• Enter the TVWB 27th Anniversary Prize Drawing for a chance to win a Weber Traveler Portable Gas Grill! Click here to enter!

Brisket Times


 
D

David Rodriguez

New member
I've been told it generally takes about one hour per pound when smoking a brisket at 225 degrees. I've BBQ'd several briskets now and they been averaging half the cooking time. Today I smoked a 8lb. brisket and it took 4.5 hours at 235 to 240 degrees. Is this correct? It had good smoke flavor but I thought it was a little tough. I'm in South Texas and the temperature outside was 94 degrees with high humidity. So the heat index was close to 101 degrees. This quick cooking times are confusing me. What am i doing wrong?
Thanks,
David
 
Sounds to me like your cooking by temp and time ! You just can not do that with a brisket . you have to cook them until tender either the probe goes thru like soft butter or me I just stick a fork in and I know by how it feels and twists if its tender enough or not . But the probe test works just fine .

Iam NO expert iam sure one of the experts a chime in soon . But my last 3 briskets have come out great .

What it is your brisket is not done yet ! You have to go by tendernes not time or temp on a brisket !

That IMO

Good luck and enjoy remember you can atleast eat your mistakes
wsmsmile8gm.gif


I start cking mine for done after 1 hr per lb but have never had one be done yet on the first ck for tenderness . I can tell when its getting close from experiance and ck every 1/2 hr when its close .
 
Sounds like you were smoking a flat, not an entire packer. That *could* account for the short time it took, plus, you didn't let it get tender.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by David Rodriguez:
I've been told it generally takes about one hour per pound when smoking a brisket at 225 degrees. I've BBQ'd several briskets now and they been averaging half the cooking time. Today I smoked a 8lb. brisket and it took 4.5 hours at 235 to 240 degrees. Is this correct? It had good smoke flavor but I thought it was a little tough. I'm in South Texas and the temperature outside was 94 degrees with high humidity. So the heat index was close to 101 degrees. This quick cooking times are confusing me. What am i doing wrong?
Thanks,
David </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

David:

What was the internal temperature of the meat when you took it off?
 
Howdy folks. New here. Just got a 22.5 WSM and tried it out for the first time yesterday. 1st thing, can't believe how easy it is to maintain temps but I had two vents closed completely and one open around 1/3 and it still stayed at 250 or so. I've read that can happen with a new smoker. Is that true?
Also, cooked my brisket (flat) for about 7 hours, 190 degrees. But, no bark! a little tough but I expect that's because it was a flat. Any ideas? Thanks in advance
 
IMO, forget the hours per pound and the internal temp (a guide only). Feel the meat before you take it off the cooker. If it feels tender it's done.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It had good smoke flavor but I thought it was a little tough. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It was undercooked then.

KR-- Ditto. If it was a little tough it was undercooked. Cook till tender as Dave/G notes.
 
You are almost there, David. Just need to sustain and raise that internal temp till the connective tissue breaks down, leaving the meat tender.

There is a lot of great info on this site. Read all the brisket info you can under the barbecuing forum here. There is great info under any high heat brisket threads. You will build understanding of "temp-done" and "delicious-tender-BBQ-done"

I have learned a ton from those discussions. I'm sure you will too.
 
Thanks, guys. I used a different method to cook this time (foil) which I have never used. Haven't cooked a brisket in about 10 years. Should have stuck with the way I used to do it. Think the foil is what also prevented the bark. I'll do 'er again and do it my old way. To **** with temp... When I used to cook briskets a lot I just used a fork......
Love my WSM and really like this site....
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KR Manley:
Thanks, guys. I used a different method to cook this time (foil) which I have never used. Haven't cooked a brisket in about 10 years. Should have stuck with the way I used to do it. Think the foil is what also prevented the bark. I'll do 'er again and do it my old way. To **** with temp... When I used to cook briskets a lot I just used a fork......
Love my WSM and really like this site.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

KR:

IMHO, there's nothing wrong with foiling, AKA the Texas Crutch - I use it once the internal temp reaches 165 or 170 (I've seen figures ranging from 140-180, but that's basically the temperature at which smoke absorption stops.) While it does tend to soften the bark, it also, again IMHO, makes for a juicier piece of meat.

The advice about twisting the fork/breakdown of connective tissue is absolutely correct, but rather than poking/prodding every 10 minutes or so, I wait until the temps reach 195 or so before I start conducting my tenderness test - hence, my dependency on thermometer probes.

Like criminals, we tend to follow a specific MO - whatever works best for us....
 
Smoke doesn't stop absorbing - actually it doesn't really absorb. Instead, smoke particulates adhere to the meat's surface. This does not stop no matter what the temp; as long as smoke is present some particulates will keep sticking.

Foil can certainly be helpful, especially is one is cooking an inferior cut, Select, say, or lower-end Choice. It does help even the cooking dramatically. It's also possible to remove the meat when done or, better, near done, and return to the cooker unfoiled, to reestablish bark texture.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
Smoke doesn't stop absorbing - actually it doesn't really absorb. Instead, smoke particulates adhere to the meat's surface. This does not stop no matter what the temp; as long as smoke is present some particulates will keep sticking.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, apparently, once again, I stand corrected, although I'm beginning to believe that Newton should have postulated a FOURTH law, "For every opinion, there is an equal and opposite contrary opinion."
icon_biggrin.gif
 
Well, I agree with your Newton postulation - but in this case this isn't an opinion. It is quite easily verified - any many cooks need not even do actual experimentation because they already have, if unintentionally. If smoke 'stopped absorbing', sticking, whatever, occurrences such as an oversmoked finish would practically never happen. Many if not most of us have probably experienced an oversmoked finish on at least one occasion.

In many cases, unless one is intentionally cooking very low, meat temps rise into the supposed cut-off point in relatively short order. Were adsorption to stop, many of us would experience under- or non-smoked meat on a regular basis, especially those of use that cook briskets and ribs and other things at temps well over 300.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
Well, I agree with your Newton postulation - but in this case this isn't an opinion. It is quite easily verified </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kevin, while it may sound as though I'm attempting to "weasel-out" of my previous, my use of the term "absorption", for the purposes of expediency, was of course incorrect in consideration of the actual science surrounding the smoking process. As such, I no doubt contributed to the perpetuation of the smoke absorption myth, and I certainly don't resent being corrected in that regard. While there does seem to be considerable debate with respect to the relationship between temperature and smoke adherence, your point about over smoking makes sense; although I can't recall seeing a definitive answer to that issue, one may exist somewhere.

Likewise, I recognize that science is not opinion, and my use of that latter term was designed to illustrate the many and varied schools of thought when applied to issues such as foil vs. no foil, toss that thermometer you don't need it, full water pan vs. empty water pan, slather that butt with mustard, just to name a few.

I s'pose I should phrase my posts more concisely.

Regards,

Rooster
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Kevin, while it may sound as though I'm attempting to "weasel-out" of my previous, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, not at all. It did not sound that way nor did I think it.

I do not approach my cooking from a science oriented point of view but it does inform many decisions I make when it comes to cooking. For me, though, two things: One is that there is considerable bandying about of of food and cooking myths on the Net, treated as facts, especially, imo, on barbecue boards (though certainly not exclusive to them at all); the other is the 'considerable debate' issues. In most cases there need not be any debate whatsoever, the evidence for one position or another often abounds - one need only to pay attention. I think debate concerning opinions and preferences is one thing - foil vs. not, low temp vs. high, full waterpan vs. empty - and can be quite informative as people share their subjective experiences and opinions with each other. That is how many forge on to new experiences/experiments to find out what methods they like best.

I am not trying to be pedantic. I am only trying to be helpful and to that end tend to step in where factual accuracy seems to be in order. I think when cooks have a grasp of the facts they also have a better grasp of the possibilities - and I think that can make them better cooks. It has for me.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Kevin, while it may sound as though I'm attempting to "weasel-out" of my previous, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not trying to be pedantic. I am only trying to be helpful </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. I've gotten considerable help from you and a host of others on this forum by reading and learning from your and their experiences. For example, I've always held to the belief that brisket, due to its reputation for being one of the toughest cuts of meat, simply HAD to be cooked "low and slow" in order to achieve tenderness. After following the high heat method for brisket thread, I'm going to try the technique on an 8-lb. Sam's Club brisket flat, hopefully by the next week. Actually, I may even try it on my OTG, just for giggles and grins.

But not without a thermometer probe and foil......
icon_smile.gif
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
Forgo temping after foiling though. It can make you crazy if you do!
icon_smile.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It can make you crazy if you do!

You're too late, Kevin - I'm already there....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top