6 butts, 18.5 WSM, unsatisfactory results


 
T

Todd E.

TVWBB Member
I tried to do a mega-smoke this weekend. Usually I cook two butts at a time. This time, I tried six. They were all around 7 pounds. I'll spare all the details unless someone is extra curious. The bottom line is that the meat was on for about 17 hours before I had to start taking it off and processing (it was getting late). Only two of the butts spent any real time on the WSM above ~170. I should have foiled them after ~150 since I tried to push them through the "plateau" and on up to 185-190 like I do when I smoke a pair. The meat got too smokey for my normal taste. I think I know some things to try in the future if I do this much meat again but will certainly welcome any suggestions. Until then, is there anything I can do with my usual vinegar based sauce that would help mask some of the smoke?

Anyhow, I guess I have some work to do to figure out the >15 lbs smoke. The not so bad news is that these were .99/lb cuts.

Todd
 
What temps did you run at? Water in pan?


That's a pretty big mass of meat, but I've done 7 on my 22" and didn't have any significant problems.

Ron
 
Pretty much 220-225 until late in the cook when I had to add more coals and was trying to get things moving along. I use the clay saucer water pan mod. I get nervous about runaway pit temps so I really like to catch the pit temp and bring it up slowly. Maybe that's part of the problem. Should I have set a higher target for the pit temp?

Todd
 
Sounds to me like you just tried to cook too low and slow - with more meat the only real difference in cooktimes is going to be the heat-sink effect of the meat itself, which will cause your WSM to linger at lower temps for much longer than you might think at the beginning of a cook. This could potentially add hours to your cooktimes (as you saw) and if you're in a rush to pull your meat like you said, you'll pull it off before it's fully done and it won't be very good.

Regarding being too smoky, probably just a factor of the longer cooktime and more wood (?) than usual.

Next time with a big cook like that you can take your clay saucer out because the meat is enough of a heat sink. Run the WSM wide open and it will probably settle in somewhere between 230-275 depending on your WSM's airtightness. No need to baby temperatures with that much thermal mass inside, imo.

Best of luck!
 
Todd, did 5 big butts a few weeks ago. I always get the coals up to about 230 before I put the meat on. The cold meat soaks up a lot of heat and seems to take forever to get up to the right smoking temp. I don't use water in my pan. I just cover it with foil. I've done as many as six with good results. As far as being too smokey ,I've never had that complaint since once you pull the pork it all incorporates with the internal meat.Maybe don't use so much bark when you mix the meat. I've finished PB in the oven if it hasn't got to the right tenderness.Remember if you use the foil pan(no water) the hottest part of the smoker is over the pan not the top grate. Put your biggest hunks of meat on the bottom. I've done over 60lbs on that little 18.5 at one time.Keep trying.Try something different next time. You'll get the hang of it
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Todd E.:
Should I have set a higher target for the pit temp? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>17 hours for a 7lb'er would not be uncommon. I've had a couple butts take 3hr/lb.

I would have run 250º~275º and not worried about temp spikes. Butts are bulletproof.

To reduce smokiness, you could remove most of the bark. This may be more picking than you're willing to do.
icon_wink.gif
 
Great points guys. Next time ... lose the saucer, let the cooker heat up a little more, and keep it at a higher temp. I grossly underestimated the thermal mass of the meat. I'm doing these large amounts for a fundraiser (I'm vacuum packing and freezing). I may do another round for Thanksgiving and maybe another after that for Christmas gifts. I'm getting another WSM from my dad over T'giving so maybe I'll spread the load across two cookers. Of course, that means twice the fuel ... doesn't it?

Todd
 
Todd, I did a five butt cook, for a total of a little over 40 pounds a while back that took even longer, a couple maybe 18 hours if I recall. I had the two larger ones on the bottom and the smaller three on the top rack, leaned up against a beer can chicken rack.

My problem was that the three on top didn't cook NEAR as evenly as my typical two to a rack. The bones came loose on a couple of them, but the other sides of the butts weren't ready to pull yet. I've NEVER had that happen in any cooker I've used.
icon_confused.gif


I did my typical water in the pan overnight w/ Stubbs natural briquettes and refueled just once mid morning, vents entirely open all night though, which was entirely unusual. The meat wasn't too smoky, just not rendered tender evenly, but the two on the bottom were the usual product.

Back to the smokiness issue, did you add much wood during the cook? I know that my wood smoked faster on my five butt cook since I had the vents open all night, but I don't think I added any extra. I usually smoke butts with two hickory and three apple or peach aprox. fist sized chunks buried in the coals. It doesn't need to smoke all night.

I guess if I ever tried doing more than four again I'd turn/rotate 'em first thing after getting out of bed.
 
One other thing, Todd...The consensus seems to be that water in the pan "washes" some of the smoke out of the cooker resulting in less smokiness, but if you do use water with a full cooker, I'd use HOT water, let meat sit out to lose it's chill, and use some kind of insulation or efficient wind break.

That's my next little project: I've got to get a new jig saw to cut a drum into a windbreak.
 
I want to make sure I understand this. I've never done more than 2 butts at once. I can certainly see that all that meat would be a heat sink, but if the temperature in the smoker is where you want it to be (say, 250 degrees), why would it take any longer to cook 6 butts than it does 2?
Anyway, my butts often 16 hours at 225-250, so 17 hours doesn't seem off to me.
 
I usually cook 'em at 260-275 with just a foiled pan. I subscribe to the Kevin K. method and put them on as soon as I put the lit coals on top of the full ring. 3 or 4 small chunks of wood at the begining and then I don't add any more wood. My cooker runs all night with one bottom vent 3/4 open... so perhaps it gets a little more air in the door than most. Although the coals go out when I close all the vents so it cannot be excessive.

I'd shoot for higher temps for sure (like mentioned upthread). YMMV.

Ron
 
Todd I'll be honest I didn't read everything so if this has been said already I'm sorry. When I have done a lot of pork butts I half them. The butts I had last time I did a bunch were all like 9-9.5lbs each (thank you restaurant depot!)so halfing them was around what 4.5-5lbs each. I cooked them at 225-250* consistantly and they were done. I did post all the pics here and I'd have to search back to find it but I want to say they were on the smoker for about 10hrs. No water in the pan just foiled.

Guess my whole point of rambling on is if you want to all those butts at once half them next time and they will cook in less time even with low and slow...and you'll have more bark!
 
Dave, my top and bottom racks cooked pretty evenly. I had a probe in the top middle and bottom middle butt and they were always within a few degrees of each other. I use about the same amount of smoke wood (4-5 "pool ball" sized chunks of hickory). A windbreak would have helped as the air temp was in the mid 30's during the early part of the cook and there was a light breeze.
Nate, that's an interesting thermodynamic question that I'm still pondering. Maybe someone more thermally enlightened can chime in.
Chuck, I'm a trimmer and by the time I take off the false fat cap and big veins of fat, they practically are halved. But I like to keep the meat with the bone so I usually skewer or tie them up if they're really loose.
Overall, I think I'll back off to a two and two spread next time and incorporate some of the suggestions regarding cooking temp. Maybe it's cowardice, but I like having the butts laying "flat" and cooking fattier side up to start with. I'm going to order another ET-73 for the second WSM so I'll have that setup if I want to try again to corner the 'cue market.

Todd
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nate L:
I want to make sure I understand this. I've never done more than 2 butts at once. I can certainly see that all that meat would be a heat sink, but if the temperature in the smoker is where you want it to be (say, 250 degrees), why would it take any longer to cook 6 butts than it does 2?
Anyway, my butts often 16 hours at 225-250, so 17 hours doesn't seem off to me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nate, you really cook just two butts at 225-250 for 16 hours?

That sounds typical for me w/ four average 8 pounders.....

BUT, I measure 225-250 at the VENT, which is 15 degrees or more higher than the temps in the middle of the grates w/ an EMPTY cooker. Why is the central grate temp important? Well, I suspect that when you add meat, and especially, if you fill it up with five or six butts, you get even less circulation and the temp disparity is even greater. (I'd say just put an oven therm between a couple of butts, but it wouldn't fit.)

It's an interesting contrast between an UDS (upright drum smoker) where you're cooking directly over the coals and the higher temps come up the MIDDLE of the drum, not the sides, like w/ the wsm. On my drum, I would wonder how my bbq got done so quick when my side mounted temp gauge only measured 235. Well, the stem was only three or four inches long! DUH.
icon_redface.gif
 
Originally posted by Ron... L.:
I usually cook 'em at 260-275 with just a foiled pan."

Ron, if you don't mind, I'm interested in some particulars w/ your method.

Do you measure temp at the vent?
Have you cooked two butts at a time on the bottom grate at these temps? (If so, was the bark tough before you foiled to rest?)
Assuming you cook to "pulled pork tenderness", how long do your butt cooks usually take?
Click to expand...
 
Todd, you probably already thought of this, and maybe someone already said something about it, but you could skip the fat trimming if you wanted less smokiness in the final product.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Ron, if you don't mind, I'm interested in some particulars w/ your method.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dave,
Yep... measured at the vent with a Nu Temp. On my smoker the therm that came with it differs by about 20 degrees at low temps and is about the same with temps over 250... so I just watch the vent temp and go with that.

I foil empty pan top and bottom leaving air space in pan.

I have noticed no difference in butts cooked top or bottom. I would bet a blind taste test would validate this. I'm no rocket surgeon but I haven't noticed a difference. Sometimes the upper ones finish first, sometimes the lower ones. I'm sure it's the vagaries of size and the makeup of a specific cut of meat vs. another.

My overnight projects usually run between 12 and 15 hours and I go strictly by the probe test for doneness. Each butt usually takes about 10 minutes to break down with bear paws, and I always rest them in foil at least 45 minutes and normally an hour or two.

HTH

Ron
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ron... L.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Ron, if you don't mind, I'm interested in some particulars w/ your method.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dave,
Yep... measured at the vent with a Nu Temp. On my smoker the therm that came with it differs by about 20 degrees at low temps and is about the same with temps over 250... so I just watch the vent temp and go with that.

I foil empty pan top and bottom leaving air space in pan.

I have noticed no difference in butts cooked top or bottom. I would bet a blind taste test would validate this. I'm no rocket surgeon but I haven't noticed a difference. Sometimes the upper ones finish first, sometimes the lower ones. I'm sure it's the vagaries of size and the makeup of a specific cut of meat vs. another.

My overnight projects usually run between 12 and 15 hours and I go strictly by the probe test for doneness. Each butt usually takes about 10 minutes to break down with bear paws, and I always rest them in foil at least 45 minutes and normally an hour or two.

HTH

Ron </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks a bunch!

No surprises to me at all once I see that you're measuring temps at the vent. (Was it Charles H. that was sayin' he cooks butts at 275 in nine hours?) I've cooked butts a little hotter than my usual 225-250(vent)like that before but I woke up to a pan that was almost dry.
icon_redface.gif
I know, I don't need no stinkin' water in the pan. I just sleep better. I didn't adjust the vents one time until the next morning on my last butt cook. Five of 'em needed the vents 100% open all night!

Bear Claws are pretty cool, huh?!
icon_wink.gif
 
Temps too low. I would have tried to do 250-275°F.

6 butts is a hefty amount in an 18". Probably maxing it out. You need to realize this and adjust for it...meaning high point on the low and slow temperature range, more coals, longer cook time.
 
Dave: I've tended to do fairly large (8+ lbs) bone-in, cooked to 195-200 degrees and, yes, they usually go a solid 16 hours. I've got a thermometer at the top (the old standard "good" kind we had to drill in--I can't remember the name) and a thermometer at the rack. Maybe things just cook slower up here in Vermont.
Anyway, I'll reread all the posts but my basic question stands: why does it matter how much meat you have in the smoker if you've hit the desired temperature in the chamber? Why would four butts take any longer to cook at 250 than two butts at the same temperature?
All this is making my hungry. We're supposed to have nice weather this weekend (after two days of ice and snow) and I'm doing some ribs on Sunday...
cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top