18" WSM Boston Butt Capacity?


 
J

Jason H.

TVWBB Member
All,

I am going to be doing a boston butt cook this weekend and was wondering how many butts anyone has done in the 18" WSM? I have heard some discussions where people stand the butts up on the wider end to get more in there. I was thinking do 4 butts (2 on each rack sitting on the long flat side). Has anyone had this issue?
 
I would do them fat cap down with the bones facing inward for better bark formation. Anymore than 2 per grate can get cramped if more than 6lbs each.
 
Hi Jason.
I did 6 10 pounders on my 18.5"WSM, (3 per grate) and I had to stand them up on edge with the FC facing out.
With just 2 a rack, I would agree with Glen, FC down and let it roll.
wsmsmile8gm.gif

Good luck!

Tim
 
Sure, you can cook a LOT of pork butt in the little 18.5" wsm. I even noticed a thread the other day on another site where the poster claimed to have just cooked EIGHT butts at once.
icon_confused.gif


My personal most was five though, and I doubt I'll ever do that again. I stood three butts on end on the top rack around a beercan chicken rack, and layed two big ones flat on the bottom rack. The ones on end didn't cook as evenly as my usual layed flat ones, fat down, so I'll stick to cooking four butts max.

Taking the shape and pairing up into consideration, as well as the weight, personally, I don't think I'm making any sacrifices in bark or evenness of cooking for butts averaging up to.. at least eight pounds. Maybe some are cut from the shoulder a little differently, but I usually buy "fresh" cryovaced Excel bone-in. Actually, I don't have a problem putting four NINE pounders in the cooker, but yeah, they might touch a little. They shrink some while cooking though, and I don't notice any issues, even without rotating. That's cooking without the use of foil, 225-250* at the vent.
 
To maximize space I would cook boneless, rub all over then tie up the loose parts where the bone was nice and tight and stay with four 8-10 pounders.
 
I ended up doing 4 butts for a total uncooked weight of 28 lbs. I got about 16.5 lbs out of usable meat.

I just laid them flat with the fat side down.
 
may I ask why u lay fat side down?? Wouldnt it be better to have fat cap up so it melts intot he meat? maybe i am getting my cuts mixed up
 
I've done six at a time. Found that trying to do 6-10lb butts gets really cramped even standing them on edge. Sure , they will shrink down but when standing them on end on the bottom rack and trying to put the top grate on without mooshing the bottom butts down is a challenge. Hats off to the guy that does 6-10 ponders. Post some pics next time. Would really like to see the configuration.
 
Michael,

Actually every other time I have done them I did it fat side up so that it would "melt" down onto the meat. However, several of the posts I read on here said to put it fat side down. I just tried it this time to see if it would make a difference. I saw NO difference in the meat whatsoever. Since this is my first time going to a WSM from a small propane smoker I thought it might be a good buffer between the meat and the heat source so that it wouldn't burn the meat on the bottom edges especially since I had meat all the way out to the edges of the rack this time since I had so much in there but even where the meat was over the outer ring not covered by the water pan on the lower edge there was no scorching of the fat at all that I could see. Good news is that nothing was scorched. Bad news is that I am not really seeing a reason for the fat cap on there at all. Previously I always scoffed at the people who said they cut the fat cap off but next time I might try cutting it off and getting more rub directly onto the meat.

Everyone please give me pro or con comments but as usual I like to experiment and find out what might work on my own and from my experience this weekend I don't know if I can justify leaving the fat cap on.

As usual the WSM did a great job!
 
I have done 6 at once on my 18! Stand them up in a tri-pod formation with wooden skewers. Make sure they are not laying on each other, you want air flow!
 
I'm new and learning. I have 4 Butts on right now and this is the first time I've trimmed the fat. I'm guessing I'll get more bark. I read Chris's explanation and tried to follow it. I'll let you know how it turns out.
 
Lew,

Post how it turned out and pictures are always nice!

Honestly since I do pulled pork for sandwiches most of the time I don't really go for bark on my butts. I will smoke for ~4 hours and then foil it up. I have found a more moist consistency when I foil and its much more forgiving. If you think of how much surface area is created when you pull the pork the bark that might form on the outside is a small percentage.
 
Jason was yours bone in? Looks like you got 59% useable meat.. With boneless I was last able to get 65% from 55 lbs. That was on the 22 WSM, after pulling but no sauce.
 
Jason, it took 20 hours but the 4 butts are done. Trimming the fat definitely gives more bark. Next time I'm cooking at 250 to 275 to cut down the time. I'm bushed. Here's my post in BBQ.
 
Originally posted by Lew Newby:
Jason, it took 20 hours but the 4 butts are done. Trimming the fat definitely gives more bark. Next time I'm cooking at 250 to 275 to cut down the time. I'm bushed. Here's my post in BBQ.
Click to expand...

Lew, if you can speed up the time in getting the cooker up to temp, I don't think you'll notice a big difference in cooking four butts vs. two. Also, when that Kingsford bb suffocates itself, that's really gonna add some time to the cook as well.

I think my 30lb+ overnight cooks are probably averaging 14-15 hours, cooking in the 235-250* zone, measured at the vent. The longest I've had was 18hr, but that was with FIVE butts, and I did notice a lack of circulation around the meat on the top rack that slowed the cook down somewhat.
 
Originally posted by Lew Newby:
Jason, it took 20 hours but the 4 butts are done. Trimming the fat definitely gives more bark. Next time I'm cooking at 250 to 275 to cut down the time. I'm bushed. Here's my post in BBQ.
Click to expand...

Lew, try cooking one time without trimming. I've found that most of the discarded stuff when pulling pork is internal not external.Most ,if not all, the external fat renders anyway. Saves you time on prep. Now, if you're competing that might be a different story.
 
Originally posted by paul h:
I've found that most of the discarded stuff when pulling pork is internal not external. Most, if not all, the external fat renders anyway. Saves you time on prep. Now, if you're competing that might be a different story.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get plenty of bark without trimming butts, and I feel that the fat cap helps, at least to some degree, to hold the moisture in.

Regarding "discarded stuff" though, I find there's hardly anything left to pull out if I keep the temp down and cook overnight, say targeting 225* or so, or running 225-250* at the dome vent.

My big butt cooks probably run around 14-15 hrs like this, and just recently I was reminded of the difference in cooking at higher temps. I did a two butt cook all day at a higher temp, say 250-275*, and had MUCH more stuff left in the meat. It was good, but took at least twice as much time to pan up for serving and had no more moisture than usual, even though I injected.

<span class="ev_code_RED">I've since learned that it takes a long rest in a hot cooler to make all that internal fat and connective tissue to render, and honestly, I think it's a good indicator of cooking past prime. </span>
icon_rolleyes.gif
 
Dave, there are connecting tissues and stuff like that. MAybe you like eating that goop but I sure don't.
 
Originally posted by paul h:
Dave, there are connecting tissues and stuff like that. MAybe you like eating that goop but I sure don't.
Click to expand...

MAybe I didn't make my self clear. Cook long and low enough and there's virtually no connective tissue and fat left. There's always one good piece of gristle though.
icon_biggrin.gif


<span class="ev_code_RED">Edit: Paul's right. I just learned the other day that evidently, it takes a long REST to make all the connective tissue and fat render, and it probably indicates that the carry-over cooking takes the pork past prime. See my other post edits in red if that's not clear enough. </span>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top