Looooong butt cook


 
Alan Dively

Alan Dively

TVWBB Member
So I'm trying my first no water smoke (using clay saucer and lump). The good news is, is that I've gone 15 hrs so far without having to add more fuel. The bad news is that I'm still at 180 where I'm taking the temp (confirmed in the other butt on the top grate with a thermapen).

I have 4 ~ 9 lb butts in my 18.5 and holding cooking temps around 230-ish. I usually get them done about 1.25 hrs/lb. This looks it may go 2hrs/lb.

Anyone else have them go this long? I'm thinking the lack of 'humdity' in the air in the smoker may prolong the cooking process.

Thanks, Alan
 
Where and how are you measuring the cooking temp? I generally try to keep the cooking temp at 250-270 or so with a probe hanging in the exhaust vent
 
I was taking the temp at the top grate. I finally pulled them after 16 hrs when the probed butt was at 185 in the center. Away from the blade bone I was getting 197 to 200 and no resistance. I haven't shredded them yet but a quick taste makes me think they have the best bark out of all the butt cooks I've done.

I think I could've gone 20+hrs without refueling as my vents were still partially closed when I decided to shut everything down.
 
Last edited:
Alan, yes, in my experience, water in the pan does speed things up a bit since moisture conducts heat more efficiently. That's why foiling during the cook is so effective, and that's also why you can hold your hand over the vent on a dry pan cook for longer than if with water at the same temp. However, as you observed, a dry pan means better bark.
 
Alan Dively said:
So I'm trying my first no water smoke (using clay saucer and lump). The good news is, is that I've gone 15 hrs so far without having to add more fuel. The bad news is that I'm still at 180 where I'm taking the temp (confirmed in the other butt on the top grate with a thermapen).

I have 4 ~ 9 lb butts in my 18.5 and holding cooking temps around 230-ish. I usually get them done about 1.25 hrs/lb. This looks it may go 2hrs/lb.

Anyone else have them go this long? I'm thinking the lack of 'humdity' in the air in the smoker may prolong the cooking process.

Thanks, Alan
Click to expand...

Steam may be a better conductor of heat, but foiling works because is increases the overall temperature in the cooking environment. Increasing the cooking temperature to 275F - 300F will reduce the cooking time negligible affect on the product. Practice will allow you to decide if you prefer foil or not for the bark.
 
I definitely like bark on the no water butts better and the extended cook time for the cooker.

I thought that no water might be a little slower but 4+hrs slower was an eye-opener. I'll have to plan ahead next time since the wait was worth it.

Is there a clay saucer that fits the 22?
 
I had 6 8-10 lbs butts go 22 hours in a waterfilled pan 18.5. I kept the temps to about 230-238. I did refuel with a chimney of K about 3/4 of the way onto the smoke...it was before I was heading to bed.
 
I think the biggest reason your cook took so long was simply that you had 4 butts. It just takes more energy to cook 36 lbs than it does to cook 9 lbs.

But even just one butt can have tremendous variation in cook time. I had one take 16 hours (and I don't know why that would be considered bad unless you're just impatient). I had one complete in just 9 hours. At this point, I just prefer to start the night before and plan to keep it warm in a cooler if it should finish early.

But as was said, no big deal if you smoke at a higher temp to finish earlier. Experience will show what you prefer.

Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top