Briquettes vs Lump in WSM?


 
M

Mike Willsey

TVWBB Member
Has anyone compared burning briquettes to lump in your WSM? Any noticable differences in controlling temperature during a cook time?
 
I think there are differences. I use Kingsford for overnight cooks for easier temp control and consistency. The trade-off is more ash the next day, but I've gotten through the night so it's not a big deal to me.

I use lump for high-temp cooks; for shorter low-temp cooks I use one, the other, or a mix, depending on what bags are already open.

I know that there are many that use lump all the time so like the rest of Q, it's a personal preference.
 
My personal preference is Kingsford. It does the job for me and I like its availabilty and price. It probably does produce more ash, but not so much I can't finish an overnighter without a problem. I'm just not a big fan of lump, even for for high heat searing - But maybe that's because I like to use my Silver B with PCI grates for high heat, searing and direct cooking. I use my Performer for indirect and rotis and my WSM for low/slow.

However, lump does have a lot of supporters and some do like to use it with their WSMs.

Paul
 
Calling all engineers etc., is lump really hotter? Isn't that something that can be easily measured? Has the charcoal whiz measured it?
 
I'm not an engineer, but I've burned lots of both. I've not taken the temperature of burning lump or Kingsford, but this is my observation. I can get a whole chimney of Kingsford burning and the outside of a (Weber) chimney does not change color (glow orange). If I start a chimney of lump and wait until most of the lump is glowing, the chimney will be glowing orange and I have to use leather gloves to empty the chimney. I've started a full chimney of lump, poured it in my kettle and could feel real heat on my bare feet. Don't get me wrong. Kingsford burns hot too. To be honest, for me, it's hot enough for searing steaks and cooking burgers, but technically I think lump does burn hotter. I think there's a property about Kingsford that limits the burn rate though. Maybe it's the ash. With unrestricted air flow though, lump will burn hotter. Does that mean lump is better for grilling? Not necessarily. It depends on what you're looking for out of your fire. I think lump is best suited for long burns where you pile in a lot of fuel and control the air flow for a long cook. In short, I think Kingsford burns more evenly, but lump burns hotter if given enough air.
 
From a Naked Whiz FAQ:

Which is better, lump or briquettes? -- Well, this FAQ is about lump charcoal, so we aren't going to wax eloquent about briquettes. But admit it. You really want to know what is in Kingsford briquettes, don't you? Well, according to Kingsford, here is what is in their briquettes and what each ingredient is used for: wood char (heat source), mineral char (heat source), mineral carbon (heat source), limestone (uniform visual ashing), starch (binder), borax (press release), sodium nitrate (ignition aid), sawdust (ignition aid). If you hang out on any of the barbecue forums on the internet, you will find lots of folks complaining about the borax and coal and limestone. You don't often hear of people complaining about the mineral char. What is mineral char? "A soft, brownish-black coal in which the alteration of vegetable matter has proceeded further than in peat but not as far as in bituminous coal. Also called brown coal. Has empyreumatic smell." What is an empyreumatic smell? "The peculiar smell and taste arising from products of decomposition of animal or vegetable substances when burnt in close vessels." Nuff said?

But back to the question at hand. Should you use lump or briquettes? There is no one answer for everyone. If you are using a ceramic cooker, the low ash production of lump charcoal is very important. Ceramic cookers have a fire bowl holding the charcoal. As the charcoal burns, the ash falls down into the bottom of the bowl. There isn't room for a whole lot of ash.

Lump charcoal burns hotter and faster than briquettes, if given an unlimited air supply. If you can control the air flow through your cooker, lump will burn at whatever rate and temperature that you allow it to. If you can't control the air flow in your cooker, then you may need to use the slower-burning briquettes in order to keep temperature under control.

Another consideration is that briquettes tend to be cheaper than lump charcoal.

The whole FAQ is posted here.
 
I burn a mix of both, mostly for long burns and large meat (shoulder,brisket). I use kingsford briquettes, lump mesquite and oak. Rational is this: I want the increased flavor that hardwoods can provide but can not get the control/long burn by using either wood chunks or small logs, but the lump gives me what I need. I do not use it for ribs or chicken as it imparts a dominating flavor that I have not yet learned how to control, for those meats it Kingsford Briquettes and wood chunks. I have found my temp control to be the same, thanks to the great design of the WSM...and of course these are overnight burns in varied conditions (wind, rain, cold)...best advice..give it a try
 
Briquettes only for me. I tried lump but the temps varied too much and a fair amount fell though the grate. I am using Steak Master "orgainc" charcoal now and it produces way less ash than Kingsford.
 
Lump is pretty close to pure carbon and does burn hotter and faster than Kingsford. I use both products based on the cook I'm planning.
Limiting yourself to one type of product makes your arsenal smaller to do all the things a WSM is capable of handling. Learn to use it all.
Jim
 
Jim, you're a diplomat.

Mike, the biggest difference I notice is uniformity. In a big bag of lump the top is really big logs, and the bottom is little fragments. If you could dump the whole bag of lump into a container and pick out pieces that are roughly the same size, or at least pack your charcoal ring with best fitting pieces (charcoal tetris) you could easily get a good 20 hour burn from it. Since briquettes are all the same size this task is done for you.

I can't be bothered and just dump whatever is open (like Kevin) but I do notice that after 8 hours with just lump there are gaping holes in between the chunks of lump.

morgan
 
And my wife would probably agree with your wife.
icon_wink.gif
 
I'm a lumpman myself. I've been using lump for years in other smokers so I'm more comfortable with it's performance. I don't like all the ash that Kingsford gets on long smokes. Also, I need all the heat I can get. The winters are long and cold up here.

That being said you need to learn how to use both. I will always choose lump over charcoal but I can only get it from one store in my area. I can get Kingsford at Shaws at 12:00 at night if I need to. It's nice to have that flexibility.
 
Bill
Cold should be a problem as long as you can keep the wind off the cooker, use Kingsford year
around up here in the PNW.
Jim
 
I use a little less smoke wood with Maple Leaf Lump (maple, beech & birch) & Minion Method than I did with briquettes. I really like it.

To your question, I think it can be a little bit more tricky than briquettes as far as stable temps goes, but not a huge problem. I don't think a ring of this stuff lasts quite as long as a full ring of Kingsford, but the volume of 17 lb bag has got to be at least 50% more than a 20 lb bag of Kingsford.

And, not that it matters much, I LOVE the smell of that stuff lighting up
icon_smile.gif
It smells fantastic
 
Oh sure Shawn, rub it in!

Wish Maple Leaf Lump was still sold in the states. I can only get the Maple Leaf Charcoal (which is great stuff as well) and that's via UPS across the country! Shipping is twice as much as the charcoal.
 
I find Lump is more volatile; I get bigger temp spikes than with Kingsford. So I feel Kingsford is easier to cook with. But I think the flavor of lump is a little better. Decisions, decisions. Fortunately, you really can't go wrong with either one.

Lump charcoal has a reputation for cooking hotter than Kingsford. The theory is lump is about 80% charcoal. Briquettes have sand and binders and other 'stuff' in them and a far lower percentage of charcooal. So pound for pound, there should be more coal in lump so it should burn hotter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top