18.5" or 22.5" WSM


 
B

BWalker

TVWBB Member
I love my 22.5" OTS and am looking to get a WSM to increase my smoking capacity (and have a dedicated smoker to go with a grill) and was just curious as to if anyone had any experience with these two. Is the 18.5" big enough to smoke several chickens at the same time? What about two boston butts? Much appreciated!

Beau
 
Hey Beau, I actually just went through this same issue. I ended up choosing the 18.5, which will be delivered this week.

For what you want to smoke, those should fit fine on the 18.5. I have read from others who say they only need the 22.5 if they are cooking for decent sized groups, 10+.

I also chose it due to the reviews on the 18.5 using less charcoal, which of course is due to being smaller. I've seen pictures of people smoking 40 pounds of meat on the 18.5, so for me, it sounds like more than enough.
 
Thanks for the help! I'll likely go with the 18.5" version as I don't see needing the bigger one, especially with the 22.5" OTS available as well. Now I'll just have to figure out how long you can smoke on the 18.5" w/out having to add more coals....
 
BWalker said:
Thanks for the help! I'll likely go with the 18.5" version as I don't see needing the bigger one, especially with the 22.5" OTS available as well. Now I'll just have to figure out how long you can smoke on the 18.5" w/out having to add more coals....
Click to expand...


Since I do not have mine, I can not say for sure. But I was prompted to buy it because of the reviews stating that people were getting 12+ hours on a single minion method load on a slightly windy day, with maybe even some left over.
 
Which one is the million dollar question. :D There is no right or wrong answer and there's a reason Weber makes both.
For me, I liked the fact I could spread out racks of ribs flat without anything funky on the 22"er and that was the final straw on the decision making.
Love my 22" and having the mini-wsm is perfect for the days I just want to smoke a single butt or chicken.
Putting 8 butts of 64lbs on the 22" was fun, but realistically - that was a one time deal (so far) for me. But I was glad to have the space!

Good luck with your research & decision. Dwain's link should help as it did for me.
 
BWalker said:
Thanks for the help! I'll likely go with the 18.5" version as I don't see needing the bigger one, especially with the 22.5" OTS available as well. Now I'll just have to figure out how long you can smoke on the 18.5" w/out having to add more coals....
Click to expand...

I purchased my 18.5" WSM maybe a month ago. Even though I felt the 18.5" would be large enough, I would have bought the 22", if it had been available locally. I had reservations about buying one larger than I needed because, even though the extra capacity would be there for the few times I need it, I figured that I would be wasting fuel every time I used it. Since the 22" wasn't available locally, my mind was made up for me. Yea. I could have ordered a bigger one.

I have 22.5" and 26.75" kettle grills. I have cooked on the 22.5" for many years. When I got the 22.75", I noticed a significant difference between the two in terms of max heat and fuel usage. Based on that experience, I figured the 18.5" WSM would be much more efficient than the 22".

I was concerned about adding coals, too. I have cooked on my WSM 3 times now. 2 out of 3 times I used the minion method. And, I have no complaints with it. I was concerned about the unlit charcoal adding a strong charcoal smoke. But, that hasn't happened. In my last cook, I cooked for 14 hours and had charcoal left over. So, you probably won't have to add charcoal for cooks in that time frame.
 
Has anyone smoked a full brisket on the 18.5"? I really don't want to have to fold my brisket up consistently to get it on the grill (though I would likely be cooking a brisket closer to 10 lbs than 15 lbs).
 
Beau,

I've got an 18.5" and, for what it's worth, decided on that size primarily due to the size of crowd I will be serving, which is mostly just my wife and me. I also looked at the capacity info on on the page that Dwain linked. The other thing that tipped the balance toward the 18" for me was seeing the 22" in person. It's huge, which isn't in itself a bad thing, but that further emphasized the lack of need for that much cooking space for just the two of us. Like you I also have the 22.5" kettle (OTG in my case), and also an 18" OTS, so on those occasions when I need to cook more food than I can fit on my WSM (like when all of my in-laws decide to descend on my little home) then I can always use OTG to supplement the WSM.

I haven't cooked anything for longer than 8-10 hours, so I'm probably not the best estimator of how long the coals will last. But I did cook 2 fryers and an 8 lb turkey breast (fryers below, turkey up top) once for a total of 18 lbs of poultry. Again, it's usually just me and the wife so I haven't had an occasion to load 'er up to capacity... yet.

Anyway, either size you go for, I'm sure you'll be happy. And, like I told my wife, you can always buy the 22.5" in a couple of years when you outgrow you 18"! Good luck!
 
Darren C. said:
I purchased my 18.5" WSM maybe a month ago. Even though I felt the 18.5" would be large enough, I would have bought the 22", if it had been available locally. I had reservations about buying one larger than I needed because, even though the extra capacity would be there for the few times I need it, I figured that I would be wasting fuel every time I used it. Since the 22" wasn't available locally, my mind was made up for me. Yea. I could have ordered a bigger one.

I have 22.5" and 26.75" kettle grills. I have cooked on the 22.5" for many years. When I got the [26.75]", I noticed a significant difference between the two in terms of max heat and fuel usage. Based on that experience, I figured the 18.5" WSM would be much more efficient than the 22".

I was concerned about adding coals, too. I have cooked on my WSM 3 times now. 2 out of 3 times I used the minion method. And, I have no complaints with it. I was concerned about the unlit charcoal adding a strong charcoal smoke. But, that hasn't happened. In my last cook, I cooked for 14 hours and had charcoal left over. So, you probably won't have to add charcoal for cooks in that time frame.
Click to expand...

It sounds to me that you had logical reasons for buying the 18.5" WSM over the 22.5" WSM. Assuming that it was available locally, and you had the same reservations you detail here, what would have convinced you to go with the 22.5"? Just curious.
 
I don't really plan on smoking for more than 6 or 8 people, so I'm thinking the 18.5" would be plenty big. Just want to make sure you can comfortably cook something like a brisket or a few pork butts w/out much trouble. Though I guess I can always do a big brisket on the OTS. I got nearly 13 hours out of a single snake (3 on bottom, 2 on top) a few weeks ago. Cheers!

Beau
 
Brian Johnson said:
It sounds to me that you had logical reasons for buying the 18.5" WSM over the 22.5" WSM. Assuming that it was available locally, and you had the same reservations you detail here, what would have convinced you to go with the 22.5"? Just curious.
Click to expand...
I would have bought the 22" WSM, if it had been available. The reason why was to get the extra cooking volume, even though my gut was telling me that I'd be better off with the 18.5. Since the 22" wasn't available, the choice was easy (I had no choice). Like I said, I could have ordered. But, I had a gift card that I wanted to use. So, I wanted to purchase locally.
 
BWalker said:
I don't really plan on smoking for more than 6 or 8 people, so I'm thinking the 18.5" would be plenty big. Just want to make sure you can comfortably cook something like a brisket or a few pork butts w/out much trouble. Though I guess I can always do a big brisket on the OTS. I got nearly 13 hours out of a single snake (3 on bottom, 2 on top) a few weeks ago. Cheers!

Beau
Click to expand...

A single slab of baby back ribs stretches across the 18.5. If I were to cook more than one slab, I'd either have to cut them or utilize the bottom grate and/or rib racks. None of those are bad options. If you really believe you'd be consistently cooking 3 or more slabs of ribs, and you don't want to fold, cut or use racks, you might be better served by the 22". I believe you can fit 2 racks of ribs side by side on one grate without folding or cutting, but I can't confirm that. If you think that most of your cooks would be 1 or 2 slabs, the 18.5 might be big enough for you.
 
As a ref point: I put three slabs of St Louis cut spares side-by-side on my 22" WSM. I can also put a packer brisket laying flat and did a huge 23 pound turkey last Thanksgiving.
 
Darren C. said:
I believe you can fit 2 racks of ribs side by side on one grate without folding or cutting, but I can't confirm that.
Click to expand...
On the 18 or 22?

Here's my 22 with 3 racks freshly tossed on the WSM
.
540446_4757833180003_1172199120_n.jpg

.
And ready to come off
.
540395_4758791763967_1887888518_n.jpg
 
Beau,

Darren makes a good point. When I did 4 racks of St. Louis cut spares, I halved them and split them between the two cooking grates. This past weekend I did three racks using only the top grate, but I rolled them (as seen here). The rolling isn't too much trouble, but I'm still not 100% sure how I like it. The food gets cooked, and once you cut the slabs for serving you can't tell they were cooked rolled, but it's a little awkward handling the rolls until you get the hang of it. Plus, if you foil your ribs (which I do not) it might be more of a challenge. So yeah, if you regularly do more than one or two slabs of ribs at a time, you might

In other cooks I have done two boneless shoulders using only the top grate, and like I think I mentioned before two whole chickens on the same grate. Both of these combinations were done with no trouble at all.

Unfortunately I haven't done a brisket yet so I don't have any point of reference there.

Oh... here is a link to another thread by S.Six who cooked 8 shoulders on his 18.5" WSM.
 
Last edited:
I went with the 22 cause my buddy got the 18 and said he wishes he had the extra room doing briskets.
So whats worse....needing the room and not having it or having the room and not needing it was my thinking.
You will use more fuel is the only drawback.
 
Well smoking a big brisket will be more of a luxury as opposed to the norm (I think), and cutting ribs in half/using a rib rack doesn't bother me too much. I think I'm going to go with the 18.5". I still have the ol' 22.5" OTS if I need the extra room for a bigger cook (or a big brisket). Hope to get mine on Friday and fire her up with a pork butt (you can see the last one I did on the OTS here http://tvwbb.com/showthread.php?43957-First-Pork-Butt-Results) and a chicken or two on Saturday :).
 
I think you'll like it. The best part is there is no right or wrong answer. It's just a matter of how much do you want to cook and how often. You can do 2 12-13 lb briskets with no problem and you can shoehorn a bigger one on the top rack if necessary. I've done 2 racks of St Louis ribs lying flat on the top and 2 more racks on the bottom. The Capacity of the 18.5 inch has been adequate for my uses. Enjoy your new cooker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top