first boston butt


 
Here is my take from L O T S of shoulder cooks, let the arguing begin
icon_biggrin.gif


All these give or take 5-10 degrees:

210-230= 2-2.25hrs per lb
235-245= 1.75-2hrs per lb
250-265= 1.5-1.75hrs per lb
270-280= 1.3-1.5 per lb

I know my cookers are the following in temp differences give or take 5-10 degrees:

275 vent is 225 dome and 250 grate.

And yes my dome guages are within 5 deg in boiling water. Also as the cook goes on the gap(s) narrow. One thing to take in consideration is: length of come up to temp and or meat loads!

I find no value in less than a 225ish cook and or more than 1.75hrs per lb. Bottom line is learn your cooker to where you can do a shoulder between 1.5-1.75hrs per lb and that is low and slow enough.

wsmsmile8gm.gif
 
Hard to argue with the experience above. In my dozen plus cooks with large butts (10lbs +)over the past few years, Kevin and Glenn's timing is spot on. Anything approaching 7lbs or more I do as an overnighter. That said, I have been known to shoehorn in a same day butt using the Texas Crutch when the urge (or unexpected parties/guests) comes on.
My 2 cents on flavour, I like AB's rub but I prefer more peppery heat on big meat. The Renown Mr. Brown outlined in the recipes section here is a great start. I mix up the peppercorns with black, green and red and add some white pepper for good measure.
I don't usually inject but I have the last few cooks. I can't say I really noticed a difference but I didn't taste test much before adding the finishing sauce.
Finally, I use a vinegar based finishing sauce while pulling. I also keep a Carolina Red and a modified No. 5 sauce on the side for different tastes.

What I do notice at "BBQ" joints in Toronto and even at the Ribfests that come through is a terrible habit of overusing a sweet BBQ sauce to finish pulled pork. I don't know where this came from and I don't know how a stand filled with trophies and ribbons can abide this. Maybe it's the case of giving the judges one thing and the rubes another.
 
Guys, I know that the bullet can be a slow one, particularly with a slow Minion start-up. However, to reiterate, the OP said he was cooking <span class="ev_code_RED">steady at 230-250*</span>.

How long did the OP take to reach 230*? I have no idea, but it shouldn't take long with only one pork butt, even if it is a big ten pounder. Better question though is <span class="ev_code_RED">where are all the 20-22 hr. cook reports, anyway?</span>
icon_confused.gif


Kevin, 230-250* isn't that low for smoking pork butts, by the way. Besides, if using water in the pan, mine won't maintain much more than that, even with the vents left wide open.

As to whether any of this matters though....Despite any benefits from measuring vent temp, the bullet has had a gauge for over two years now and I pity the poor guy that reads that his 10 pounder will take over twenty hours to get tender on the bullet. Unless he goes by vent temp alone, if he doesn't overcook it on the grate, he'll likely do it in the cooler while holding for the hours needed til serving.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Better question though is where are all the 20-22 hr. cook reports, anyway? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
A surprising 'point'.

A simple search will find them, however 10-pound butts are atypical. Easily extrapolating from smaller size butt cooks at similar temps (again, Chris's are obvious examples and there are numerous member posts that one can use), it's pretty easy to see.

I one Minion's then the come-up needs to be added to the time once temps are 'steady'. If one doesn't, fine.
 
Not much luck finding 20-22 hour pork butt cook reports, but I did come across a post a few years back by Jim Minion:

"A three pound butt can reach 200º in 6 hours but that would not be a well cooked butt. Connective tissue takes longer than that to break down correctly. The other issue would be a 15 pound butt will not take 30 hours, 15 to 20 hours will breakdown the conective issue and render the fat.
The rule of thumb is based on an average butt at 6 to 7 pound will be a 12 to 14 hour cook on average. As soon as you go smaller or much larger the rule no longer apply."
Jim Minion
TVWB Emerald Member
posted July 17, 2004

FYI, this was the thread:
http://tvwbb.com/eve/forums/a/...220086452#6220086452
 
My very first cook took 19 & 21 hrs, and I've had a couple others go almost as long.....maybe when I did ~45-60# for my cousin's wedding this fall??? I've also had 'em go 9-13 hours too.
 
<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">Better question though is where are all the 20-22 hr. cook reports, anyway? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
A surprising 'point'.

A simple search will find them, however 10-pound butts are atypical. Easily extrapolating from smaller size butt cooks at similar temps (again, Chris's are obvious examples and there are numerous member posts that one can use), it's pretty easy to see.

I one Minion's then the come-up needs to be added to the time once temps are 'steady'. If one doesn't, fine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In Chris A's low-n-slow pork butt documentations, he mentions cooking 225-250, "lid temp". However, it seems to me at least that due to start-ups and charcoal issues, his average temp runs lower than 240*, the temp mentioned in this thread's OP.

As to his cooks still suggesting that 10lb pork butts take twenty+ hours, though, I'd just go back and read the Jim Minion quote that I referenced in my last post. Yes, 10lb butts are a bit atypical, and they tend to break any "hr/lb" rules that you might have.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">his average temp runs lower than 240*, the temp mentioned in this thread's OP. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Um, not really. The cooks noted average 230-241, within the range noted in the OP, i.e., 230-250.

As I said upthread to your statement questioning lengthy cooking times, "Not in my experience[which I think I can say is fairly substantial], especially if the trend is the lower end of that range, nor in the experiences of any cooks I know...". I mentioned Chris's experiences because they are easily accessible.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mike_L (Big Mike):
Well, I tried to do a boston butt this weekend...It was around 10 pounds bone in. I put it on at 8am. At 8:30pm it was still holding at 180...The temps held steady though 230 to 250 and i didn't add coal till 8:30 to bump up the temp. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess my original question was simply this: What did "20-22 hrs" have to do with Big Mike's big butt if it was 180* at the 12.5 hr mark? Know what I mean, Kevin?
 
Never cooked many butts un a WSM? 180 at the 12.5-hour mark means nothing at all. It can sit there for quite a while, and likely would have. Regardless, internal temp has nothing to do with tender.

Further: "I ended up bumping the temp at 8:30 to over 300 and it hit the 190 temp. I took it off and let it rest for 30 minutes. Even though it hit 190 i'm guessing it still needed another 2 to 3 hours." He bumpd the temp to over 300, it then eventually hit 190, and it was still underdone, as I would have expected.
 
That's EXACTLY my point. I've cooked enough to know that a pork butt, no matter the size, won't need another 7.5+hrs once it reaches 180* at the 12.5hr mark...whether in the bullet or any other cooker.

Below is a Chris A. pork butt cook. Notice all the lid temp readings under 230* and when he pulled in relation to when the probed butt reached the 180* mark.

Here's how the temperature and vent settings went for the cooking session:

Time Lid
Temp Meat
Temp Vent 1
% Vent 2
% Vent 3
%
9:55pm - - 25 25 25
10:20pm 140 - 25 25 25
10:45pm 150 - 25 25 25
11:15pm 159 - 25 25 25
11:45pm 160 - 50 50 50
12:30am 204 - 50 50 50
1:15am 240 - 50 50 50
2:15am 210 - 50 50 50
3:00am 225 - 50 50 50
5:00am 245 - 50 50 50
7:00am 226 - 50 50 50
8:45am(s) 210 - 50 50 50
9:00am(t)(b)(s) 212 170s 100 25 25
10:00am 241 - 100 100 25
11:00am 235 - 100 100 25
11:15am(b) 235 - 100 100 25
11:30am(a) 232 - 50 50 50
12:00pm 260 - 50 50 50
1:00pm 242 180s 100 100 100
2:00pm 247 2@190s 100 100 100
3:00pm 235 2@190s 100 100 100
(t) turned meat over and end-for-end
(b) basted meat
(s) stirred coals
(a) added 40 hot briquettes
 
Yes, I know. His temps averaged > 240, as I noted upthread.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I've cooked enough to know that a pork butt, no matter the size, won't need ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? I don't think so.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I've cooked enough to know that a pork butt, no matter the size, won't need </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, from Big Mike (why I am still repeating myself I have no idea): "At 8:30pm it was still holding at 180. I ended up bumping the temp at 8:30 to over 300 and it hit the 190 temp. I took it off and let it rest for 30 minutes. Even though it hit 190 i'm guessing it still needed another 2 to 3 hours. The bone did not fall out." Do you really think he after bumped the temp to over 300 just to break the secondary plateau to hit 190 it was almost where it needed to be? Really??

If you've 'cooked enough' to know - well...
 
My point, btw, as stated upthread, is that if you are cooking butts of that size at those temps in that shorter time period (or, relatively, smaller butts in a shorter time), you are cooking at higher temps than you think you are.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
My point, btw, as stated upthread, is that if you are cooking butts of that size at those temps in that shorter time period (or, relatively, smaller butts in a shorter time), you are cooking at higher temps than you think you are. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And my point is that if your ten pound pork butt takes 20hrs+, you're not cooking at 240*. It's ok to disagree though, and it's also easy to understand the different perspectives if taking into account the importance of temp measurement methods.

In cooktimes, my experience cooking pork butts on the bullet sort of mirrors Chris Allingham's three pork butt cooks. If you'll notice, the third cook takes less time (only 16 hours) to tenderize two butts that started out at 9.5lb or so each before trimming, although the temps don't seem to be any higher than the first two cooks. Why's that? Well, if I'm not mistaken Chris had put a therm in the dome and was no longer measuring at the vent.

When I quit going by vent temps my cook times got cut as well...still not as short as with other cookers, but closer, still. The thing to watch for when using a dome gauge though is when the sun hits it after the meat's getting hot. Then it starts reading hot just like measuring at the vent.
 
Love to Jerry.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> ...the third cook takes less time (only 16 hours) to tenderize two butts that started out at 9.5lb or so each before trimming, although the temps don't seem to be any higher than the first two cooks. Why's that? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> The butts he trimmed as he always does. The cook, though apparently shorter, still comes in at ? 2 hours/lb, making my point again.

One can certainly cut the time. That, again, requires cooking at higher temps. (Or foiling, of course.) Or simply cooking something sized more to the cook time alloted.

Occurring rather often, whether it is Big Mike's butt cook or another new WSM cook's ribs or another's brisket, one of the most common problems we see on this board is - especially for new cooks who are under the impression the barbecue must be cooked < 250?, often lower - that the meat is undercooked.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jerry P.:
Sheesh, fellas. This horse is dead. Please stop beating it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, Jerry, it is indeed dead, so let me put the 2hr/lb for 10lb butts issue to bed:

Kevin, the last cook of Chris' that I referenced took sixteeen hours to cook two <span class="ev_code_RED">9.5 </span>lb. butts, which was exactly the same time frame as the last time I cooked one aprox. 9.5lb butt on each rack....not 19 hours.
 
I know Dave. Two 9.5-pound butts <span class="ev_code_RED">which he then trimmed</span>. Judging by the pic and by how Chris trims, the butts would come in at ~7.5 lbs each. Again, cooktime ? 2 hours/lb.

I can't read for you Dave. I'm done here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top