consumption and size


 
B

Brian Weatherly

New member
Im still trying to figure out which size WSM to buy. My problem is I want the 22.5 but I dont know how much charcoal it will consume. With the 18.5 will it be big enough to hold a 12 to 15lb brisket with out having to cut it up to make it fit. In the past I went out and bought a offset cooker, and wasted ALOT of charcoal. About 30lbs for a 14hr cook. I just dont want buy another charcoal hog. :wsm:
 
" With the 18.5 will it be big enough to hold a 12 to 15lb brisket with out having cut it up fit"

Sure thing, You just have to wedge it tween the handles and add some foil under the ends on the outer hot zone.
I have both, and have yet to fire up the Big boy yet, but the 18.5" has served me well for the last 5 yrs feeding a family of 6-7.
OBTW.. Welcome to the board:wsm:
Tim
 
Brian, if the there are little to no wind you should be able to get that long of a cook on 1 ring in a 22.5. I just 10 hours with lump and I choked it down to stop it, and the next day cleaned a little ash and found about 1/3 of the lump left so I got another small cook out of it! I like the 22.5 for the fact I don't have to roll, cut , or stack any of the meats I'm going to cook.
 
I have both an 18 1/2" and 22 1/2" WSMs.
The larger one does use more fuel than the smaller one.
The extra room in the 22 1/2" cooker is a good thing though.
 
i own both sizes. i use the 18 wsm 80% of the time for chicken, butts, chuckies for me and the wife. when the kids and spouses come over i break out the 22. love the room the 22 has and only cook ribs on the 22. i use the 18 charcoal ring for shorter cooks on the 22.
 
Last edited:
They each have their merits. I owned both but was not happy with the extra fuel the 22 used. If you are loading up the 22 it makes a lot of sense but for my purposes I'm happy with the 18.
 
I've done 17lbs of pork butts and just did an 11.5lb brisket on my 18.5" WSM with no problems with the fit. I didn't even have to wedge the brisket or foil it for the 18.5. I know there are many out there that love their 22.5s and that's great for them, I love my 18.5 and don't have any desire for the 22.5. You can smoke a whole lota meat on either one!
 
Thanks for all of the replies already. Im still torn between the 18 and 22 just because the kids are getting older now friends are starting to come over mor, along with wandering neighbors. But I am leaning twords the 18.5. I know more space means more fuel. Im wondering if I build a portable shelter for the 22.5 could I get better charcoal mileage.
 
I have the 22 and agree the 18 is more than enough for most of my cooks. But, laying full racks of ribs flat on the top grate with room to spare was my reasoning for the 22. As far as your charcoal usage goes... I've fit most of a 20 pound KBB (or entire 15lb of Stubbs) into the 22 and had no problems going 14 hours. Wasn't the same with Cowboy Lump from Home Depot. That crap burned pretty quick.
 
I love my 18.5 and haven't had any issues with it. I've cooked 6 racks of ribs(rolled) at one time and another time I cooked 2 butts and an 11 pound brisket at once. I also have gotten 14-16 hours out of a load of K. What's not to love about it? :wsm:
 
The larger the cooker the more fuel you're gonna use, just say'n unless you're useing a leaky offset like Chargriller.
 
I bought the 22 and thought, wow, too big, but wound up keeping it anyway. I'm glad I did. First off, I rarely use the second grate since I can get so much on top. I cook ribs more than anything, and like to leave them whole, and easy to foil flat if I wish. That being the case can do three racks on top grate. For a rib cook, 5-6 hour I do not fill up my charcoal ring to the top, and usually a good bit leftover after shutting it down. For longer cooks 10+ hours, I fill it to the top, and still have some left. Buy the charcoal when the sales go on, and don't fret over it. I'd rather have too big than not big enough, but I think you will be happy with either, but if charcoal is a big issue, then go 18. When I fire up the 22 to do a small butt or just ribs, I almost always throw on a bag of chicken breasts to put in the fridge for meals during the week, never let a fire go to waste if there is extra room...........................d
 
David gives some good advice, while we were doing a 11.5lb brisket on our 18.5WSM we also had 2 pork Loins going and after the loins were done we threw 6 pork hocks on to be used for home made bean soup! Never waste the space or coal that's available in your smoker, no matter what size you decide on.
 
Brian Weatherly said:
Im still trying to figure out which size WSM to buy. My problem is I want the 22.5 but I dont know how much charcoal it will consume. With the 18.5 will it be big enough to hold a 12 to 15lb brisket with out having to cut it up to make it fit. In the past I went out and bought a offset cooker, and wasted ALOT of charcoal. About 30lbs for a 14hr cook. I just dont want buy another charcoal hog. :wsm:
Click to expand...

30 pounds of charcoal for a single cook equates to a lot of baby sitting. LOTS!!! If you want a fuel miserly non-gas cooker your two best options are either a pellet smoker or kamado (ceramic or steel). On my Big Steel keg grill/smoker a 14 hour cook at 250 uses only 6-8 lbs of charcoal, and there could be some left over. Even less usage on my large egg.

Relatively speaking I'd advise buying the larger WSM, then a charcoal ring for the 18.5 to use in it. OR buy the smaller WSM and a One Touch Silver (or Gold) for smoking items that won't fit the 18.5.
 
sounds to me like you want the 22.5" and are trying to justify it? Get it! I don't have an 18 so can't give a comparison, but have used offsets and the 22 is more efficient. I also have a welding blanket I can drape over the WSM to help conserve coal.
 
All I can offer as a newbie myself is, when I saw the two side by side, it was a no brainer. The difference in size between the two is dramatic, and having the extra space is really nice. If you have a small cook, look up some of the fuel saving strategies where you run a ring of coals partially around the perimeter of the ring, which might help as well.

While I can't judge on the comsumption part between the two, I do know that when I used my DigiQ DX2 the first time last week, the consumption dropped ALOT. I'm not quite sure why, but I probably used 30% less than usual. That said, I will echo an earlier post that I also wired my ring to the grate, and put some big handles on the grate as well, and after the cook I immediately close all of the vents, and later I will shake off all of the ash, and leave the unburned portion of the coal for next time. So you save there as well.

Overall, I think we have to understand that by the time you buy all of your supplies, wood chunks, charcoal, meats, and factor in your time, BBQ'ing your own is not a financial ROI thing. I can get pretty darn good BBQ locally at a price much cheaper than I could ever make it for, so it's all about the enjoyment factor. With all of the mods, and extra's I've bought to get rolling, I'll never in a million years amortize that, but that's not the point. It's all about eventually becoming the best damn BBQer on the block (and beyond)!
 
The wsm is relatively efficient as smokers go, since heat rises and it's a vertical smoker. So it's a WHOLE different ball game than a sheet metal offset. However, no matter which size you get, realize that ALL sheet metal smokers are affected by the weather. The smaller one is easier to shield from the weather, and will be more efficient in terms of charcoal for most backyard cooks. However, the larger bullet gets up to temp quicker, making predicting temps/times a little easier. Also, it's space makes for more even and convenient cooks of certain things, like full packer briskets or slabs of ribs. Another thing is to ask yourself whether you'd prefer to only cook on the top grate most of the time. Guess what I'm saying is that the decision between the two size cookers should come down to a lot more than charcoal efficiency.
 
Our kids are grown and two of the three live out of state. We don't do a lot of entertaining. After careful consideration I chose the 18.5" for it's efficiency. So far, I have seen no need for greater capacity (only cooked on it for a couple of months). I already had a Walmart roaster rack ($7.50 including the roaster pan). Turned over, the rack has six slots. I cut racks of ribs in half and can hold six halves on the top grate without over cooking the ends. If I have a large party, I can run another six halves on the lower grate. That's a LOT of ribs, folks!

Frankly, you won't be "wrong" whichever one you choose. The price difference is small and had little to do with my decision.

One thing is for sure, I am REALLY happy that I made the move to get the WSM - it is a pleasure to use. I did good work on my 22.5" OTG (ribs, Boston Butt, as well as burgers, chops, and steaks) but am thoroughly enjoying exploring the world of "Lo and Slo"...

FWIW
Dale53:wsm:
 
Thank you all for your comments. First off I would like everyone to know that im not cheap, im not worried about the price of charcoal. I just dont want another one that needs to be cleaned out and refilled every 6 to 9hrs. Just one last thing Yes I do want the 22.5in model. Im a bigger is better person but I just dont want to get burned again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top