair, Sheldon is (non-practicing) Jewish, so Christmas doesn't
>> hold any special significance for him.
>>
>> Bob
>
> ...but he does whip up a batch of eggnog spiked with crystal palace.
>


Speaking of xmas, blake, you should try to crash one of those White House
holiday party/receptions...

A coupla politico pals of mine (they've known the Obamas for years, etc...)
here in Chicawgo were invited to one last week. Everything is top - class,
great buffets, sushi and dessert bars, top - shelf likker...all with the
requisite "American" theme.

Vernita LUVS shrimp, Renae said: "Every time I turned around and saw Vernita
she had jumbo shrimp hangin' outta her mouth, lol...". The girls also
brought back some official WH napkins and stuff like that for souvenirs...

Very interesting crowd needless to say, not just friends and supporters of
the Prez, but numerous foreign officials, members of Congress, etc...Renae
had an "interesting" discussion with some Pentagon brass guy about our
"strategy" in Afghanistan (knowing her I feel some sympathy for the guy,
lol). The President and his wife are present at all these holiday "open
houses" but because there are hundreds at each one they can't necessarily
spend much "face time" with too many peeps...

There are like six huge trees in the various public rooms of the WH, each
tree has a different theme, e.g. one has a "50 states" theme and so
on...very beautiful.

On xmas I was over at one of the gal's for the day, I espied a White House
xmas card. I said, "Hey, the first thing I'm gonna do is turn this over to
see how much it cost, lol...". The large card is made by American Greetings
and instead of the usual price info there is a note that the cards are paid
for by the Democratic National Committee, "which does not necessarily
endorse the political affiliation of the sender of the card [!]...".

Anyways, it was interesting to hear the gals talk about it, it's something
most of us will never experience...


--
Best
Greg

On Dec 27, 3:07*pm, brooklyn1 > wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:21:31 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
> >"John Kuthe" wrote
> >"Kent" wrote:
> >> "cshenk" wrote in message
>
> >> >>> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for
> >> >>> the
>
> >> > (snips)
>
> >>> > I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to
>
> >>> Cook's Ham is a brand of smoked uncooked
> >>> hams.http://cooksham.com/product/bone-in-...onal-whole-ham
>
> >> See where it says "cured"? That means "cooked"! Not necessarily by
> >> heat, there are a number of ways to denature the proteins in meat.
>
> BullShit... cured does NOT mean cooked, not in any way whatsoever,
> cured means *PRESERVED*.

Cured or preserved means either denaturing the proteins and/or
dehydrating the meat.

You can also say cooked.

John Kuthe...

Greg wrote:

> Everything is top - class, great buffets, sushi and dessert bars, top -
> shelf likker...all with the requisite "American" theme.

I wonder what "American-themed" sushi entails.

Bob

The best way to cook with ham is to soaked it with pineapple juice and then out into oven for 3 minutes just to heat it. then put a sauce on top of it.