Greasy pork butt


 
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wade G

TVWBB Fan
I am a new visitor to the site, and think it is great. In hopefully not too drawn out fashion, I would like to explain my delima, and ask for help. Previous to today, I had a cheap Charbroil charcoal/water smoker. I purchased butts from a local butcher, trimmed as much fat as possible- -and smoked them (3 different tries). I cooked them for anywhere between 6 and 8 hours. They looked about like the pictures do on this site in the various sections from the outside.

However, the only problem was that on the inside, there was a good deal of jelly-like fat, and the meat was generally very greasy. It sorta glistened in the light. And it was more pale in color (closer to white, like chicken), than the darker grey that I am used to in my favorite bbq restuarants. I realize that the butt is a fatty piece of meat to begin with. But I know there has to be a way to either render some more of that jelly out, or something. I almost made me sick it was so greasy and slimey.

That brings me to today. I kicked the old Charbroil to the curb (convinced that somehow it was to blame, and not me!). I have been a proud Weber Kettle owner for many years, and new that if I got a WSM, any bad experience would be my fault alone.

Having said all that. Unfortunately, I don't have cooking temps, wind, or any other data from the failed experiences. I am hoping that someone can make sense of my 3 similiar outcomes, and give me an AH HA! with some tips for better success.

Thanks for the help. Sorry for the rambling.
 
You seemed to have left out alot of vital information.What was the temp on your smoker? What was the temp of your butt when you pulled it? How much did they weigh? It sounds like you pulled it to soon. You didn't give the fat time to melt down. 6-8 hours is a short time. Your smoker temp should be 220-225. The meat temp should be 190 when you pull it.There's nothing wrong with yourCharbroil charcoal/water smoker. I had a ECB before my WSM and I did some fine butts on it. Don't give up. Try again.
 
Wade, do not be discouraged.
Fat rendering is a time thing. It can take several hrs for the butt to "break down". If after 5 hrs your butt reads 180 and you take it off, it will be fatty. Just because your therm says 180 (for a butt) does'nt mean it's done. It can stay there for hours, gently breaking down the different tissues in the butt. If you jump in your sauna, start breaking a sweat, and jump out; did it do much good? Same thing here.
You gotta make sure it's done. Once you reach internal temp it becomes a "feely" thing. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
There are mega posts on this site that deal with butts. Read, read, read.
 
My last two butts have come out well enough to garner praise from a native SC barbecue lover, who pronounced them some of the best she ever tasted.

No leaving off refrigeration, no fat trimming whatsoever, cook at 250* measured at the grate, foil after reaching 150* internal, poke drain holes in bottom of foil when 190* internal achieved, pull off at 205*, rest 20 minutes, shred immediately with carving forks, pack tightly in airtight container to refrigerate.
 
Doug D

So I gather you were equally pleased with the butts you foiled as the ones you've done without foil ? Did you get some bark with the foil. Lastly, what about time. Can you give us a run down on starting and stopping and whether you used water or sand. As you can tell, I'm interested in this method. I didn't like overnighters in college or law school and I'm not a big fan of them now - but I do them.

Thanks,

Paul
 
Wade G - there are a couple good strings explaining the butt process "My Butt Journey" and "My Butt Journey 2". A lot of advice about how to do it the right way etc. I followed the advice and the Mr. Brown description and produced some fine BBQ. My adventure took about 11 hours for a foiled butt and 13 for a non-foiled butt. I took the advice "patience" to heart and it worked.

Paul G.
In my journey, I cooked two 6-7lb butts. I had to foil one in able to put food on the table for my family at a reasonable dinner hour. Since it was my maiden voyage on the WSM, I didn't want to try the overnight thing. When the butts got to 160 I foiled one, and let the other out. The foiling expedited the trip to 190, compromising the bark a little. The meat was still fantastic. The unfoiled one was great too with nice bark. The only other taste difference I could comment on was that the foiled butt seemed to concentrate the pepperiness of the Mr. Brown rub. The unfoiled one seemed to mellow out the pepper a bit more. In a pinch, the foil worked for me and I'll likely do it again. My next Butt adventure will likely be a midnight smoke, but I won't try that 'til I get a ET-73.
 
Bob J- - I think you are hitting the point of which I feared. I think I may have even went to an internal of 170 or 175 (printed DONE on chart on back of my ACCURITE brand digital thermometer). Couple that with the shorter cooking time, and I agree that the fat didn't have time to render out. Thanks also for the encouragement.

From the other posts, I am wondering also if Foil seems to be the magic bullet as far as forcing the rendering (or perhaps it just SPEEDS the rendering).

I will keep reading, and also start trying different stuff.

I am intrigued with Doug's post, as I fell in love with good BBQ in SC.

Thanks to all for your help. I really appreciate the feedback.
 
Tony
Also to answer your questions. I know my post was severely lacking in details. I didn't know to keep a journal at the time- -just a rookie. Here is a little more though about what I remember.
1) the temps on the Charbroil are measured in Warm, IDEAL, and Hot. the guage stayed just inside the Warm/Ideal line. No idea what temp that actually was, as I had my only digital therm in the meat.
2) the butt was about 6 pounds.
3) I think the LONGEST i cooked the butt was 7-8 hours.

that's about all I remember, and I am also melding 3 cooking experiences into one (although probably appropriate seeing as how the outcome was about the same in all 3).

I think from reading everybody's post- -and thanks for responding to all- -it seems a timing thing-- in that I didn't cook for long enough, had no idea at what temp I was cooking (and had no way of controlling it if I did), and then I yanked it off just cause the therm said DONE (at like 170).

No wonder, in hindsight, the butts were greasy.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Paul G.:
[qb] Doug D

So I gather you were equally pleased with the butts you foiled as the ones you've done without foil ? Did you get some bark with the foil. Lastly, what about time. Can you give us a run down on starting and stopping and whether you used water or sand. [/qb] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I've been happy with butts done without foil in the past, but this method, for me, seems to have all the positives. I can get them up to 205* faster and with less bother. Waiting until after 150* to foil lets bark and smokering form, and allows enough time to apply a decent amount of smoke-- I use about double the wood I would normally use when not using foil. A 7+ pounder took 13 hours to reach 205*. Net after cooking was 4 lbs.

I use water exclusively. I wait to add water to the pan in the beginning to aid in getting the cooker up to target temp, and, as fuel diminishes towards the end, opt to not add much if any water in order to let the butt be that which absorbs the available heat. The charcoal ring was filled to nearly overflowing and about a fourth of a Weber chimney of lit leftover briquets dumped into a depression made in the middle of the bed. I did not have to add any additional fuel.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Doug Lax:
[qb] Ok Doug D this a poke hole is a new one on me . I guess it would maintain the bark?[/qb] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nah, I just figured the rendered fat is better drained away at that point rather than have the butt just sitting in a pool of it at the bottom of the foil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

 

Back
Top