Is the Charcoal Rim in my WMS necessary?


 
I've done two overnight cooks with a WSM 22.5. Both were Minion cooks, using a full ring and about 3/4 of a chimney lit, ~6 qts hot water at the start, and both went 16+ hours with no charcoal added. Used a DigiQ2 running pit sets of 225 - 235 for the duration. Did have to add water to each after about 10-12 hrs. Used Kingsford Original blue bag. At the time I did these cooks, my WSM had prolly a dozen previous cooks, so it was nicely gunked. Like an earlier respondent, I had added the Cajun Bandit door prior to the overnight cooks.
 
By using the coffee can method you are losing space for some unlit coals. I pack the ring with unlit to the point its falling over the ring. I then arrange the unlit around the edge to form a bowl in the center. Dump your lit there in the center.14+ hours depending on how hot you run and how long it takes to get to temp.
 
JSMcdowell;
I would like to respectfully disagree with you regarding the "Tin Can Minion Method". The only space taken up is the thickness of the can walls. That is microscopic.

I regularly use the tin can, and get completely consistent results and long burn (I have never had to add coals to my 18.5" WSM). I must qualify this statement, as I have yet to do an overnight cook (I haven't needed to do for the things I smoke regularly). I "might" have a different opinion if I regularly did full packer brisket, but for Boston Butt's, PSB, ribs, and chicken (parts, spatchcocked, and halves) it hasn't been necessary to use anything but the tin can method. Again, I still don't really understand how the tin can will limit how much charcoal I load into my WSM...

FWIW
Dale53
 
I no longer have a WSM, but have had four total (2-18.5s and 2-22.5s) and I not only packed the coal rings "running over" with unlit, but I created a cavity on one side to pour the lit. Seemed to always have predictable consistency and excellent results from a "burn across" method, rather than dumping coals on top and having ash buildup smother those underneath.

I only have 2 kamados now, and have yet to do a low n slow on my 26.75" kettle. But when I do I will employ the same method, using firebricks as a barrier and dropping the lit in one side. I got over 14 hrs doing this with a Performer last year - and would expect similar results with the bigger kettle.
 
Tyler that is interesting, going to try that on the next overnighter, I have seen what you refer to as the ash on top of lit coals, for shorter low and slows I was doing the c shaped thing with one end started. But for an overnighter used the Minion Method.
 
Robert McGee said:
JSMcdowell;
I would like to respectfully disagree with you regarding the "Tin Can Minion Method". The only space taken up is the thickness of the can walls. That is microscopic.

I regularly use the tin can, and get completely consistent results and long burn (I have never had to add coals to my 18.5" WSM). I must qualify this statement, as I have yet to do an overnight cook (I haven't needed to do for the things I smoke regularly). I "might" have a different opinion if I regularly did full packer brisket, but for Boston Butt's, PSB, ribs, and chicken (parts, spatchcocked, and halves) it hasn't been necessary to use anything but the tin can method. Again, I still don't really understand how the tin can will limit how much charcoal I load into my WSM...

FWIW
Dale53
Click to expand...

i think I know what he means , bob. The room you are losing is not due to the thickness of the can , but rather the heights you could pack the charcoal in that circle where the can sits. I noticed myself last time when I pulled the can out....the unlit is sitting in a pretty deep hole.....that hole would hold a lot of unlit charcoal. I think next time I smoke a shoulder or brisket I will half fill the can with unlit and THEN dump my half chimney of lit on top of it....THEN pull the can out.
 
>>>I will half fill the can with unlit and THEN dump my half chimney of lit on top of it....THEN pull the can out.<<<

EXACTLY!! (I have been using 12 lit briquettes lit in my little IKEA silverware caddy).

Dale53
 
Very well may be the KComp. I find it burns out quicker than other charcoal. Hotter too. I like it for the kettle but used it twice on the WSM and found I prefer KB, as I get a more steady burn from it.
 
I've read all the posts here I've noticed some are talking about their 18's some about their 22's. Having owned both there is a significant difference in fuel consumption between them. Hot water in the bowl does make a big difference especially when you consider the 22 holds 3 gallons. It's tuff to heat that much water without using a lot of lit to begin with and once you do that you shorten the burn considerably. My experience is dry pans, metal discs, clay saucers all increase cooking times over the use of water not to mention clean-up. The one thing that will definitely aid your cooker is Nomex gasket material especially around the bowl and the fuel door. I have applied Nomex to two of three WSMs I have owned and also to the underside of the lid on my 26. The gunk everybody refers to aids to seal the spaces but Nomex does it better. Whether your fuel burns from the middle out, from one side to the other, top down or bottom up it still depends on how much access to air it has and how you lay it in. Control the air you control your burn. I like lump myself but I pack it in tight using a charcoal basket and lay in big pieces and small packing it with the smaller chips. I don't have the ash problem to worry about.
This past weekend I helped my nephew cook for 24 people, 11 racks of ribs in the 22 over half a pan of hot water with a full ring of briquettes. New smoker used twice. We burned through almost a full ring in a little over 5 hours running wide open. Temps by the dome never exceeded 250 but there was a lot of mass in that much cold meat. We did one grate dry rub, the other 3-1-1, they turned out very well. Did a brisket too on a Komodo, it was a lot touchier than the WSM but still all about controlling the amount of lit fuel to begin with and the air flow.
 
Last edited:
Gary S said:
I've read all the posts here I've noticed some are talking about their 18's some about their 22's. Having owned both there is a significant difference in fuel consumption between them. "Hot water in the bowl does make a big difference especially when you consider the 22 holds 3 gallons. It's tuff to heat that much water without using a lot of lit to begin with and once you do that you shorten the burn considerably. My experience is dry pans, metal discs, clay saucers all increase cooking times over the use of water not to mention clean-up." The one thing that will definitely aid your cooker is Nomex gasket material especially around the bowl and the fuel door. I have applied Nomex to two of three WSMs I have owned and also to the underside of the lid on my 26. The gunk everybody refers to aids to seal the spaces but Nomex does it better. Whether your fuel burns from the middle out, from one side to the other, top down or bottom up it still depends on how much access to air it has and how you lay it in. Control the air you control your burn. I like lump myself but I pack it in tight using a charcoal basket and lay in big pieces and small packing it with the smaller chips. I don't have the ash problem to worry about.
This past weekend I helped my nephew cook for 24 people, 11 racks of ribs in the 22 over half a pan of hot water with a full ring of briquettes. New smoker used twice. We burned through almost a full ring in a little over 5 hours running wide open. Temps by the dome never exceeded 250 but there was a lot of mass in that much cold meat. We did one grate dry rub, the other 3-1-1, they turned out very well. Did a brisket too on a Komodo, it was a lot touchier than the WSM but still all about controlling the amount of lit fuel to begin with and the air flow.
Click to expand...

Gary can you elaborate on how this could be the case, and I am not following you on how the metal or sand or whatever in the pan could increase your cook time any more than water in the pan.
 
Bill Schultz said:
Gary can you elaborate on how this could be the case, and I am not following you on how the metal or sand or whatever in the pan could increase your cook time any more than water in the pan.
Click to expand...

Bill, I did not say that correctly now that I re-read it. Thanks for drawing it to my attention. To clarify any misunderstandings I wanted to say it simply takes a lot more energy to heat three gallons of water than it does to heat the smoker with a dry pan or a metal disc or a clay saucer. My point being when I am operating the smoker without water I can use less lit to begin with, reach my temps sooner and therefore I can run for a longer period of time as I have consumed less fuel as opposed to using the water pan full of water. The saucers, dry pans etc. do not cause you to cook longer but they afford the opportunity to extend the run time on the same amount of fuel.
 
I'm not Gary but try this:

Much heat from the fire goes into evaporating the water. It take a LOT of heat to evaporate a gallon or more of water. That's why having water in the pan helps to stabilize the temperature. You might find water desirable because of this effect (it can be no hotter than 212 degree F until the pan boils dry), but people who use one of the waterless methods find that temperature control is still excellent if the vents are carefully set.
 
Got it Gary, and Carl. That is where I am at. I use 2/3 of the pan filled with sandy gravel, small stuff. Very tight pack. Foiled on top. It has worked well for my temp controls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top