Are there any changes needed when adding up to multiple pieces of meat

[Scott-B]

Hi Guys,

I have been smoking for a while and have been getting allot of information from these forms. I wanted to start with a big thank you to everyone for all the guidance I have been getting from here. Hopefully someday I can pass on my experience and help the next generation of smokers.

I have a question that I can’t seem to get proper information on. I am confident in my setup and procedures but I haven’t don’t multiple slabs of meat before (ie two pork butts). I am ready to step up (now that I know I wont waste $50 of meat with a bad smoke) but don’t understand how this will impact cooking time and smoke wood quantity.

I know that smoking a single pork butt will take around 1.5 hour/lb. Is this the same for 2, 3, 4....? Is pork different than beef? Do I need to add more smoke wood with multiple slabs or stick with what I have currently been doing?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Dave Russell]

No additional smoke wood is needed, but it'll take a few more lit coals and/or time to reach cooking temp. Each additional pork butt is an additional heat sink. For instance, I've smoked chicken with water in the pan a lot and have noticed that all other things being equal, one grate's worth of chicken is done in about the same amount of time that two grates worth are done in the same smoker, without any water in the pan. Add a third grate full of chicken and it's gonna take some time. And so if you ever do cook a bunch of chicken, that's why it's good to pull it out of the fridge an hour+ ahead of cooking, if and at all possible.

 

[Jon Des.]

Just to add to what Dave said, think of it as boiling a two gallons of water versus one. You're going to lose a certain amount of heat because you're heating your cooker, the grates, water pan, etc. -- but a good bit of the heat energy is absorbed by the meat since that's the greatest mass. Double the meat is more heat loss, and everything takes longer to change temperature. I'll also add that I hate to not cook on a full WSM, so I often throw a chicken on when I'm doing butts, etc. I'm not sure if you're using a WSM or kettle, but you may want to do a little reading on here about cooking butts at higher heat, as that seems to work a little better for me when doing multiple butts. Another tip: if you are doing two butts on an 18.5 WSM, I'd suggest putting one on each rack so that they are still in the "shadow" of the water bowl. When the racks are full out to the edges you run into a problem of things cooking at different rates because of the heat coming up around the sides of the bowl and cooking the meat directly (which can be fixed by rotating the meat, but it's easier if you don't have to).

 

[Dave Russell]

Another tip: if you are doing two butts on an 18.5 WSM, I'd suggest putting one on each rack so that they are still in the "shadow" of the water bowl. When the racks are full out to the edges you run into a problem of things cooking at different rates because of the heat coming up around the sides of the bowl and cooking the meat directly (which can be fixed by rotating the meat, but it's easier if you don't have to).

Amen. Although I've cooked two butts to a rack MANY times in my 18.5" wsm, my best butts yet were cooked one over the other with water in the pan, and I have no idea why most folks want to put two big butts on the top rack and nothing on the bottom one. One butt over the other will require more fuel and possibly more time, but the rewards are better bark and more even cooking.

 

[Scott P.]

I usually buy my pork butts in cryo with two per pack, so if one gets cooked, they both get cooked. I always do them one per rack unless I am cooking something else like beans. Then the beans get the bottom for all that fatty goodness coming off the pork.