Second stall


 
PeterD

PeterD

TVWBB Super Fan
I've done a handful of overnight cooks so far this year and I'm asbsolutely noticing a second stall. Here's a Stokerlog screen cap of my most recent cook (2 butts, about 8.5# each). I had a regular ET-73 probe in the smaller one and the Stoker probe in the bigger of the two.

6-30-2013pr0kbuttsmoke.jpg


The first plateau hit after roughly 4 hours and lasted about 4 hours. Temps steadily climbed again after that for three hours until it his a second plateau for another 3-4 hours. I ran out of time with the butt in for 15-1/2 hours and stuck it immediately in foil then faux-cambro for 2 hours, and the result was perfect. The second butt was perfect right off the pit. In looking at Stokerlogs for previous cooks (mostly overnight briskets), I'm seeing the same pattern. First plateau hits around 145-160ish, steady climb to second plateau, which seems to last from 175-190. Here's a brisket from last July:
7-30Brisket-final.jpg


And a different one (where I foiled in the last two hours since it wouldn't budge otherwise):
BrisketJuly6-72012.jpg


Just curious what your own experiences are in this regard.
 
Enjoyed your graphs. When cooking at 225 I see a first stall but then just a slow uptick to desired 200 temp
 
The 2nd part which appears to be a stall may just be the fact that as the Delta T between meat and air termperature bcomes closer, the heat transfer is not as efficient. If you did the same tracking with the WSM temps at 275, I doubt that 2nd stall would show up. I'd give the 275 temps a try. I've had better luck at 275; that and if I keep the temps at 225 the butts aren't ready for almost 18-20 hours.
 
That's interesting. I noticed you cook ~ 225*F or so. Maybe you can try about 275*F and see if you get the same results.

I've started cooking at higher temps to speed up the cook and in doing so I've noticed the stall comes at a higher temp and is less pronounced.
 
Ken has it dead on. The closer the meat temp comes to the cook temp the longer it's going to take to increase it's temperature.
Even your last graph shows a very small rise from 10:00 to 11:00, but it'd take forever at that smoke temp to get where you want.
I made this mistake last fall when I worked hard to keep 225, I would have been there for another 6 hours, but I had to pull it and slice it before my guests killed me.
My last few smokes I did a 250 and they went a bit better, but like Ken said, next smoke I'm going to shoot for 275.
 
Interesting, but I don't pay attention to the temp much until my Maverick beeps at 188 or so depending on how fast I'm cooking.

A little off your topic, but I also like to cook slow for an overnight cook that's for supper the next day. I just think it tastes better and the bark is better if not held hot in foil for long. However, I'm not as happy with the bark texture when the cook is stretched out too close to 2hr/lb. I'll go 235 at the lowest for a long cook, and 275 if I'm trying to get it done. The bark just ends up more moist and tender than if I cook any slower than that range. 225 has been popularized since it's easy to maintain with a water smoker, and the humidity from the pan helps keep the bark from drying out.
 
I was running about 235 with water in the pan. I did add fuel and take it up to 250 and that pulled it out of my 176* purgatory. I did not foil it until it was ready to come off at 190*. Then I wrapped it tight with some butter and only about 1/4 cup apple juice, and it went into a hot cooler where it stayed for 5-6 hours. It was the best results I've had so far. It was still piping hot, but this is the first time that pretty much all of the fat seemed to have melted away, and the meat was perfectly tender with a decent bite. My longest cook so far (16 hours on the smoker) produced my best results so far - not sure if that is correlation or causation but I'm going to try to replicate it next time!
 
Ken Keating said:
The 2nd part which appears to be a stall may just be the fact that as the Delta T between meat and air termperature bcomes closer, the heat transfer is not as efficient. If you did the same tracking with the WSM temps at 275, I doubt that 2nd stall would show up. I'd give the 275 temps a try. I've had better luck at 275; that and if I keep the temps at 225 the butts aren't ready for almost 18-20 hours.
Click to expand...
Nailed it.

Try cooking a butt in your oven at 200F until it's done. You'll be waiting about 24 hours for it to finish creeping up. Same butt at 300F is done in like 6 hours because you always have a big temperature difference between the air around the meat and the meat itself.
 
Alan Soden said:
I was running about 235 with water in the pan. I did add fuel and take it up to 250 and that pulled it out of my 176* purgatory. I did not foil it until it was ready to come off at 190*. Then I wrapped it tight with some butter and only about 1/4 cup apple juice, and it went into a hot cooler where it stayed for 5-6 hours. It was the best results I've had so far. It was still piping hot, but this is the first time that pretty much all of the fat seemed to have melted away, and the meat was perfectly tender with a decent bite. My longest cook so far (16 hours on the smoker) produced my best results so far - not sure if that is correlation or causation but I'm going to try to replicate it next time!
Click to expand...

What are you speaking about? Butt or brisket?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top