Pennyaline > wrote:

>On 7/19/2010 23:55, Steve Pope wrote:

>> However, his statements that you can get a large about of smoke
>> infusion in a short period of time using his type of grill (a
>> Weber kettle) are completely accurate. It does not require much
>> wood either, often just a few ounces. It can go way past the
>> barely noticeable stage. I have done this myself many times.
>> In fact there are some preparations (such as sable) in which
>> the result out of the Weber is pretty much indistinguishable
>> from something that came out of a smoker. It's also excellent
>> for making really smoky babaganoush. It's not a smoker, it
>> doesn't produce barbecure, but it's an in-between beast that
>> can get certain results.

>How quickly can YOU get a deep smoky result on a rare burger grilled
>directly over hot coals using cherry wood? And are you successful at
>getting the benefit of cherry smoke into extra spicy brats?

I don't doubt his statements but I generally cook other meats on
the Weber (rib steaks or New York steak, lamb shoulder chops, brined
pork chops; ignoring for the moment fish and vegetables) and all of
these can obtain significant infusions of smoke in their short cookings
times -- to the point where many eaters would call them too smoky
(but not me).

My Weber is only the 18" model and this makes it a little small
for doing brats, burgers, chicken, or other thing that are going
to drip any significant amout of grease. There really isn't room
for a drip pan separate from the coals in the 18". I'm guessing
Bryan has the 25".

>I know you can smoke using a Weber kettle. You can smoke food using
>practically anything if you use indirect heat, the right wood for smoke
>and the right meats for smoking. You can also barbecue in a Weber kettle
>if you can access and restoke the coals without interferring with the
>temperature of the cooking chamber too much.

I agree with the latter statement -- you need access, to feed in a few
more coals and a little more wood, every 10 minutes or so; this
can be done by lifting the lid and using the hinge-up section of the
grill to get down to the coals.

But what happens though is by taking the lid on and off to do this,
the cooking temperature is not very constant. This is why I
said it's hard to obtain a barbecue-like result really consistently
with the kettle. It's not reliable and it requires a lot of
deft maneuvering and guessing right. Not the best plan if you want
to promise people barbecue.

But a smoky result, no problem.

Steve

FYI: I once knew a girl named Rosemary, strawberry blonde
Australian, but sadly, her family name was not Potatoes, so I
cannot contribute to this thread.

Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!

"Pennyaline" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

>> Pennyaline, don't be stupid. The world is a bit place and even the USA
>> uses different terms for these things.

>> You have only experience where you are
>> and there is no such thing as 'Barbecue is barbecue, no matter where
>> it's done. It's low and slow, period.' which just shows you are located
>> in one area and don't understand other parts of the world outside your
>> little part of it.
>
> You have no idea where I am, nor do you know where I've been. You don't
> know what my experiences might have been, and you are consummately
> clueless as to the depth of my understanding of other parts of the world
> beyond where I am at this moment.

Dont really care either. You know your own venue and insist all worldwide
must be the same other they are 'wrong..

> I even understand why people will go to hell and back to defend their own
> misconceptions rather than have to correct them. It's okay. I get it.

People generally come here to learn about others and how it is outside their
own area. You don't know my own experiences either but this isnt relevant
to the discussion. Best said here is I have lived more places so know the
term shfts. You'd freak at Korean BBQ I bet.

"Pennyaline" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

> No, sorry. It wasn't below. Nowhere below does it explain how "Penny
> probably doesn't grasp this one." It just babbles about your trees and his
> trees and what you do with the wood from them.

Ok, trying little words. We have enough, we don't care if the smoke value
is minmal.

Got it yet?

"Pennyaline" wrote
> Steve Pope wrote:

> How quickly can YOU get a deep smoky result on a rare burger grilled
> directly over hot coals using cherry wood? And are you successful at
> getting the benefit of cherry smoke into extra spicy brats?

Please tell us where he claimed a DEEP smoke treatment. You have some idea
of what 'smoke' must be that isn't fitting what he or I do sometimes.

cshenk > wrote:

>"Pennyaline" wrote

>> How quickly can YOU get a deep smoky result on a rare burger grilled
>> directly over hot coals using cherry wood? And are you successful at
>> getting the benefit of cherry smoke into extra spicy brats?

>Please tell us where he claimed a DEEP smoke treatment. You have some idea
>of what 'smoke' must be that isn't fitting what he or I do sometimes.

Tangentially, to get a smokier yet still rare burger when grilling over
wood, start with a burger pattie that is very cold, still refrigerator
temperature. (In most cases I let meats come up to room temperature
before cooking, but this would be the exception to that rule.)

Steve

"Gorio" wrote
> cshenk;1506955 Wrote:

>> don't have mesquite here (wrong area) but am growing 2 apple trees and
>> part of the idea in them was the dropped wood.

> you'll get good smoking wood just from
> pruning the things. My apples don't drop much wood; but I do have to
> prune them every year.

Thats what we expect! It will be a bit before we collect much so we will be
parsimonious with the apple wood for a bit. The trees are not very big yet
and will take years to grow. This is their first year and one didnt fruit
at all but the other fruited 17 (snipped all but 2 so it spends it's tme
growing roots this year). They are cross pollenating sorts of yellow
delicious and granny apple. Squirrels expected to grab most the the fruit
here, but we get the wood!

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:45:58 -0400, "cshenk" > wrote:

> People generally come here to learn about others and how it is outside their
> own area. You don't know my own experiences either but this isnt relevant
> to the discussion. Best said here is I have lived more places so know the
> term shfts. You'd freak at Korean BBQ I bet.

What about the Australians? We've all seen the commercial where they
say they'll "throw another prawn on the barbie" for us.

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:04:35 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> Tangentially, to get a smokier yet still rare burger when grilling over
> wood, start with a burger pattie that is very cold, still refrigerator
> temperature. (In most cases I let meats come up to room temperature
> before cooking, but this would be the exception to that rule.)

Partially to fully frozen is good too. I like a good char on mine
with the interior as rare as possible. None of this beginning with
room temperature meat for me.

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On 7/20/2010 18:45, cshenk wrote:
> Dont really care either. You know your own venue and insist all
> worldwide must be the same other they are 'wrong..

Now, now. You're intentionally glossing over my point. You'd do yourself
a favor to stop doing that.



> People generally come here to learn about others and how it is outside
> their own area. You don't know my own experiences either but this isnt
> relevant to the discussion. Best said here is I have lived more places
> so know the term shfts. You'd freak at Korean BBQ I bet.

No, I probably wouldn't freak at Korean BBQ. But there you go, trying to
nullify someone elses experiences again. BTW, what relevance does the
statement "People generally come here to learn about others and how it
is outside their own area" have, especially as it followed my statement
that you don't know where I am or where I've been or what my experiences
are? And what does "Best said here is I have lived more places so know
the term shfts" mean?

On 7/20/2010 22:02, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:45:58 -0400, > wrote:
>
>> People generally come here to learn about others and how it is outside their
>> own area. You don't know my own experiences either but this isnt relevant
>> to the discussion. Best said here is I have lived more places so know the
>> term shfts. You'd freak at Korean BBQ I bet.
>
> What about the Australians? We've all seen the commercial where they
> say they'll "throw another prawn on the barbie" for us.

And have we all seen where they then say that shrimp/prawns are never
barbecued, but they are grilled?

On 7/20/2010 18:48, cshenk wrote:
> "Pennyaline" wrote
>> cshenk wrote:
>
>> No, sorry. It wasn't below. Nowhere below does it explain how "Penny
>> probably doesn't grasp this one." It just babbles about your trees and
>> his trees and what you do with the wood from them.
>
> Ok, trying little words. We have enough, we don't care if the smoke
> value is minmal.
>
> Got it yet?

I had that point all along, and the next time you truncate a post for
quoting, include the part you're actually responding to. It was clear
that I understood you both have more than enough of your blessed wood.
Now, you try grasping this: What about his post about barbecuing that is
actually grilling am I not grasping?

Got it yet?

sf > wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 01:04:35 +0000 (UTC),

>> Tangentially, to get a smokier yet still rare burger when grilling over
>> wood, start with a burger pattie that is very cold, still refrigerator
>> temperature. (In most cases I let meats come up to room temperature
>> before cooking, but this would be the exception to that rule.)

>Partially to fully frozen is good too. I like a good char on mine
>with the interior as rare as possible. None of this beginning with
>room temperature meat for me.

Yeah, I hear you. For burgers, put 'em on the wood-burning grill
still froze. So as to get max smoke infustion.

This technique dates back to when refrigeration came on line.

I believe James Beard refers to it, in his Outdoor Cookery Book.

Steve

"sf" wrote
"cshenk" > wrote:

>> People generally come here to learn about others and how it is outside
>> their
>> own area. You don't know my own experiences either but this isnt
>> relevant
>> to the discussion. Best said here is I have lived more places so know
>> the
>> term shfts. You'd freak at Korean BBQ I bet.

> What about the Australians? We've all seen the commercial where they
> say they'll "throw another prawn on the barbie" for us.

Grin, I don't recall eating shrimp/prawn there at all on my trips. I always
made an effort to get 'something unique to me from the area' so living in
Japan, I wouldnt bother with shrimp when away from there.

Found out there is a definate 'roo cooking time that seems to be either
quite brief or very long. Anything in between is tougher than sneaker
bottoms.

Anyways, 'Barbie' was used as a term but not sure about 'prawn term use' in
Oz. I was too busy checking out lamb/mutton and 'roo. Rabbit also when i
found it. Barramundi as well.

"Pennyaline" wrote
> sf wrote:
>>"cshenk" wrote:

>>> People generally come here to learn about others and how it is outside
>>> their
>>> own area. You don't know my own experiences either but this isnt
>>> relevant
>>> to the discussion. Best said here is I have lived more places so know
>>> the
>>> term shfts. You'd freak at Korean BBQ I bet.
>>
>> What about the Australians? We've all seen the commercial where they
>> say they'll "throw another prawn on the barbie" for us.
>
> And have we all seen where they then say that shrimp/prawns are never
> barbecued, but they are grilled?

Penny, try asking the OZ folks here what they call it. Like the USA, it's a
big place and my experience is Darwin, Townsville and Brisbane. Do not
expect the terms to match just because they use 'English'.

"Pennyaline" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

>> Dont really care either. You know your own venue and insist all
>> worldwide must be the same other they are 'wrong..
>
> Now, now. You're intentionally glossing over my point. You'd do yourself a
> favor to stop doing that.

It would certainly make you happy.

>> People generally come here to learn about others and how it is outside
>> their own area. You don't know my own experiences either but this isnt
>> relevant to the discussion. Best said here is I have lived more places
>> so know the term shfts. You'd freak at Korean BBQ I bet.
>
> No, I probably wouldn't freak at Korean BBQ. But there you go, trying to
> nullify someone elses experiences again. BTW, what relevance does the
> statement "People generally come here to learn about others and how it is
> outside their own area" have, especially as it followed my statement that
> you don't know where I am or where I've been or what my experiences are?
> And what does "Best said here is I have lived more places so know the term
> shfts" mean?

It means it is very apparent that you have a a small local regional area
experience as evinced by the fact you can't grasp that the simple 'BBQ' term
you insist on isnt universal and want everyone else to change to your use of
the term. Hate to tell you but the world isnt going to change to suit you.
Suggest you investigate the differerences instead.

Korean 'BBQ' isnt even remotely slow cooked except a few rare dishes you
will have to go to the bigger cities to even find on a menu. Other places,
'BBQ' can mean explictly slow cooked pork unless otherwise specified (Guam,
Hawaii are 2 samples). You'd be happy to see they use the term 'grill' in
Japan, but then, they have no BBQ term at all and 'grill' is used for both.

"Pennyaline" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

>> Ok, trying little words. We have enough, we don't care if the smoke
>> value is minmal.

>> Got it yet?

> I had that point all along, and the next time you truncate a post for
> quoting, include the part you're actually responding to. It was clear that
> I understood you both have more than enough of your blessed wood. Now, you
> try grasping this: What about his post about barbecuing that is actually
> grilling am I not grasping?

> Got it yet?

Sure! You do not grasp that his term is different.

I do not overquote and trimmed to just what I was replying to. If you have
problems recalling, keep the thread so you can look back.

"cshenk" > wrote in
:


> Korean 'BBQ' isnt even remotely slow cooked except a few rare dishes you
> will have to go to the bigger cities to even find on a menu. Other
> places, 'BBQ' can mean explictly slow cooked pork unless otherwise
> specified (Guam, Hawaii are 2 samples). You'd be happy to see they use
> the term 'grill' in Japan, but then, they have no BBQ term at all and
> 'grill' is used for both.
>
>


And in Australia, BBQ is.... "get that fire going, get it red hot, and lets
chuck on the steak and snags!!"

When we move down to Tassie, I'm going back to the good old wood BBQ.

Get a 44gal drum, cut it in half, band the two halves together (round side to
round side) and make up a plate to cover the top. Fill with wood, and away
you go :-)

And here, to 'grill' means to put under the toaster section on the stove.

--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

I didn't fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.

On 7/21/2010 18:43, cshenk wrote:
> Korean 'BBQ' isnt even remotely slow cooked except a few rare dishes you
> will have to go to the bigger cities to even find on a menu.

Why are you telling me? Didn't I already explain that I would NOT be
surprised by Korean barbecue?

Give it up, hon. It's time has passed.

On 7/21/2010 18:47, cshenk wrote:
> Sure! You do not grasp that his term is different.
>
> I do not overquote and trimmed to just what I was replying to. If you
> have problems recalling, keep the thread so you can look back.

As I said further up the thread: give it up, hon. Whatever argument
there was is over. Your insipid logic failed. It's time is passed. Bub-bye.

I like the big drum cut in half, too. The bigger it is the easier to slow Q; and, if you need to cook for a bunch of poeple, you've got the surface area. All about the wood, baby.

On 7/20/2010 8:04 PM, Steve Pope wrote:
>> of what 'smoke' must be that isn't fitting what he or I do sometimes.
> Tangentially, to get a smokier yet still rare burger when grilling over
> wood, start with a burger pattie that is very cold, still refrigerator
> temperature. (In most cases I let meats come up to room temperature
> before cooking, but this would be the exception to that rule.)
>
> Steve
>

So true, I have cooked frozen patties that turned out well.

Becca

On 7/22/2010 07:20, Gorio wrote:
> I like the big drum cut in half, too. The bigger it is the easier to
> slow Q; and, if you need to cook for a bunch of poeple, you've got the
> surface area. All about the wood, baby.

A barrel smoker is a great thing to have if you barbecue and smoke
routinely.

"PL" > wrote
> "cshenk" wrote

>> Korean 'BBQ' isnt even remotely slow cooked except a few rare dishes you
>> will have to go to the bigger cities to even find on a menu. Other
>> places, 'BBQ' can mean explictly slow cooked pork unless otherwise
>> specified (Guam, Hawaii are 2 samples). You'd be happy to see they use
>> the term 'grill' in Japan, but then, they have no BBQ term at all and
>> 'grill' is used for both.

> And in Australia, BBQ is.... "get that fire going, get it red hot, and
> lets
> chuck on the steak and snags!!"
> When we move down to Tassie, I'm going back to the good old wood BBQ.
> Get a 44gal drum, cut it in half, band the two halves together (round side
> to
> round side) and make up a plate to cover the top. Fill with wood, and away
> you go :-)
> And here, to 'grill' means to put under the toaster section on the stove.

Lol! Works for me Peter! USA folks would call your 'grill' to 'broil' most
likely. Best guess I have on it.

How would you classify the tea smoked chicken we have both had which is then
finished off in a table brazier by the eater? I would nominally call this
'grilling' in USA english from my own background area.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 01:43:37 -0600, Pennyaline
> > wrote:
>
> > On 7/18/2010 17:43, Food Snob® wrote:
> > > You really have a problem with half pound burgers?
> >
> > Yes, I do (granted, it might be age-related, but even so...). That's
> > entirely too much meat on a burger. Portion control, son. Portion control!
>
> I know. 1/3 pound is something you can finish and still allows a good
> char on the outside without overcooking the center... but guys like
> the idea of half a pound. It's a manly burger.

I like a half pound burger. Granted, it's several servings of meat, so
no other meat for the day. In fact, it's a treat, so just a few times a
year. Still, as an occasional treat, I'm not seeing a problem, at least
for me (6'2", 180 pounds).

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA