New Searwood pic.

[Jon Tofte]

My Recteq RT-700, which predates the SmokeFire, has the rear hopper which was intended to allow for a short auger, less prone to jamming. Recteq’s hopper is not so long and narrow like the SmokeFire’s, and I have never had an issue with it. I think Weber overdid it on style over functionality. Some have been able to remedy by removing the finger guard and lining with special slick tape.

The Recteq hopper lid also opens the opposite of the SmokeFire’s. I have heard complaints about that on the SmokeFire.

While not as “cool” or space-saving, side hoppers are everywhere - even Recteq uses them on their smaller grills - and I am sure will work fine on this new Searwood.

 

[Bradley Mack]

Not going to lie. I like it. I‘ll likely flip my Smokefire and move onto this.

 

[Greg Ross-MN]

Yeah I had the RT 680 with the rear hopper a few years ago. I swear it opened the same was as the SF though, hinged in the back. Here is their current "Flagship 1100" with the rear hopper.


Weber seems to have remedied the hopper on the Sear+. I haven't had any issues with it yet. Now I'm curious on the auger size difference.

 

[BFletcher]

I swear it opened the same was as the SF though, hinged in the back.

My SmokeFire hopper lid is hinged on the same edge as is my RT-700. But because of the SF vents and for other reasons it would be nice, in my mind, if it were hinged on the opposite edge so as to open toward the pit. In no particular order these are some of the reasons I feel this way:

1. Condensation occurs rapidly on the SF lid when it's open while the unit is running
2. Pellets easily get wedged between the hopper and pit (this doesn't cause an issue, though)
3. If filling the hopper from plastic bags while the unit is hot the lid might protect the bag from the hot pit

I'm not a physics expert but I am mystified as to why Weber did not produce the hopper so that its chute is centered.

 

[Brian B Atlanta]

Not going to lie. I like it. I‘ll likely flip my Smokefire and move onto this.

Careful lets get the thing out there for awhile and see what the reviews are. It didn't pay to be an early adopter of the Smokefire with all the issues it had. I love the looks of it still quite stylish again providing it all works so we will see.

I think that what might be getting lost here is they did not dream this new design up in 6 mos. They might have been working on it for at least a year probably longer most likely longer so fairly early on say 2 years into the Smokefire since it was launched in 2020 they figured out the Smokefire was not going to work for them then back to the drawing board. I wish them well I really do.

 

[Greg Ross-MN]

My SmokeFire hopper lid is hinged on the same edge as is my RT-700. But because of the SF vents and for other reasons it would be nice, in my mind, if it were hinged on the opposite edge so as to open toward the pit. In no particular order these are some of the reasons I feel this way:

1. Condensation occurs rapidly on the SF lid when it's open while the unit is running
2. Pellets easily get wedged between the hopper and pit (this doesn't cause an issue, though)
3. If filling the hopper from plastic bags while the unit is hot the lid might protect the bag from the hot pit

I'm not a physics expert but I am mystified as to why Weber did not produce the hopper so that its chute is centered.

Good points but it would be even more of a pain to fill if it opened the other way.

 

[BFletcher]

Good points but it would be even more of a pain to fill if it opened the other way.

Why do you feel it would be more cumbersome?

 

[Greg Ross-MN]

Why do you feel it would be more cumbersome?

The lid would be in the way. I fill mine from the front.

 

[BFletcher]

The lid would be in the way. I fill mine from the front.

Yeah, if filling from the front that lid change would not work, lol.

 

[Jon Tofte]

I am not home to look, but I guess I was wrong in saying that about the hopper lid. I just know I have read comments complaining about the one on the SmokeFire. The one on my Recteq is fine to me. The Rt-700 does have the old style “chimney” so there is no interaction between the lid and exiting smoke/heat.

EDIT: One picture I have on my phone seems to confirm that the hopper hinge is on the back.

 

[BFletcher]

I am not home to look, but I guess I was wrong in saying that about the hopper lid. I just know I have read comments complaining about the one on the SmokeFire. The one on my Recteq is fine to me. The Rt-700 does have the old style “chimney” so there is no interaction between the lid and exiting smoke/heat.

EDIT: One picture I have on my phone seems to confirm that the hopper hinge is on the back.

If Weber had not developed the "open fire" concept I'd still maintain that my RT-700 is perfect. And I like how the lid opens to a full horizontal position, whereas the SF lid stops at a full vertical position.

 

[Jon Tofte]

If Weber had not developed the "open fire" concept I'd still maintain that my RT-700 is perfect. And I like how the lid opens to a full horizontal position, whereas the SF lid stops at a full vertical position.

Maybe that is the difference I read comments about. I will post pictures when I get home after the weekend.

 

[LMichaels]

I think hopper placement and lid (purely from user input not relating to internal functions of the grill) can be very dependent on grill placement and how it's used. Me? given how I use my Z, I would really dislike a rear hopper. Had I bought a SF could I learn to live with it? Sure. But I would be "tolerating" it not loving it. Honestly I really like the side hopper for my application

 

[Bob Erdman]

I prefer the hopper in the back as is. Fits my grill area better.

Things I don't like about the Searwood are the lack of 4 wheels and the bottom shelf. The bottom of the pit doesn't look like it's porcelain coated either.

The little red strip along the front looks nice. Would be nice if you could get the entire cook chamber in red porcelain.

 

[BFletcher]

I think hopper placement and lid (purely from user input not relating to internal functions of the grill) can be very dependent on grill placement and how it's used.

Agreed

 

[JimK]

Hopefully, there will be tables/shelves available for the left and front.

 

[LMichaels]

It almost looks like the construction has been "cheapened" up. The SF thanks to it's hefty design, large casters and so on looks "built". This one looks like they almost did a throwback to a late 80s Genesis (2 wagon wheels and a lift area). Of course all this may be speculation. This photo may be simply a very early prototype and not really as close to actual production as many might think.
But if this is what an actual production unit will be I think some of it may disappoint people as a step back in design. Time will tell though so I refrain from being anything more than optimistic that it becomes a worthy successor to SF

 

[TimA]

So my initial reaction, I still stand by it, may have been a bit premature.

So, Smokefire blows this thing away in the looks department. Most of us enjoy our Webers for style as well as cooking, they have a presence on the deck or patio. That’s why we search for certain models and colors.

Having time to chew and look, it looks like the same cook chamber. This leads me to believe they will have the exact same flavorizer and grate setup they currently have. This is a good thing, as it’s what separates the Smokefire from everything else. Truly, the end product is superior to everything I’ve had, I’ve had food off every major brand out there.

The shelf, I could use. Smokefire has threaded bungs at bottom of legs, I’m going to make a stainless shelf for it. So, this is in line. I like.

What I don’t like. Visually the grease drain is bad, they’ve tried to make it look good and I applaud the effort, the red stripe is nice. The apparent change from rear hopper, meh. I like the rear hopper, it works just fine and folks make way too much out of it, but is what it is.

The new display looks good.

So, I’ll be interested to see what they offer and price point. And how it looks in person

 

[Lew Newby]

It's a conventional design pellet grill with the big drip pan and a side hopper. I'm betting that they stay with the Weber Connect software so that will be the same as a Smokefire. The design eliminates the flavorizer bar brackets and the interior pellet slide. Those were the most prone to corrosion/ heat erosion. The big and heavy drip pan puts a big heat sink between the fire and the food. That will stabilize the temps across the cooking grates and satisfy those who didn't like the big temp differences inside the Smokefire. My Smokefire gives good smoke at 400 F so I'm interested to see f the Searwood gives good smoke above 300 which is where my conventional design pellet grills ran out of smoke The Searwood is coming but I have no idea what Weber plans for the Smokefire.

 

[Greg Ross-MN]

The two wheel design makes it look like a cheap Spirit gas grill. Also, it would be dumb to name it “Searwood” and not have an ability to sear. Let’s hope that’s not the case. If it’s truly a traditional pellet style with a drip pan across the entire cooking area then it’s no different than anything else.

The fact it has a drip pan on the bottom like the Genesis tells me it just might still have flavorizer bars though.

I’m willing to forego looks if it performs well…