Best Methods Question for Butt

[Brad H.]

Ok, I watched a show on Memphis in May and one man talked about cooking his pork butt at 210 for nearly 24 hours...this leads to some questions for the "experts" out there...

1) Will the product be significantly better if you use a lower temp. for a longer period of time?

2) Will the product be significantly better if the temp. remains stable over time? Will spikes of only 6 to 10 degrees make a difference or do you want to keep it a rock solid temp for as long as possible?

 

[Jerry N.]

If you go too low and slow I think you run the risk of drying out the meat. Like anything, however, if it works for you - do it.

Running at a stable temp in my opinion has more to do with getting done than it does flavor. I can see how large swings in temp (25º or more) could effect the finished product, but ten or so - I wouldn't think so.

 

[K Kruger]

I agree with Jerry.

For some very finely marbled briskets (think Kobe/Wagyu) I think very low temps are preferred. For Prime briskets, probably around the temps you mention, Brad. Butts, no, not if they're standard supermarket/mass-produced butts.

Can you do butts that low? Sure. Does it make them better? Not in my opinion.

I do butts much higher. Imo, butt does not need very low temps--the fat structure doesn't support the need. Yes, as Steve Petrone noted just today (in another thread) bark texture might be an issue at higher temps (or with higher temp spikes) but much of that comes down to personal taste, how finely (or not) the rub was ground, the contents of the rub (some things take higher heat better than others), and whether you rest the butt flipped (thereby increasing the potential for bark softening), or mop (ditto). I do not think butts are 'better' cooked at higher temps--I think they are pretty much the same--controlling for potential bark issues (again, according to preference) is all that is needed.

For pastured pork (not feedlotted, not mass-produced) things can be different. Finely striated fat and connective tissue (like one finds in Kobe) can be found in some of the pig breeds and in these cases a lower temp can be helpful. The fat/tissue structure is different--it often looks like less but is actually more (more renderable at the very least)--and lower temps allow more time for gentle rendering. With 'normal' butts the structure, though appearing like more, is less renderable (as compared to many heritage breeds) even though it appears substantial. It is substantial, it's just that it's not of the prolific/fine structure and treating it as such (by using low temps) can dry the meat if cook time is extended.

The trick with cooking tough meats of any variety and by whatever method--barbecue or braise--is to get a good sense of moisture content and fat/connective tissue content of the cut and select heat and time accordingly. Though nearly any tough meat of any internal structure can be cooked at very low temps, care must be taken to ensure tenderness without drying--which is a timing issue. Since hard and semi-hard fats are not going to render at low temps no matter how long the meat cooks excessive time is not beneficial for these (often mass-market) cuts.

 

[adam clyde]

Like Kevin said, I don't think butts need to, or benefit from, an ultra long, extra low smoke. I'm not advocating a 300+ degree cook like some folks are doing, but I think 250 is a very reasonable temp, which will speed up the cook 30% compared to a 210 cook.

I guess I shouldn't second guess someone competing at memphis in may (and presumably, since they are interviewing him, he's good too). All I know is that with my butts I get at my supermarket, doing them at 250-ish has produced a better result than doing them at 210-ish (which I've done by accident). I should note, however, that I don't do any injecting, brining or marinating either, which some folks do. Though, I can't see how that would affect the results of the cook, based on temperature.

Anyhow, just my 2 cents.