Boneless butts


 
B

Bob T.

TVWBB Wizard
I bought a twin pack at Costcos for $1.29/pound and pulled them out of the pack this AM to rub and put on the WSM. I didn't read the pack, and found out they were boneless. Nice hack job they did on the one. Never done boneless before, anyone prefer these over bone in? I would think they would finish quicker than bone in. The twin pack was just shy of 18 pounds. Price was OK considering there is no bone.
I'll have to pay more attention for now on!
icon_wink.gif
 
they work great. I have always gotten my butts from costco and have had good results.
In fact I am prepping a set right now for super bowl weekend.
 
The flapped open section from where they cut to pull the bone out is what I'm wondering about. That would be all dried out before the rest is done?
 
You're right. Costco does do a bit of a hatchet job on those butts. I usually tie mine into a manageable shape. About a pound of twine per butt.
icon_wink.gif
Just kidding.

Rita
 
I don't buy boneless butt but will bone them out for jerk or cochinita pibil or the like so that I can work the paste rub into more places. For pulled pork with a boneless I'd tie them like Rita suggests so that they won't cook too quickly. Note: If you apply rub inside the meat bundle it won't form bark since it's not exposed to the direct heat and air. It'll just get pasty.
 
I have to get some more twine to tie with. I didn't have any so just tucked where I could. I think I still prefer the bone in.
 
Bob -

I'm totally with you. I think Rita and I had a conversation a few months ago about Costco's boneless butts. While some folks like having more surface area to coat in rub, we just found them to be so hacked up that it made cooking them with consistency hard. I found some parts cooked way too long...

Anyhow, I do as rita suggests, just do one or two goes with twine - doesn't need to be alot - just enough to get the main mass to stay together. The only problem with twine is that when you remove it, you will unavoidedly take off some bark. So use as little twine as you can while still getting the job done.

In the event of no twine, I've done the tuck method like you did. It works OK - just try to avoid a chunck sticking out on its own.

Anyhow, long and short is - I much prefer bone in for straight pulled pork. As Kevin suggests, it's great if you are going to bone it anyhow for other uses...
 
Well, the cook is over and most of the pork is history. I will continue to prefer bone in, but $1.28/pound and not paying for any bone..I do like the sound of that though.
 
Bruce, Cook's Illustrated looked at them but I can't recall what they said - senior moment. Their website has been down for 7 days and just now they finally have a message: "CooksIllustrated.com will be available shortly." Shortly, meaning......???

Rita
 
Finally Cook's is back online. Here's their take on Food Loops:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Food Loops - An Alternative to Tying Knots
Written: 2/2005

After seeing our tip on kitchen twine in last month's e-Notes, a reader asked if we had tested Food Loops, stretchable segmented cords with two ends that snap together and cinch to make tight loops around food bundles. We tried them and found some limitations--namely, they don't adapt well to the largest roasts and leave behind unsightly marks on small veal rollups. But in other applications, such as bundling bouquet garnis and tying turkey legs, the loops performed well. Our test cooks wouldn’t trade in their more all-purpose twine but do think the loops would be especially useful to anyone who has difficulty tying knots.

The loops are dishwasher-safe and can stand temperatures up to 500 degrees; a box of six costs $15 at www.cookingenthusiast.com, item #WLA1072.
~~~~~~~~
The question is, are they long enough to go around a big pork butt? It sounds like something that might make Costco's hatchet jobs a little more manageable.

Cooking.com has them and the description includes: "Flexible and adjusts from 1 to 4 inches or larger by linking several loops together." They look longer than that in the pictures.

Rita
 
Thanks for the info Rita.
I don't understand why Costcos had bone in butts one week for $1.39/pound, 2 weeks later had boneless for $1.29/pound. For sure the boneless are a better value. I'll have to get some twine and give it a try. Other than a few sections that did pop out and dried up, they were pretty good.
 
Bob, I've never seen bone-in butts in my Costco, but they could have had them when I wasn't looking. Or it may have been a fluke.

I started tying the first of 4 boneless butts in the standard butcher's way, so picture-perfect, but by the time I got to the fourth one, I just wrapped it around a few times and called it a day.

If you cut all the threads on the side that has the least-perfect bark, you might be able to pull each strand out from under the bark on the good side so it won't disturb the "look" too much. I can't see that it makes too much difference, though, since you're going to pull it anyway.

Your cook must be well under way at this point. Let us know your results in the morning.

Rita
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top