My water pans never runs dry...

[Scott B (nj)]

Almost every recipe, trick, tip, manual, etc for the WSM has mentioned keeping up with the water pan, checking it to make sure it never runs dry, adding more water every x hours, etc.

My WSM never comes close to running out. Never once in countless runs on it, have I been worried about the water running dry. After Hurricane Sandy, I was smoking ribs and brisket for my neighborhood, and had it going for close to 36 hours straight. Again, never had to add water

The easy answer seems to be my geographic location, 7 miles from the ocean, 1 mile to the bay.... Humidity is almost always through the roof. I want to believe thats it, but maybe there's something I'm missing. Any input from the board would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Dave Russell]

Scott, you're not alone. Maybe the humidity has a little to do with it, but my guess is that it also has to do with your cooking temp. Also are you starting off with hot tap? With any boiling? Big bullet or 18.5" wsm? (The big one's pan is relatively far from the fire, but the little ones pan is huge.)

 

[Dwain Pannell]

When I used water, I got 3 gal in the 22" and never ran dry even on long overnight cooks.

 

[Dave Russell]

When I used water, I got 3 gal in the 22" and never ran dry even on long overnight cooks.

That's exactly what my buddy in Mississippi said of his 22".

I've yet to use water in my 22" for long cooks, and never run a completely full pan for ribs. I do cook 'em fast enough that the pan will be quite low by the end, though, and I start off with hot tap and usually a kettle worth of boiling.

My experience with the 18" for long cooks is eventually needing to add some to the pan, but typically, the Brinkman pan won't need any more water til the next morning.

 

[Scott B (nj)]

I'm running a 22.5, 225-275 deg.

 

[Dave Russell]

Yeah, I think the pan is just too far from the fire to steam off as fast as the 18" wsm.

 

[Mike Freel]

I only put about 1 gallon of water in the pan of my 18 inches and it always lasts the entire smoke. It's past weekend I did Boston butts and there was still water left after 14 hours.

Mike

 

[Dave Russell]

I only put about 1 gallon of water in the pan of my 18 inches and it always lasts the entire smoke. It's past weekend I did Boston butts and there was still water left after 14 hours.

Mike

Mike, there's a reason why Weber increased the pan capacity from only one gallon to how ever much it is in the huge pan they started using in '09. If you can run for 14 hrs. on only one gallon of water so close to the fire, you're cooking quite slooooowwwwwww....I'm interested in hearing your cook times.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Matt Gard]

I've had the exact opposite experience with my 22.5 WSM. I filled the pan completely and was bone dry 6 hours in cooking at 225-250.

 

[Dave Russell]

I've had the exact opposite experience with my 22.5 WSM. I filled the pan completely and was bone dry 6 hours in cooking at 225-250.

Dang. Only way I could figure that is if you had several butts on the cooker and measured temp by the Weber dome gauge....starting off with hot or maybe even boiling water. (???)

 

[Matt H]

I have an 18 and i usually fill the pan with hot water. I've always had water left in the pan, even after over nighters. I do cook relatively low though, usually never hotter than 250.

 

[Scott B (nj)]

I've had the exact opposite experience with my 22.5 WSM. I filled the pan completely and was bone dry 6 hours in cooking at 225-250.

Wow... Take a note of the humidity level next time you smoke.

 

[Matt Gard]

I did cook using my dome thermometer, but i've checked that using my thermapen and its within 5 degrees of the thermapen. I had one butt on the last time(i've since switched to not using water at all). It was about 10 degrees outside and little wind. And the water I used was warm water.

 

[Dave Russell]

Originally Posted by Matt Gard:
"I've had the exact opposite experience with my 22.5 WSM. I filled the pan completely and was bone dry 6 hours in cooking at 225-250."

Originally Posted by Dave Russell:
"Dang. Only way I could figure that is if you had several butts on the cooker and measured temp by the Weber dome gauge....starting off with hot or maybe even boiling water. (???)

I did cook using my dome thermometer, but i've checked that using my thermapen and its within 5 degrees of the thermapen. I had one butt on the last time(i've since switched to not using water at all). It was about 10 degrees outside and little wind. And the water I used was warm water.

Gotcha, Matt...warm water from the start, 225-250 by the gauge in first 6 hours of cooking one butt, but only 10* outside.

Yeah, from my own experience at least, I guess I can see how you'd simmer the water off so quickly if you were measuring temp by the gauge. It's because your fire was practically boiling the water off, and you were cooking a lot faster than you thought. (I actually do about the same for cooking ribs if not foiling, but no water for everything else.)

As far as accuracy goes, the Weber dome gauge is usually just fine, although my experience is that they eventually read a little on the low side. (I've had Weber send me two.) Anyhow, the "problem" is in it's location and the short stem, in that it's quite affected by relatively cold meat and ambient temps, simply because it's outside of the stream of circulation. In nice weather, the gauge might read very close to the grate temp, but that's usually only after the meat is thoroughly heated and the sun is hitting the dome.

Still, I've used the gauge many times, especially for ribs, where I didn't have much room with three large slabs on the top grate. If I wanted to cook at 225-250 at the start of a cook though, (at least if starting while it's still dark and the sun isn't hitting the dome), my Weber gauge starts at around 200* and then rises to not much past 12 o'clock within the first few hours. But cooking so fast from the start with water in the pan I can understand why you've decided to "go dry"! No more refilling the pan, and I'm sure you're using a lot less charcoal now, huh?

Regards,
Dave

 

[Matt Gard]

I am using a whole lot less charcoal now that I don't use water. I used two 20 pound bags on that first butt cook when it was 10 degrees outside and I used water. I just cooked a butt last week in about 15 degrees and I used maybe 20 pounds and had a lot left over after 11 hours.

 

[Dave Russell]

I am using a whole lot less charcoal now that I don't use water. I used two 20 pound bags on that first butt cook when it was 10 degrees outside and I used water. I just cooked a butt last week in about 15 degrees and I used maybe 20 pounds and had a lot left over after 11 hours.

That's what I figured. As an aside, though, tell you what. Unless you like your ribs foiled, I wouldn't give up on water in the pan completely. You won't use near as much more charcoal as you'd think, because the ribs cook more efficiently and evenly in the steamy environment. (Steam burns, right?) Also, the moist environment helps control bark formation and helps keep it from getting leathery, particularly on the ends of the ribs. Like I said though, I basically only use water if cooking ribs that I'm NOT gonna foil during the cook. I prefer st. louis or spare ribs smoked and cooked without foiling, but all my best loinback ribs to date have been smoked for a couple hours or so, then foiled til tender or almost. I get a better bark on them if I just foil the pan and cook dry.

Have a good 'un!
Dave