time was tight so I bumped the temp to 275 and modified the 3/2/1 method and while the ribs were properly smoked and looked good, they were not tender. Unfortunately, 4-4.5 hrs is not enough. I suppose in hindsight, I should have foiled longer and need to allow for more overall time, but that's the way it worked out. Maybe the liquid braising would have helped
Used the 2.5/1.25/.5 Method to no avail
- Thread starter DavidD
- Start date
Dave Russell
TVWBB Honor Circle
I've gotten ribs tender with the 3-2-1 method, but they were mushy, probably foiling too long. You're supposed to unwrap them when you have "pull back" on the tips, but anyway....
I've been pleased just to smoke til they look good, then foil til tender with little or no liquid in the foil. I put the ribs back on the smoker at that point just to glaze and/or crisp up a little, not long at all, especially if the cooker is real hot.
You can use this method and cook them slow or fast. I believe the method I've used lately is referred by many here as the 2-1-10 min. method, cooking St. Louis ribs at about 300 degrees. I'm not an expert at this by no means, but I have learned this: The hotter you cook at, the smaller the window of doneness perfection. You can't just kick back and finish your beer like cooking low-n-slow.
Good luck with them next time!
Dave
I've been pleased just to smoke til they look good, then foil til tender with little or no liquid in the foil. I put the ribs back on the smoker at that point just to glaze and/or crisp up a little, not long at all, especially if the cooker is real hot.
You can use this method and cook them slow or fast. I believe the method I've used lately is referred by many here as the 2-1-10 min. method, cooking St. Louis ribs at about 300 degrees. I'm not an expert at this by no means, but I have learned this: The hotter you cook at, the smaller the window of doneness perfection. You can't just kick back and finish your beer like cooking low-n-slow.
Good luck with them next time!
Dave
Mike Hartwell
TVWBB Pro
Where do you measure temp...at the lid or the grate?
Mike Hartwell
TVWBB Pro
Yeah, thanks Kevin, good advice indeed.
The two Daves here were comparing temps, and I was wondering which spot they were using.
The two Daves here were comparing temps, and I was wondering which spot they were using.
Michael C.
TVWBB Gold Member
I've had good luck with the 2-2-1 method on my ribs. Sometimes though, it might take 2.5-2.-1, just depends on the meat, temps, etc. Keep trying, you'll get the ribs to your liking!
Dave Russell
TVWBB Honor Circle
Mike, I measure temp at the vent since it's directly in the stream of circulation, and also since I usually have a full cooker. I find that all that cool meat substantially affects the dome gauge or temp measurements taken at the grate.
Dave Russell
TVWBB Honor Circle
Kevin makes a really important point. Tenderness is what matters. The ribs just vary too much to go by time and temp, no matter how convenient that would be.
David i normally cook my ribs 275-325 range anywhere in between no pan at all, wrap in foil when ribs get to 160-170, no real time limit in foil just till tender, i do not check temps anymore after foiling just checking for tenderness, when it happens it happens, take out of foil and back on grill just to firm up bark a tad, if cooking at high heat not much room for error, if cooking at low heat greater room for error hope this helps
JIRodriguez
TVWBB Member
Low and slow gives the best rib results, both foiled and unfoiled. When you hit them with high heat the muscle strands contract quickly, drive out the moisture and create a chewey tough piece of meat. Give yourself more time and keep the temps between 210 and 230, you will be amazed at the differance in tenderness and juciness. Can't rush good BBQ.
K Kruger
TVWBB 1-Star Olympian
You might prefer low/slow for whatever reason but your statements are factually incorrect. If high heat resulted in chewy, tough meat I'd never get the positive responses I do when I cook ribs - nor would I like them at all.
You can cook ribs at 210-230 if you wish. But ribs can also cook at 250, 275, 300, or higher, as I do. Contrary to ever popular myth, you can rush barbecue, and end up with great results, not just good results. It's a simple matter of understanding the cooking dynamics involved.
You might prefer low/slow for whatever reason but your statements are factually incorrect. If high heat resulted in chewy, tough meat I'd never get the positive responses I do when I cook ribs - nor would I like them at all.
You can cook ribs at 210-230 if you wish. But ribs can also cook at 250, 275, 300, or higher, as I do. Contrary to ever popular myth, you can rush barbecue, and end up with great results, not just good results. It's a simple matter of understanding the cooking dynamics involved. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
JIRodriguez could have phrased it better, but I believe he would be referring to the fact that it is much easier to overcook a piece of meat at higher temperatures than at lower temps. i.e. the window of "acceptable doneness" (in terms of tenderness, moisture) is much larger for lower temp cooks.
But yes you are right as usual Mr. Kruger, it is not always true that high heat = tough+dry and low heat = tender+moist but moreso the time held at a certain temperature and the dynamics of that particular piece of meat.
well, curiously, since i did not foil long enough and was not able to produce tender ribs given the rush job i did, can i re heat them tonight for 1 hr in foil with a little moisture added to bring some tenderness or is it simply too late and not possible. I qued them on monday and they are currently in the fridge but wanted to eat the remaining ribs tonight.