Charcoal, etc...

[Guest]

I have been using lump and chunks but on the advice in here decided to try charcoal and
Jim Minion's method of top down burning.

Yesterday, I cooked a butt using Royal Oak with the wood chips mixed in. (Mesquite)
Not the best wood but I had some of that already and decided to use it instead of buying plain charcoal and adding Oak chunks for smoke.

I got pretty good results. Filled the ring
and got 12 hours at ~225 degrees, a 3 hour nap... and an excellent 7 lb pork butt. I
had to stir and add some wood chunks (no more coals left) during the last hour for a total of 13 hours. Fell apart coming off the grill and pulled very easily.

I could swear that I could smell it when the
meat pulled from the bone. All of a sudden more of a meat cooking smell that a smoke smell. It came off soon after that.

I know that plain (without wood mixed in)
charcoal will probably burn slower but does Kingsford burn slower that Royal Oak?
I have noticed some of you saying you get longer times.

 

[Jim Minion]

CP
The wind has a lot to do with the lenght of a burn you will get from a load of charcoal. Royal Oak in some cases burns cooler so you may have had to allow more air in the cooker to get the desired pit temp. The few times I've used it, it seemed to work ok.
Jim

 

[Guest]

If it burns cooler, I should have got the full 13 hours then some with a slight intermittent breeze. Right? I think next
I'll use the plain briquettes without the
wood added in. I think that might extend
the length of the burn. It sure would be nice to throw on a 10-12 lb brisket and not
have to load up again! I'll let you know if it makes a difference.


------------------
Couch Potato