First, I hafta confess my sins. I've never really fried chicken.
There, I've said it. Oh, I took a half hearted stab at it back when I
was a pup. But, it was so pitiful it has intimidated me ever since.
Add the fact that I've never really been a rabid fried chicken fan,
and you have life-long calculated indifference.

So anyway, I did the big fried chicken thing this weekend and tonight.
The whole nine yards. Cut up a whole fryer, marinated in buttermilk,
fried in my big ol' No. 10 Wagner, yada yada. Actually, I'm pretty
pleased with how it came out, taste-wise, and that's what really
counts. Also, it's very moist and tender. BUT!! ...it's just not
pretty! It's not post-the-pic material. I see other folk's picnic
chicken and recall how my godmother's killer chicken looked. In
comparison, mine looks horrible.

Here's pics of the recipe I pretty much followed to the letter.

http://www.elise.com/recipes/archive...ed_chicken.php

As I said, it tastes great. But, mine is not that picture perfect
chicken you see on the drain rack and serving plate on that website.
Let's put it this way. If the chicken in the pictures is Beyoncé
Knowles, my chicken is CCH Pounder. And here is where I want some
honesty. How does one really cook fried chicken to cook it hot enough
so it's not greasy, long enough that it's done, yet just enough so it
looks appealing? Cuz I'm telling you right now, there's no way in
Hell the recipe on that website produced the chicken in those
pictures. Cooking chicken in oil @ 350 deg F for 12-15 mins *per
side* is gonna get you some damn dark chicken. Sure, I know
commercial cooking pics are mostly bogus, but I've seen real
in-the-wild fried chicken that's both pretty and good tasting at the
same time. So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
really do it?

nb

notbob wrote:

> As I said, it tastes great. But, mine is not that picture perfect
> chicken you see on the drain rack and serving plate on that website.
> Let's put it this way. If the chicken in the pictures is Beyoncé
> Knowles, my chicken is CCH Pounder. And here is where I want some
> honesty. How does one really cook fried chicken to cook it hot enough
> so it's not greasy, long enough that it's done, yet just enough so it
> looks appealing? Cuz I'm telling you right now, there's no way in
> Hell the recipe on that website produced the chicken in those
> pictures. Cooking chicken in oil @ 350 deg F for 12-15 mins *per
> side* is gonna get you some damn dark chicken. Sure, I know
> commercial cooking pics are mostly bogus, but I've seen real
> in-the-wild fried chicken that's both pretty and good tasting at the
> same time. So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
> really do it?

I posted a recipe for Deviled Fried Chicken that has never failed to
produce amazing crust even though you start by skinning the chicken. I
also perfected frying by just using large slabs of boneless breasts or
only doing drumsticks (see, only one cut of chicken, so it didn't get
confusing with various timing). Once I fried my initial batch (deep
fried in an immersion type fryer -looks a bit like a bread machine, and
removed the chicken when I thought it was done I checked a few pieces
with my instant read thermometer to confirm I'd reached the required
safe temp of 185. So then I had the timing for the rest of the large
batches I tend to make when I do fried chicken. I double the recipe at
least. Sure cuts down on the guesswork! I continue to randomly temp
test chicken as it is removed from the fryer to assure I'm still doing
okay. The breast slabs take barely 5-7 min, drumsticks a bit longer if I
recall.
I think the baking powder in my posted recipe helps give it an amazing
crust, and the way the directions call for the chicken to sit in the
flour mix for an hour after that long marination in the spicy buttermilk
mixture gives it a great start to a crust.
It is an amazing recipe. Honest.

Deviled Fried Chicken


Recipe By : Bon Appetit, August 1998
Serving Size : 4 Preparation Time :0:24
Categories : Poultry


Amount Measure Ingredient -- Preparation Method
-------- ------------ --------------------------------
2 cups buttermilk
1/4 cup dijon mustard
2 tablespoons onion powder -- divided
5 teaspoons salt -- divided
4 teaspoons dry mustard -- divided
4 teaspoons cayenne -- divided
2 1/2 teaspoons black pepper -- divided
3 pounds frying chicken -- skinned
3 cups all-purpose flour
1 tablespoon baking powder
1 tablespoon garlic powder
5 cups peanut oil


Remove backbone from fryer and cut chicken into 8 pieces. In a 1-gallon
resealable plastic bag, mix buttermilk, Dijon mustard, 1 tbls onion
powder, 1 tsp salt, 1 tsp dry mustard, 1 tsp cayenne and 1 tsp black
pepper. Add chicken pieces. Seal bag, eliminating air. Turn bag to
coat chicken evenly. Refrigerate at least 1 day and up to 2 days,
turning plastic bag occasionally.


Whisk flour, baking powder, garlic powder, remaining 1 tbls onion
powder, 4 tsp salt, 3 tsp dry mustard, 3 tsp cayenne and 1 1/2 tsp black
pepper in 13x9x2 inch glass dish. With marinade still clinging to
chicken pieces (do not shake off excess), add chicken to flour mixture;
turn to coat thickly. Let chicken stand in flour mixture for 1 hour,
turning chicken occasionally to recoat with flour mixture.


Pour oil to depth of 1 1/4 inches into deep 10 to 12 inch diameter pot.
Attach deep-fry thermometer. Heat oil over medium-high heat to 350
degrees. Add 4 pieces of chicken, skinned side down, to oil. Reduce
heat to medium-low and fry 5 minutes, adjusting heat to maintain oil
temperature between 280 and 300 degrees (oil should bubble constantly
around chicken). Using wooden spoons, turn chicken over. Fry 7
minutes. Turn chicken over again. Fry
until deep golden brown and cooked through, about 3 minutes longer.
Using same spoons, transfer chicken to a large rack set on baking
sheet. (To prevent the crust from breaking and to keep moisture sealed
in, use wooden spoons rather than tongs or a fork to turn over the
chicken pieces as they fry.)


Reheat oil to 350. Repeat frying with remaining 4 pieces of chicken.

notbob wrote:

>So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
> really do it?
>
> nb

I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.

I wash the chicken then dredge it in flour to which some onion powder,
garlic powder, salt, black pepper and a bit of oregano has been added.
Dredge it well, and set it aside. I heat the Crisco in an open, deep
skillet on medium-high until a little drop of water crackles on the
surface. I drop the pieces in one by one and let them fry on one side
until they are a little golden brown (8 mins? - I have never timed it).
Then I turn them, and fry some more. I keep turning until each
surface of the chicken is a deep golden brown. One side may fry in the
oil 2-3 times. The total time cooking is probably 45 minutes or so. If
some pieces get done before others, I throw them on some papaer to
drain, and then keep them warm in a 200 degree oven until all the
chicken is done. Always works well, and my chicken looks a lot like
what was pictured. Granny did it this way, Momma did it this way, and
MIL does it this way. Can't argue with that!

-L.

"-L." > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> notbob wrote:
>
> >So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
> > really do it?
> >
> > nb
>
> I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.
>
> I wash the chicken then dredge it in flour to which some onion powder,
> garlic powder, salt, black pepper and a bit of oregano has been added.
> Dredge it well, and set it aside. I heat the Crisco in an open, deep
> skillet on medium-high until a little drop of water crackles on the
> surface. I drop the pieces in one by one and let them fry on one side
> until they are a little golden brown (8 mins? - I have never timed it).
> Then I turn them, and fry some more. I keep turning until each
> surface of the chicken is a deep golden brown. One side may fry in the
> oil 2-3 times. The total time cooking is probably 45 minutes or so. If
> some pieces get done before others, I throw them on some papaer to
> drain, and then keep them warm in a 200 degree oven until all the
> chicken is done. Always works well, and my chicken looks a lot like
> what was pictured. Granny did it this way, Momma did it this way, and
> MIL does it this way. Can't argue with that!
>
> -L.
>

My hubby uses lard and follows the method that you use, -L. It takes quite
a while per piece, actually, but it's never dark. He heats up the lard
until it melts and you can see it "wave" on the surface and then drops the
chicken in. It bubbles and sizzles, but if you keep turning each piece as
it browns, it doesn't burn. Oh, and he carefully uses tongs to turn the
pieces. In all honesty, I prefer his fried chicken to KFC (blech!) or any
supermarket deli kind. It's not greasy, it's crispy, and it's good.

kili

Oh pshaw, on Mon 28 Aug 2006 11:50:28p, -L. meant to say...

>
> notbob wrote:
>
>>So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
>> really do it?
>>
>> nb
>
> I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.
>
> I wash the chicken then dredge it in flour to which some onion powder,
> garlic powder, salt, black pepper and a bit of oregano has been added.
> Dredge it well, and set it aside. I heat the Crisco in an open, deep
> skillet on medium-high until a little drop of water crackles on the
> surface. I drop the pieces in one by one and let them fry on one side
> until they are a little golden brown (8 mins? - I have never timed it).
> Then I turn them, and fry some more. I keep turning until each
> surface of the chicken is a deep golden brown. One side may fry in the
> oil 2-3 times. The total time cooking is probably 45 minutes or so. If
> some pieces get done before others, I throw them on some papaer to
> drain, and then keep them warm in a 200 degree oven until all the
> chicken is done. Always works well, and my chicken looks a lot like
> what was pictured. Granny did it this way, Momma did it this way, and
> MIL does it this way. Can't argue with that!
>
> -L.
>
>

Seasonings may differ, but the method is true "southern fried chicken". My
grandmothers and mother made it this way, as I do. Solid Crisco is a
*must*.

--
Wayne Boatwright
__________________________________________________

Read what I mean, not what I write.

Oh pshaw, on Tue 29 Aug 2006 03:43:49a, kilikini meant to say...

>
> "-L." > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>>
>> notbob wrote:
>>
>> >So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
>> > really do it?
>> >
>> > nb
>>
>> I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.
>>
>> I wash the chicken then dredge it in flour to which some onion powder,
>> garlic powder, salt, black pepper and a bit of oregano has been added.
>> Dredge it well, and set it aside. I heat the Crisco in an open, deep
>> skillet on medium-high until a little drop of water crackles on the
>> surface. I drop the pieces in one by one and let them fry on one side
>> until they are a little golden brown (8 mins? - I have never timed it).
>> Then I turn them, and fry some more. I keep turning until each
>> surface of the chicken is a deep golden brown. One side may fry in the
>> oil 2-3 times. The total time cooking is probably 45 minutes or so. If
>> some pieces get done before others, I throw them on some papaer to
>> drain, and then keep them warm in a 200 degree oven until all the
>> chicken is done. Always works well, and my chicken looks a lot like
>> what was pictured. Granny did it this way, Momma did it this way, and
>> MIL does it this way. Can't argue with that!
>>
>> -L.
>>
>
> My hubby uses lard and follows the method that you use, -L. It takes
> quite a while per piece, actually, but it's never dark. He heats up the
> lard until it melts and you can see it "wave" on the surface and then
> drops the chicken in. It bubbles and sizzles, but if you keep turning
> each piece as it browns, it doesn't burn. Oh, and he carefully uses
> tongs to turn the pieces. In all honesty, I prefer his fried chicken to
> KFC (blech!) or any supermarket deli kind. It's not greasy, it's
> crispy, and it's good.
>
> kili

I've used lard, too, kili. Crisco produces very similar results, although
not quite the same flavor. Both work much better than oil. It never burns
as oil often seems to do.

--
Wayne Boatwright
__________________________________________________

Read what I mean, not what I write.

"notbob" > wrote

> same time. So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
> really do it?

Just a thought. Tyler Florence is big on making fried chicken,
perhaps you could check out his recipes ... once he made it
on his Ultimate show, I would check there.

Paula Deen also makes some fine looking fried chicken, look
there.

I only say because you might see something in their recipes that
is different from yours, methodwise, that will help you.

nancy

"Wayne Boatwright" <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
28.19...
> Oh pshaw, on Tue 29 Aug 2006 03:43:49a, kilikini meant to say...
>
> >
> > "-L." > wrote in message
> > ups.com...
> >>
> >> notbob wrote:
> >>
> >> >So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
> >> > really do it?
> >> >
>
> I've used lard, too, kili. Crisco produces very similar results, although
> not quite the same flavor. Both work much better than oil. It never
burns
> as oil often seems to do.
>

Okay, then it must be the oil that's producing less than satisfactory
results to the OP. Interesting.

kili

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:46:40 -0500, notbob wrote:


> So anyway, I did the big fried chicken thing this weekend and tonight.
> The whole nine yards. Cut up a whole fryer, marinated in buttermilk,
> fried in my big ol' No. 10 Wagner, yada yada.

> As I said, it tastes great. But, mine is not that picture perfect
> chicken you see on the drain rack and serving plate on that website.

Good is what counts.

I see no difference in oil used.. crisco, canola,
peanut or corn oil. Lard is a great flavor enhancer but we never use it
anymore. Deep oil is important as is control of the temperature. Be sure
the chicken and the dredge are COLD and the oil is HOT.

Soak cut up chicken in iced salt water at least an hour.
Dip in COLD butter milk.
Dredge in COLD flour seasoned as you like it. (I keep the dredge in the
freezer between batches.) The more you use the dredge the better it gets
...the small clumps in the flour make for a nicer crust.
Slit the drumsticks so that they are done before they burn.
Don't over handle the chicken while frying.
The first pieces will not be as brown as those that follow. If you really
brown the first pieces they will be overcooked.

Fry ~ 350 and don't over load the batches..that of course cools the oil.
If you do a lot of chicken, know when to start over with fresh oil and as
you fry remove the settled dredge from the oil if it is accumulating and
reserve it for the gravy.

"kilikini" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Wayne Boatwright" <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> 28.19...
>> Oh pshaw, on Tue 29 Aug 2006 03:43:49a, kilikini meant to say...
>>
>> >
>> > "-L." > wrote in message
>> > ups.com...
>> >>
>> >> notbob wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
>> >> > really do it?
>> >> >
>>
>> I've used lard, too, kili. Crisco produces very similar results,
>> although
>> not quite the same flavor. Both work much better than oil. It never
> burns
>> as oil often seems to do.
>>
>
> Okay, then it must be the oil that's producing less than satisfactory
> results to the OP. Interesting.
>
> kili


I've been using oil to fry chicken for at least 20 years and mine doesn't
burn. I get a nice crispy crust too.

Ms P

On 28 Aug 2006 23:50:28 -0700, "-L." > wrote:

>I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.


Me too. Or lard. Ha!

<snip>

In addition to the method notbob and Goomba use, I use Penzey's Ozark
seasoning in both the buttermilk marinade and the flour mixture.
Heavily seasoned. We love it.

TammyM

ms_peacock wrote:
> "kilikini" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> "Wayne Boatwright" <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>> 28.19...
>>> Oh pshaw, on Tue 29 Aug 2006 03:43:49a, kilikini meant to say...
>>>
>>>> "-L." > wrote in message
>>>> ups.com...
>>>>> notbob wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
>>>>>> really do it?
>>>>>>
>>> I've used lard, too, kili. Crisco produces very similar results,
>>> although
>>> not quite the same flavor. Both work much better than oil. It never
>> burns
>>> as oil often seems to do.
>>>
>> Okay, then it must be the oil that's producing less than satisfactory
>> results to the OP. Interesting.
>>
>> kili
>
>
> I've been using oil to fry chicken for at least 20 years and mine doesn't
> burn. I get a nice crispy crust too.
>
> Ms P
>
>


What kind of oil? I think peanut oil would work better than most.
Mom always used solid Crisco.

Bob

On 28 Aug 2006 23:50:28 -0700, "-L." > wrote:

>I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.

And I second it.

Carol

In article >,
Damsel in dis Dress > wrote:

> On 28 Aug 2006 23:50:28 -0700, "-L." > wrote:
>
> >I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.
>
> And I second it.
>
> Carol

Peanut oil.

Deep fryer.

Next time I do it, I'll take pics. ;-)
--
Peace!
Om

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch"
-- Jack Nicholson

One time on Usenet, Damsel in dis Dress > said:
> On 28 Aug 2006 23:50:28 -0700, "-L." > wrote:

> >I use solid Crisco. There, I said it.
>
> And I second it.

I used to, but I switched to canola oil. I don't seem to miss
it. Then again, Mom always used shortening, and her chicken was
better than mine...

--
"Kthonian" is Jani in WA
~ mom, Trollop, novice cook ~

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> I've used lard, too, kili. Crisco produces very similar results, although
> not quite the same flavor. Both work much better than oil. It never burns
> as oil often seems to do.
>

Peanut Oil is commonly used for the high smoking point. Commonly used
for their fried turkeys too.

On 29 Aug 2006 14:26:41 +0200, Wayne Boatwright
<wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote:

>> My hubby uses lard and follows the method that you use, -L. It takes
>> quite a while per piece, actually, but it's never dark. He heats up the
>> lard until it melts and you can see it "wave" on the surface and then
>> drops the chicken in. It bubbles and sizzles, but if you keep turning
>> each piece as it browns, it doesn't burn. Oh, and he carefully uses
>> tongs to turn the pieces. In all honesty, I prefer his fried chicken to
>> KFC (blech!) or any supermarket deli kind. It's not greasy, it's
>> crispy, and it's good.
>>
>> kili
>
>I've used lard, too, kili. Crisco produces very similar results, although
>not quite the same flavor. Both work much better than oil. It never burns
>as oil often seems to do.

One of the things I learned to do if good lard is not available, is to
use Crisco, but add some bacon fat. Gives a wonderful flavor.

And I grew up in the tradition of shallow frying chicken...where the
heat is high at first, to brown the chicken, then the pan is covered
slightly and the heat turned down to finish the cooking.

I am still working on the best method, as I had lost the knack of
frying really good chicken after my mother died. She taught me to
fry...but when the eGullet thread on frying chicken started, I got
interested in really developing it again. I learned that for me, a
cross between shallow frying and deep frying works best...
And that salting and peppering the chicken beforehand also adds
something: I salt and pepper a bit before I dredge the chicken...And I
find, at least for my taste, that it takes more salt than I thought I
would need.

Here is the eGullet thread again. I heartily urge you to read it,
notbob, as you can learn a lot from it about making good fried
chicken.
http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=63594

Christine

On 2006-08-29, -L. > wrote:

> until they are a little golden brown (8 mins? - I have never timed it).




Now, this is where I start wondering about perceived times and temps
versus real. I'm sure you are being honest with me, but I did this
all very scientifically. I had a very good digital immersion
thermometer and an electronic timer. When that oil hit 360 deg F, (I
knew the chicken would cool the oil) in went the chicken. Within a
timed 4 mins, that chicken was hoplessly beyond "golden brown". And
this with a temp drop of almost 30 deg within the 1st min and me
having to turn up the heat (slow electric hob) to get the temp back
up.

I also noticed the 350° oil is damn hot oil. It was actually rather
difficult keeping it up there. Even turning the chicken the first
time dropped temps 25°. I was constantly cranking my big hob to HIGH
to keep temps up. This with at least 2-1/2 C of canola oil in a good
iron skillet and I didn't overload the pan (1 chicken, 2 batches). I
suspect most folks are really cooking not at 350°, but closer to
320-330° if my temp readings are any indication. Methinks your times
are also a tad exaggerated. I can't for the life of me imagine a
chicken taking 45 mins to cook. Even chicken breasts oven baked at
325° start drying out after about 30 mins.

But, I like your idea of keep the chicken moving. More than one
respondent agrees. Perhaps that's the secret. I may try another oil,
also. My canola oil is irretrievably browned so maybe I'll try lard.
No way I'm using hydrogenated Crisco.

This was a good learning experience for an almost first timer.
Besides, it turns out my chicken isn't quite as bad as I first
thought. In the light of day, the pieces are not exactly dark
chocolate colored, though one spot on the flat of the back was
actually black. And again, I can say it actually tastes good. I
think I needed a tad more salt, but the buttermilk marinade is a good
way to go. There's a nice sweetness to the meat and it is very moist.
I think a couple more batches and I may be posting some pictures
of my own.

Thank you all who've responded.

nb

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:54:55 -0500, notbob > wrote:

>No way I'm using hydrogenated Crisco.

They make an unhydrogenated version now.

Christine

notbob wrote:

> Now, this is where I start wondering about perceived times and temps
> versus real. I'm sure you are being honest with me, but I did this
> all very scientifically. I had a very good digital immersion
> thermometer and an electronic timer.

My electric deep fryer has a timer on it. Once I had a ball park idea of
what the pieces were taking to cook, I could set the timer with each batch.

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:54:55 -0500, notbob > wrote:

>Now, this is where I start wondering about perceived times and temps
>versus real. I'm sure you are being honest with me, but I did this
>all very scientifically. I had a very good digital immersion
>thermometer and an electronic timer. When that oil hit 360 deg F, (I
>knew the chicken would cool the oil) in went the chicken. Within a
>timed 4 mins, that chicken was hoplessly beyond "golden brown". And
>this with a temp drop of almost 30 deg within the 1st min and me
>having to turn up the heat (slow electric hob) to get the temp back
>up.
>
>I also noticed the 350° oil is damn hot oil. It was actually rather
>difficult keeping it up there. Even turning the chicken the first
>time dropped temps 25°. I was constantly cranking my big hob to HIGH
>to keep temps up. This with at least 2-1/2 C of canola oil in a good
>iron skillet and I didn't overload the pan (1 chicken, 2 batches). I
>suspect most folks are really cooking not at 350°, but closer to
>320-330° if my temp readings are any indication.

I think you're supposed to start at 360F and then leave the
temperature alone. The cooling effect of the chicken was probably
allowed for in the original recipe, and the oil was likely never
intended to remain at a constant 360F.

Carol

"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
...
> ms_peacock wrote:
>> I've been using oil to fry chicken for at least 20 years and mine doesn't
>> burn. I get a nice crispy crust too.
>>
>> Ms P
>
>
> What kind of oil? I think peanut oil would work better than most.
> Mom always used solid Crisco.
>
> Bob

I used to use corn oil but changed to canola.

Ms P

One time on Usenet, Christine Dabney > said:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:54:55 -0500, notbob > wrote:
>
> >No way I'm using hydrogenated Crisco.
>
> They make an unhydrogenated version now.

I had no idea! I checked their web site and they released it a couple
of years ago:

http://www.crisco.com/whatsnew/press_releases.asp

"ORRVILLE,OH (April 2004) -- The makers of Crisco proudly present the
latest innovation in their trusted line of products - Crisco Zero
Grams Trans Fat Per Serving All-Vegetable Shortening. Whether you are
making the Classic Crisco Pie Crust or mom's special fried chicken,
this new zero trans offering can be used interchangeably with original
Crisco shortening"

Have you tried it, Christine?

--
"Kthonian" is Jani in WA
~ mom, Trollop, novice cook ~

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:10:56 GMT, (Kthonian) wrote:


>http://www.crisco.com/whatsnew/press_releases.asp
>
>"ORRVILLE,OH (April 2004) -- The makers of Crisco proudly present the
>latest innovation in their trusted line of products - Crisco Zero
>Grams Trans Fat Per Serving All-Vegetable Shortening. Whether you are
>making the Classic Crisco Pie Crust or mom's special fried chicken,
>this new zero trans offering can be used interchangeably with original
>Crisco shortening"
>
>Have you tried it, Christine?

Yes, I started getting it when it first came out. I won't use regular
Crisco anymore.

Christine

One time on Usenet, Christine Dabney > said:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 18:10:56 GMT, (Kthonian) wrote:

> >http://www.crisco.com/whatsnew/press_releases.asp
> >
> >"ORRVILLE,OH (April 2004) -- The makers of Crisco proudly present the
> >latest innovation in their trusted line of products - Crisco Zero
> >Grams Trans Fat Per Serving All-Vegetable Shortening. Whether you are
> >making the Classic Crisco Pie Crust or mom's special fried chicken,
> >this new zero trans offering can be used interchangeably with original
> >Crisco shortening"
> >
> >Have you tried it, Christine?
>
> Yes, I started getting it when it first came out. I won't use regular
> Crisco anymore.

I can't imagine why anyone would even *want* the trans fat version
if this cooks/tastes the same. I have to go shopping today, so I'll
look for it. Thanks for sharing this info, I'd totally given up on
Crisco... :-)

--
"Kthonian" is Jani in WA
~ mom, Trollop, novice cook ~

"Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:54:55 -0500, notbob > wrote:
>>I also noticed the 350° oil is damn hot oil. It was actually rather
>>difficult keeping it up there. Even turning the chicken the first
>>time dropped temps 25°. I was constantly cranking my big hob to HIGH
>>to keep temps up. This with at least 2-1/2 C of canola oil in a good
>>iron skillet and I didn't overload the pan (1 chicken, 2 batches). I
>>suspect most folks are really cooking not at 350°, but closer to
>>320-330° if my temp readings are any indication.
>
> I think you're supposed to start at 360F and then leave the
> temperature alone. The cooling effect of the chicken was probably
> allowed for in the original recipe, and the oil was likely never
> intended to remain at a constant 360F.

350° is damn hot to try and maintain. As long as the temperature remains
above 275° or so (preferrably 300° or a little above), things will be okay
and there will be less tendency for burning. The other thing is to keep
moving the chicken so the same spot doesn't sit in contact with the bottom
of the pan. I believe the pan bottom itself is well in excess of the
temperature of the oil above it. I think one would get a different result in
a fryer with a basket elevated above the pan bottom compared to sitting
right on the bottom.

I tend to fry for about 10 to 12 minutes per side. I've used a digital meat
thermometer and learned to not fry until the center reaches whatever your
target temperature is. It is amazing how much higher the center temperature
keeps rising after the chicken pieces are removed from the pan. I fry in a
classic deep cast iron chicken fryer (like a deep skillet with cover). I fry
in two batches. The first batch has cooled on the outside to the point one
can actually eat it, while the center has risen to a safe temperature, by
the time the second batch is finished. The timing also depends on how big
the bird was you started with. The thigh on a 6 pound "fryer" is going to
take a whole lot longer than that from a 3 pound fryer. (Yes, in my
supermarket, those 6 pound monsters are still called "fryers". That's
because the "roasters" can be even bigger yet.)

Practice makes perfect. Your fried chicken will start looking a whole lot
nicer once you've done it several times and get a feel for the method.

--
( #wff_ng_7# at #verizon# period #net# )

On 2006-08-29, ms_peacock > wrote:

> I've never measure the temps but it generally takes about 45 minutes to pan
> fry chicken. I've never turned the burner above about medium high though.
> I'd rather have it cook a little slower and get done all the way thru.

Does you chicken come out crispy and non-greasy? That's what I must
acheive, above all else. My chicken, despite it's dark crust, is
non-greasy. I despise KFC's greasy chicken.

nb

"notbob" > wrote in message
. ..
> On 2006-08-29, -L. > wrote:
>
>> until they are a little golden brown (8 mins? - I have never timed it).
>
>
>
>
> Now, this is where I start wondering about perceived times and temps
> versus real. I'm sure you are being honest with me, but I did this
> all very scientifically. I had a very good digital immersion
> thermometer and an electronic timer. When that oil hit 360 deg F, (I
> knew the chicken would cool the oil) in went the chicken. Within a
> timed 4 mins, that chicken was hoplessly beyond "golden brown". And
> this with a temp drop of almost 30 deg within the 1st min and me
> having to turn up the heat (slow electric hob) to get the temp back
> up.
>
> I also noticed the 350° oil is damn hot oil. It was actually rather
> difficult keeping it up there. Even turning the chicken the first
> time dropped temps 25°. I was constantly cranking my big hob to HIGH
> to keep temps up. This with at least 2-1/2 C of canola oil in a good
> iron skillet and I didn't overload the pan (1 chicken, 2 batches). I
> suspect most folks are really cooking not at 350°, but closer to
> 320-330° if my temp readings are any indication. Methinks your times
> are also a tad exaggerated. I can't for the life of me imagine a
> chicken taking 45 mins to cook. Even chicken breasts oven baked at
> 325° start drying out after about 30 mins.
>
> But, I like your idea of keep the chicken moving. More than one
> respondent agrees. Perhaps that's the secret. I may try another oil,
> also. My canola oil is irretrievably browned so maybe I'll try lard.
> No way I'm using hydrogenated Crisco.
>
> This was a good learning experience for an almost first timer.
> Besides, it turns out my chicken isn't quite as bad as I first
> thought. In the light of day, the pieces are not exactly dark
> chocolate colored, though one spot on the flat of the back was
> actually black. And again, I can say it actually tastes good. I
> think I needed a tad more salt, but the buttermilk marinade is a good
> way to go. There's a nice sweetness to the meat and it is very moist.
> I think a couple more batches and I may be posting some pictures
> of my own.
>
> Thank you all who've responded.
>
> nb

I've never measure the temps but it generally takes about 45 minutes to pan
fry chicken. I've never turned the burner above about medium high though.
I'd rather have it cook a little slower and get done all the way thru.

Ms P

"Goomba38" > wrote in message
. ..
> notbob wrote:
>
>> Now, this is where I start wondering about perceived times and temps
>> versus real. I'm sure you are being honest with me, but I did this
>> all very scientifically. I had a very good digital immersion
>> thermometer and an electronic timer.
>
> My electric deep fryer has a timer on it. Once I had a ball park idea of
> what the pieces were taking to cook, I could set the timer with each
> batch.

He's not deep frying though. He's pan frying.

Ms P

On 2006-08-29, wff_ng_7 > wrote:

> 350° is damn hot to try and maintain. As long as the temperature remains
> above 275° or so (preferrably 300° or a little above), things will be okay

Now we're getting to the real nitty gritty. But! ...here's what I run
across on the web:

"Keep your oil very hot. To make sure that your chicken doesn't get
greasy, you want the oil hot enough (375 degrees Fahrenheit) that the
water in the chicken stays above the boiling point during frying. The
force of the steam leaving the chicken keeps the oil from being
absorbed. The hot oil also makes the outside wonderfully crispy."

http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/Dumm...bcat-FOOD.html

This is what I always thought. Hot != greasy. But, then the very
same page later states:

"Brown the chicken quickly to seal in the juices. After the initial
browning, reduce the heat to allow the chicken to cook through without
drying."

DOH!!

Now, which is it? Keep it hot or not? This is the key point I'm
looking for. How to cook the chicken so it becomes done, but cooks
hot enough to not come out greasy. Also, this page gives advice that
directly contradicts suggestions made by others, like keeping the
chicken cold before frying. It's maddening. I think you are right.
I'm just going to have to keep at it till I work out a method that
works for me.

nb












> and there will be less tendency for burning. The other thing is to keep
> moving the chicken so the same spot doesn't sit in contact with the bottom
> of the pan. I believe the pan bottom itself is well in excess of the
> temperature of the oil above it. I think one would get a different result in
> a fryer with a basket elevated above the pan bottom compared to sitting
> right on the bottom.
>
> I tend to fry for about 10 to 12 minutes per side. I've used a digital meat
> thermometer and learned to not fry until the center reaches whatever your
> target temperature is. It is amazing how much higher the center temperature
> keeps rising after the chicken pieces are removed from the pan. I fry in a
> classic deep cast iron chicken fryer (like a deep skillet with cover). I fry
> in two batches. The first batch has cooled on the outside to the point one
> can actually eat it, while the center has risen to a safe temperature, by
> the time the second batch is finished. The timing also depends on how big
> the bird was you started with. The thigh on a 6 pound "fryer" is going to
> take a whole lot longer than that from a 3 pound fryer. (Yes, in my
> supermarket, those 6 pound monsters are still called "fryers". That's
> because the "roasters" can be even bigger yet.)
>
> Practice makes perfect. Your fried chicken will start looking a whole lot
> nicer once you've done it several times and get a feel for the method.
>

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 14:28:13 -0500, notbob > wrote:


>Now we're getting to the real nitty gritty. But! ...here's what I run
>across on the web:

>This is what I always thought. Hot != greasy. But, then the very
>same page later states:
>
>"Brown the chicken quickly to seal in the juices. After the initial
>browning, reduce the heat to allow the chicken to cook through without
>drying."
>
>DOH!!
>
>Now, which is it? Keep it hot or not? This is the key point I'm
>looking for. How to cook the chicken so it becomes done, but cooks
>hot enough to not come out greasy.

This is the way I was taught, and I grew up in Virginia. We always
turned down the heat after the initial browning.

Christine

"notbob" > wrote:
> Now we're getting to the real nitty gritty. But! ...here's what I run
> across on the web:
>
> "Keep your oil very hot. To make sure that your chicken doesn't get
> greasy, you want the oil hot enough (375 degrees Fahrenheit) that the
> water in the chicken stays above the boiling point during frying. The
> force of the steam leaving the chicken keeps the oil from being
> absorbed. The hot oil also makes the outside wonderfully crispy."
>
> http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/Dumm...bcat-FOOD.html
>
> This is what I always thought. Hot != greasy. But, then the very
> same page later states:
>
> "Brown the chicken quickly to seal in the juices. After the initial
> browning, reduce the heat to allow the chicken to cook through without
> drying."

I took a look at that dummies article and there are those contradictions. I
think what the overall jist of it is that the oil has to be "hot" during
the initial browning stage, and can be lowered quite a bit during the longer
cooking period where the interior is brought up to a safe and "cooked"
temperature. Once the crust is crisp and brown, I think it is fairly
tolerant of a lower temperature, as long as it is still well above the
boiling point of water. 275 to 325 is still well above boiling. Notice the
dummies article says nothing about oil temperature for the second part of
cooking where all the chicken is returned to the pan. It says turn heat to
low or medium low and cook slowly and gently.

To me, 375 still seems a bit high for an initial temperature, but I know how
hard it is to control the temperature even over a gas flame. I probably try
for 350 to 360, but overshoot often enough and end up at 375 or more. The
oil temperature with nothing in the pan climbs very fast, and I'm not going
to turn the heat off and wait until it gets back down. I just monitor how
fast the browning is occurring and lower the flame a bit if it seems to be
going too fast.

Then there's the whole issue of using a cover. The advice varies across the
board. I cover during the first half of cooking on the first side, and then
cook uncovered for the remainder. With my crust recipe (which produces a
fairly thick crust, but it is not a batter crust), it ends up very crispy.
The thing I like about covering during the first part of cooking is that is
where the bubbling oil causes the most mess. The bubbling is very much
subdued during the later portions of the cooking time. Though I do use a
cover, it is still vented... my chicken fryer has two spouts, and the cover
also covers these spouts totally enclosing it if aligned. But I turn the
cover slightly so the spouts are uncovered and the steam can escape. Most of
the oil spatter is contained but the steam can get out.

--
( #wff_ng_7# at #verizon# period #net# )

notbob wrote:
> On 2006-08-29, wff_ng_7 > wrote:
>
> > 350° is damn hot to try and maintain. As long as the temperature remains
> > above 275° or so (preferrably 300° or a little above), things will be okay
>
> Now we're getting to the real nitty gritty. But! ...here's what I run
> across on the web:
>
> "Keep your oil very hot. To make sure that your chicken doesn't get
> greasy, you want the oil hot enough (375 degrees Fahrenheit) that the
> water in the chicken stays above the boiling point during frying. The
> force of the steam leaving the chicken keeps the oil from being
> absorbed. The hot oil also makes the outside wonderfully crispy."
>
> http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/Dumm...bcat-FOOD.html
>
> This is what I always thought. Hot != greasy. But, then the very
> same page later states:
>
> "Brown the chicken quickly to seal in the juices. After the initial
> browning, reduce the heat to allow the chicken to cook through without
> drying."
>
> DOH!!
>
> Now, which is it? Keep it hot or not?

I recall turning down the heat a tad when the splattering became more
violent. And FWIW, the 45 minutes total cooking time I cited is pretty
accurate, IIRC. You have to realize this is done as a procedure passed
down from one generation to the next. Nothing scinetific about
it...you just sort of do it, and it works!

-L.

"notbob" > wrote in message
...
> On 2006-08-29, ms_peacock > wrote:
>
>> I've never measure the temps but it generally takes about 45 minutes to
>> pan
>> fry chicken. I've never turned the burner above about medium high
>> though.
>> I'd rather have it cook a little slower and get done all the way thru.
>
> Does you chicken come out crispy and non-greasy? That's what I must
> acheive, above all else. My chicken, despite it's dark crust, is
> non-greasy. I despise KFC's greasy chicken.
>
> nb

It comes out very crispy and non-greasy. I rinse and dry the chicken well.
Then dip in egg/milk wash and then into seasoned flour. I lay the pieces on
a sheet of wax paper until the egg wash has soaked up the flour and then I
dip into the flour again. I put about an eighth of an inch of oil in the
pan and heat until a little flour dropped in sizzles. Add the chicken
pieces skin side down until the pan is full. I don't cook in batches. If
there's too many pieces of chicken to brown all at once the first time I
just pile them up in the pan. When the first side is lightly browned turn
and lightly brown the other side. Turn again, lower the heat and cover.
Check it every 10 minutes or so and when it's a dark golden brown turn and
cook the other side to dark golden brown.

I'm sure I never turn the burner above med-high. I know I never use high.
I always use canola oil.

Ms P

"ms_peacock" > wrote:
> I put about an eighth of an inch of oil in the pan and heat until a little
> flour dropped in sizzles.

Here's another diffence in how one can fry chicken. I use about 3/4 inch of
oil. Others use electric deep fryers with probably a couple of inches of
oil. Just like they say there are many ways to skin a cat, there are many
ways to fry a chicken. But the combination of elements... the type of
coating, the temperature of the chicken, the amount of oil, the temperature
of the oil, whether a basket is used, etc. all interact to produce great
fried chicken... or a dismal failure. Taking one piece of someone's advice
may or may not improve one's results... it's the total procedure that
matters. But the original poster must be well on his way to great results,
considering how well he did the first time. It took me a while to get
results I really liked, and now I'm sticking with it. I try not to let too
long go between making fried chicken, for fear I'll lose my touch! ;-)

--
( #wff_ng_7# at #verizon# period #net# )

notbob wrote:

> First, I hafta confess my sins. I've never really fried chicken.
> There, I've said it.

I've made it a few times, but not for a long time. I don't eat it much
at all anymore and, frankly, Popeye's makes better fried chicken than I
ever did. On the rare occasions I have it, I stop in there.





Brian (the batter-dipped fries are good too)

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

Oh pshaw, on Tue 29 Aug 2006 05:45:39a, kilikini meant to say...

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" <wayneboatwright_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> 28.19...
>> Oh pshaw, on Tue 29 Aug 2006 03:43:49a, kilikini meant to say...
>>
>> >
>> > "-L." > wrote in message
>> > ups.com...
>> >>
>> >> notbob wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
>> >> > really do it?
>> >> >
>>
>> I've used lard, too, kili. Crisco produces very similar results,
>> although not quite the same flavor. Both work much better than oil.
>> It never burns as oil often seems to do.
>>
>
> Okay, then it must be the oil that's producing less than satisfactory
> results to the OP. Interesting.

Yes, I think that's it. I remember my mother trying oil one time years
ago and never did it again as it was disappointing. She either used lard
or Crisco.

--
Wayne Boatwright
__________________________________________________

Walk in shadow, walk in dread, Loosefish walk as
like one dead

notbob wrote:
> First, I hafta confess my sins. I've never really fried chicken.
> There, I've said it. Oh, I took a half hearted stab at it back when I
> was a pup. But, it was so pitiful it has intimidated me ever since.
> Add the fact that I've never really been a rabid fried chicken fan,
> and you have life-long calculated indifference.
>
> So anyway, I did the big fried chicken thing this weekend and tonight.
> The whole nine yards. Cut up a whole fryer, marinated in buttermilk,
> fried in my big ol' No. 10 Wagner, yada yada. Actually, I'm pretty
> pleased with how it came out, taste-wise, and that's what really
> counts. Also, it's very moist and tender. BUT!! ...it's just not
> pretty! It's not post-the-pic material. I see other folk's picnic
> chicken and recall how my godmother's killer chicken looked. In
> comparison, mine looks horrible.
>
> Here's pics of the recipe I pretty much followed to the letter.
>
> http://www.elise.com/recipes/archive...ed_chicken.php
>
> As I said, it tastes great. But, mine is not that picture perfect
> chicken you see on the drain rack and serving plate on that website.
> Let's put it this way. If the chicken in the pictures is Beyoncé
> Knowles, my chicken is CCH Pounder. And here is where I want some
> honesty. How does one really cook fried chicken to cook it hot enough
> so it's not greasy, long enough that it's done, yet just enough so it
> looks appealing? Cuz I'm telling you right now, there's no way in
> Hell the recipe on that website produced the chicken in those
> pictures. Cooking chicken in oil @ 350 deg F for 12-15 mins *per
> side* is gonna get you some damn dark chicken. Sure, I know
> commercial cooking pics are mostly bogus, but I've seen real
> in-the-wild fried chicken that's both pretty and good tasting at the
> same time. So! ...what's the skinny? How did you and/or granny
> really do it?
>
> nb
>

As soon as you figure out the secret, let me know. Please!

I've loved fried chicken all my life. My grandmother made it just about
every Sunday for dinner. She always did it just right, perfect hot for
the evening meal, with enough left over for cold lunches on Monday or
Tuesday. It looked good and tasted good too!

She made milk gravy with a little of the leftover oil and the "goody"
(the bits of crust that built up in the bottom of the pan). Usually
spooned the gravy over fresh mashed potatoes, but sometimes over toast
or sliced homemade bread.

My grandmother wasn't from down south, but there was definitely a rural
influence on her cooking background.

Many dozens of years later, I tried to make fried chicken for some
friends. I used a well-seasoned cast iron pan, hot oil, and took the
best care possible to soak the pieces in milk and then cover them in
seasoned flour. It came out okay, but the "goody" burnt and the gravy
just didn't happen. And the individual pieces just didn't look very good.

I'm sure it's a matter of "practice makes perfect". By the time I came
along in the early 60's, my grandmother had been married for over 40
years and had lots of practice time in the kitchen. With the exception
of when they traveled, every meal my grandparents consumed was hand-made
by my grandmother. Only God knows exactly how many chickens she fried
over those multitude of years. I'm sure as a young woman and a new
bride, she screwed up her share! ;-)

"Default User" > wrote:
> I've made it a few times, but not for a long time. I don't eat it much
> at all anymore and, frankly, Popeye's makes better fried chicken than I
> ever did. On the rare occasions I have it, I stop in there.

There just aren't any good fried chicken places that close to my house. I
admit, some of them do a very good job, but I think I've perfected my
technique to the point mine comes out better. It took a long time to get
there though. And no doubt about it, it is one of the messier types of
cooking one can do.

There are certain advantages to doing it oneself... I get to keep the rest
of the carcass and giblets for stock. The liver I saute as a snack after I
cut up the chicken and put the pieces in buttermilk. Years ago... like over
25 years ago, I remember some of the fried chicken places had chicken livers
on the menu. I think it was Church's, but maybe Popeye's did too. I looked
online at both place's menus, and neither lists chicken livers now. Another
good food that bit the dust?

--
( #wff_ng_7# at #verizon# period #net# )

On 2006-08-30, wff_ng_7 > wrote:

> 25 years ago, I remember some of the fried chicken places had chicken livers
> on the menu.

I never saw livers, but I do recal Kentucky Fried Chicken (not KFC)
that sold gizzards. I even bought some, but only once. It was like
chewing golf balls.

nb