Kingsford to Change the Original Formula for Jan 2010


 
"Probably the more important change here isn't the mass of the briquette as much as the composition. What has been removed here is more coal than char. Now char is the the wood portion and coal is, well, actually coal. This means a cleaner charcoal that produces less ash."
Click to expand...
I like the sound of this...
 
I only used blue bag and then tried kingsford comp. Not sure I could go back to the blue bag after that. Hopefully the new blue will be more like comp with a cheaper price. Id be all for that!
 
the thing not mentioned was that they raised the price a lot. now they will do it again. but ya need to look at the tests done by naked whiz. not what the k people like you to believe. there was nothing wrong with the original k, so they messed with it. i'll never go back.
 
We will see. I use Blue for Grilling and Shoulder.
I use comp for Ribs and Brisket. I haven't found any official press release (pun intended). I'm sure there will be lots of complaining again this time around. I wonder if the bag weights will change.
 
Mike, im fairly new to my smoker (chicken once, ribs twice, butts 3 times and one brisket). Why do you switch up for different meats? I would think that brisket and shoulder would be similiar because they are both low and slow and that you may would switch to something different for grilling. Any tips or suggestions are appreciated.
 
I heard Derrick Riches on The BBQ Central Show podcast recently (not sure which date because I download from Itunes and then listen to them on my iPod) and he mentioned this.

The grooves and the "K" in the briquette will be deeper and yes, the bag weights will change - they will go down BUT you're supposed 'to get the same cooking time' as the old sized bag.

I can't get my hands around that. Still, I use K a lot for smoking because it is plentiful, consistent and relatively cheap. I tend toward lump for my grilling.

I'm sure like a lot of others, I'll grumble a bit, then go on looking for the best price (probably still at Sam's).

Pat
 
Originally posted by Joe Lanier:
Mike, im fairly new to my smoker (chicken once, ribs twice, butts 3 times and one brisket). Why do you switch up for different meats? I would think that brisket and shoulder would be similiar because they are both low and slow and that you may would switch to something different for grilling. Any tips or suggestions are appreciated.
Click to expand...

Hi Joe. I found, and this is just my opinion and my wife's. Some meat is more susceptible to absorb flavor. For Example Chicken absorbs the most. Therefor to me, Ribs and Brisket seem to have a slight off taste from the Original K. Shoulder seems to not absorb this taste so I use the Original K on that. Again this is just my opinion and when I compete I buy pretty cheep meat and save my $$$ for beer, so I need all the help I can get. Again this is just my opinion. Try different fuels without wood chunks and taste for yourself and let others try too. I usually like to do side by side tests or freeze some from a prior cook to compare. I have a Rocks Stoker System so consistency isn't a factor. Also when doing a rotisserie chicken my family says its too smokey and pink when using RO or other lumps.
 
It's not a matter of absorption, as meat does not absorb smoke-- smoke is only deposited on the surface of the meat. It's more that a particular meat doesn't have a distinct flavor of its own that can stand up to too much smoke. Chicken, as is poultry in general, is a bland meat, and therefore needs very little smoke application in order to taste smokey.

That "char" vs. "coal" bit sounds like quite the load of hooey. I don't think there's anything in Kingsford, or any other briquette for that matter, that is the product of geologic eons of pressure as is actual coal.
 
Doug,

I thank you for all that you contribute here but your statement of smoke not being abosrbed by meat confused me. If it does not absorb then what is the smoke ring? Why does it seem like most of the meat in PP taste smoky? If you could expand on that statement that would be really great.
 
If meat truly absorbed smoke, then the smoke ring would be not merely a ring, but evident entirely throughout the meat. The smoke ring is not actually the result of smoke, per se, but of the nitrates in smoke causing a chemical reaction in the outer layers of the meat which results in the characteristic redness. That the redness typically advances no further than a fraction of an inch inward from the surface is a result of the fact that the chemical reaction in question stops after the meat reaches temps in excess of about 140°F. Pulled pork tastes smokey throughout because smoke particulates layered on the outside have been mixed into the internal parts of the meat by the physical action of the pulling. For further discussions on the subject of meat "absorbing" smoke, do a forum search on the term "adsorbed" (vs. absorbed).
 
Originally posted by Doug D:
It's not a matter of absorption, as meat does not absorb smoke-- smoke is only deposited on the surface of the meat. It's more that a particular meat doesn't have a distinct flavor of its own that can stand up to too much smoke. Chicken, as is poultry in general, is a bland meat, and therefore needs very little smoke application in order to taste smokey.

That "char" vs. "coal" bit sounds like quite the load of hooey. I don't think there's anything in Kingsford, or any other briquette for that matter, that is the product of geologic eons of pressure as is actual coal.
Click to expand...

Hey Thanks Doug. Ya learn something new everyday.
 
Originally posted by george curtis:
but ya need to look at the tests done by naked whiz. not what the k people like you to believe.
Click to expand...
I think the Naked Whiz is awesome, but admits to being completely biased against briquettes and does not have the resources and scientific equipment to accurately test briquettes the way Kingsford does.

I have visited the Kingsford test lab...it's an amazing facility. I'm totally comfortable believing their numbers. The scientists that work there are grilling and barbecue fans, and pretty nice people, too.

In 2006, they changed the formula to include more char. I'm hoping they continue that trend with the new 2010 version.

Regards,
Chris
 
Originally posted by Joe Lanier:
Mike, im fairly new to my smoker (chicken once, ribs twice, butts 3 times and one brisket). Why do you switch up for different meats? I would think that brisket and shoulder would be similiar because they are both low and slow and that you may would switch to something different for grilling. Any tips or suggestions are appreciated.
Click to expand...

Hi Joe!

i make no claims to expertise, but my experience has been that blue k burns longer and steadier than comp k, so for overnight butts i use the blue (i can count on 14 hours on a full ring of blue vs only 9-10 with comp). for shorter cooks and grilling i like the flavor that the comp k gives better, plus it burns a little hotter, so i use comp for those cooks.

but of course ymmv!
 
I read somewhere the new bags will weigh 11 lbs. I have no complaints with the new K or the comp version. So I'll give this one a shot as well. Getting frustrated about the price ain't gonna change it. Go with the flow or just say no!
icon_biggrin.gif


Rick @
 
Originally posted by Chris Allingham:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by george curtis:
but ya need to look at the tests done by naked whiz. not what the k people like you to believe.
Click to expand...
I think the Naked Whiz is awesome, but admits to being completely biased against briquettes and does not have the resources and scientific equipment to accurately test briquettes the way Kingsford does.

I have visited the Kingsford test lab...it's an amazing facility. I'm totally comfortable believing their numbers. The scientists that work there are grilling and barbecue fans, and pretty nice people, too.

In 2006, they changed the formula to include more char. I'm hoping they continue that trend with the new 2010 version.

Regards,
Chris </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I totally agree here and to dovetail on Chris' statement. The Naked Wiz isn't always gospel. For example they state that RO has a high burn time and Ca Hot Wood has a low burn time. I tested them out and Ca Hot Wood (which is much more dense) burns about 40% longer in an uncontrolled burn. They talk about Kingford with very little regard. Ive tried about 5 different popular lumps that all make my rotisserie chicken taste pungent and meat way to pink. With the K its Crispy and Mmmmmm with no overpowering smoke.I have done side by side tests using the Minion method with K and several types of lump. The K in my opinion did not taste any worse. They both had a charcoal flavor. I like Kingsford because the flavor is so light you can enjoy the flavor of the food and it doesn't compete with what ever wood your are using also.
Lastly almost every time I grill with lump I'm serving up steak that is rare on one end and medium on the other. The heat is so uneven, sometimes I have to grill half a piece of Polo Azado over direct and the other half that is already done over indirect.
Although we (the bbq fanatics) make up only probably 10% of the Ks market, I think they are really listening to us and what we want in a charcoal. Our biggest complaint is the Ash and there claim in the new version coming Jan will reduce this.

Check out this cite. This guy was a neighbor at a competition we did. He won reserve champion in Kansas, 2nd place out 161 teams. He uses original K and did so at that competition. Funny thing, it was sponsored by RO. He told me when they got in they drove to Wal-Mart to get some K. Even thought a truck was driving around the comp selling the RO for $5 a bag.

http://www.slapyodaddybbq.com/
 
yep, but their test is not weak either. i did my own side by side test and found just about the same as naked whiz. but again, everyone should use what they like, regardless if its the best or worst out there. all i know is that k always raises their prices when a change is made and unless you can find a deal they are expensive ! i'm not a fan for many reasons and continue to be. now if they went back to the original i would change my mind.

Originally posted by Chris Allingham:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by george curtis:
but ya need to look at the tests done by naked whiz. not what the k people like you to believe.
Click to expand...
I think the Naked Whiz is awesome, but admits to being completely biased against briquettes and does not have the resources and scientific equipment to accurately test briquettes the way Kingsford does.

I have visited the Kingsford test lab...it's an amazing facility. I'm totally comfortable believing their numbers. The scientists that work there are grilling and barbecue fans, and pretty nice people, too.

In 2006, they changed the formula to include more char. I'm hoping they continue that trend with the new 2010 version.

Regards,
Chris </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
 
I WAS buying nothing but 100% hardwood charcoal brands until the magical $6 coupon appeared. This allowed me to buy a 18 lb. bag of Kingsford for $1.50. At that price, I learned to love Kingsford. I don't care what the formula is
icon_smile.gif

I have over 50 bags in my garage now!
icon_smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top