Jim, if I may pick your brain a bit you may want to dispell more of my newby misconceptions:
I did poke a toothpick through the meat midway between bones after waking up from an hour nap during my second ever WSM cook. Although the cooker temps hardly fluctuated at all in the barely seasoned cooker (compared to the first cook), half-awake I jumped into my pants like a fireman hoping I hadn't created pork jerky. This WSM is new stuff for me.
Well, fully awake now it was only four and 1/4 hours into my cook at estimated, fairly consistent, 250* grate temps (adjusted estimate from top vent thermometer).
I poked a toothpick through. Easy. Ribs must be done. The ribs were kind of dry on the outside despite two prior apple juice mists (newby thinking).
Ribs overdone? Oh the horror!!! (I did take the day off, after all--but not to make jerky!!!).
The ribs seemed tender to this unexperienced newby's toothpick, but perhaps tender just in the middle, between the outer surface barks??
The info here says spares take significantly longer than my 4 1/4 hours at 250* that I cooked at and I'm fully aware of the time-reducing foiling info. Still, the toothpick went through so easy when I took the ribs out and put them in foil. But they were dry and chewy.
Perhaps in the future maybe I need to try to flake the outer bark with the toothpick to determine real done-ness, kind of like flaking a Kettle mesquite-grilled salmon filet to the core for its done-ness.
Anyway, I'm rambling again. My (apparent)misperception was that after a mere 4 1/4 hours in the WSM then resting in foil for 1/2 hour more the bark had resorbed moisture from the core meat during the rest, not that the whole thing needed more cooking time.
It appears I'm confusing resting time with enough time on the fire? It's a bit confusing for this newby.
In one of his articles somewhere Chris does speak of inadequately rested meat as "dry and chewy" and I thought inadequate rest was my major problem this time, not inadequate cook time and temp remedied by the foil at the end of the cook. Analysis, anyone?
Dave