<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Charles Howse:
Sheeeeesh! What's all this talk of 20-hour cooks?
Cook at 275° and 2 butts will be done in 9 hours.
Got the T-Shirt on that one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I've never taken 20 hours to cook a butt, but I have had them go 18 or so, especially when I packed four or more in my little wsm. I like to cook low-n-slow at 225-250, measured at the vent and stretch out my cooks since the Missus always wants the bbq for supper the next day, not lunch. I find that the hotter I cook, the faster the water boils off the pan, and I have the time cooking overnight, anyway.
I find the wsm is a set and forget cooker with a ECB water pan and good charcoal. I typically monitor for the first hour or so, then go to bed and not worry about filling the pan again until the next morning. No refueling on the little wsm is needed unless it's really cold/windy.
BTW, I put out the queastion a while back on two different forums concerning all-day butt cooks for supper, vs. overnight and holding til supper. NOT ONE person encouraged me to get up early or cook at 275, with the exception of a couple of guys that suggested foiling to speed up the cook. I don't want to mess with foiling if I'm cooking butts on both racks, and I like the texture of the bark best with a long low-n-slow cook, anyway.
Just thought I'd give the reasons for the long low-n-slow cooks. It's more a timing sort of thing, really. When I cooked three for a family reunion this summer, I cooked a little hotter to get 'em done that morning. If I remember correctly, I set the Maverick for 240-265 or so, and yep, they were done a good bit quicker, just as planned.