Nakedwhiz: Kingsford vs. Kingsford
- Thread starter Tony Hunter
- Start date
Craig Castille
TVWBB Wizard
Interesting.
Based on the Naked Whiz tests, Weber went to a whole lot of trouble for briquettes that start a lousy two minutes quicker. It seems to be more about the decreased bag weight and higher price for this stuff than the performance.
The high temperature test is pretty scary for low & slow users. That could be why there were the I can't use it for overnighters scare stories. I think Tony demonstrated last week that the new version can be managed and used for long cooks. Although at a big price jump from the old stuff.
On the other hand, that 900F temperature will awesome for searing on the grill. Kingsford's target market for this.
Jim
The high temperature test is pretty scary for low & slow users. That could be why there were the I can't use it for overnighters scare stories. I think Tony demonstrated last week that the new version can be managed and used for long cooks. Although at a big price jump from the old stuff.
On the other hand, that 900F temperature will awesome for searing on the grill. Kingsford's target market for this.
Jim
Bill Mengel
TVWBB Fan
To me the most interesting is the smell difference. Anyone else notice that that has used the new K? I've not tried it yet.
David Willis
TVWBB Member
I definately notice my smoker running hotter than I'm used to by around 10 - 20 degrees (no real scientific back here, just what I'm used to setting my water pan and vents at. I've done two smokes so far with the new Kingsford and have been closing vents more often than I'm used to. BUT, once I get it set, it is fine, just vents closed a bit more.
About the smell difference. I don't know if it smelled different, but it took a lot longer to burn off the black and/or grey acrid smoke you get when you first light up a full chimney. That has me a bit concerned when I add cold coals to a long cook.
Again, though, just two cooks with the stuff, so I guess I'll have to BBQ more often to really tell in the next few months.
About the smell difference. I don't know if it smelled different, but it took a lot longer to burn off the black and/or grey acrid smoke you get when you first light up a full chimney. That has me a bit concerned when I add cold coals to a long cook.
Again, though, just two cooks with the stuff, so I guess I'll have to BBQ more often to really tell in the next few months.
The problem with any testing done by The Naked Whiz or by me or by anyone else is that we're not using the same method Kingsford uses to evaluate their product.
For example, Naked Whiz used a chimney to judge lighting time. Kingsford doesn't use chimneys when they do burn tests. They put a measured amount of charcoal into a ring on a grate and apply a measured amount of lighter fluid, like most Americans do in the backyard. So it's hard to know how that result compares to using a chimney.
Kingsford uses a specific test procedure that has been essentially unchanged for many years. When they say "lights faster" or "burns even longer" they are making that claim in the context of their test procedure which can be duplicated again and again under controlled conditions in the lab, which they feel simulates backyard use.
But none of us cook in a lab, and we don't cook the way most people do and we don't use charcoal the same way most people do. Each of us could start with a bag of old and new K and do our own comparison and come up with different results depending on how we conducted our test.
The best test is going to be the one you do in your own backyard, using your own process and your own cooker, and judged not on a single cook, but over the course of several cooks, in order to really understand how the new product performs. It is the same as if you switched to any other brand of briquette or lump. You might have a bad experience the first time, but after 4-6 uses you get things dialed in and get a sense of how--or whether--the product really works.
Regards,
Chris
Jeff T Miller
TVWBB All-Star
I don't think you can say they have completely ignored it. My nephew brought over a very small bag of charcoal today "Kingsford". I didn't read it couldn't have been more than 2 pounds. It was new with sure fire grooves, you just put it in the grill and light the bag. Maybe no help to us but I don't see that they have completely ignored other methods of starting coals.
Tony Hunter
TVWBB Pro
Well, I definitely have to disagree with the naked whiz ash test and results. On both my cooks I noticed a significant decrease in ash production. In fact, it was very impressive. I plan to do several more cooks with the new K. I think I for now it will take some consistently bad performance points to make me immediately jump to something else and I have not seen that so far. I do plan to try some different types of lump, but unless one those comes across as the no-brainer choice, my main fuel will be the new K.
Craig Castille
TVWBB Wizard
After all the debate, angst, and feeling of abandonment about new vs. old kingsford...it's really just time to move on IMO.
The worst case scenario is that you may have to refuel on a limited basis.
The best case scenario is that little or nothing changes with the cooking process itself.
Obviously, kingsford did this to please the masses in general.
When the change in product came about, so did I.
A conversion to lump has been near seamless, and IMO, produces a superior cooked product.
The tradeoff however, is that it's not maintenance free (as the new kingsford appears to be as well).
I will still use charcoal on rare occasions when circumstances dictate, and I'll be prepared to refuel as necessary....so to me, it's just not a real big deal anymore.
The move to lump has changed that.
JMO.
The worst case scenario is that you may have to refuel on a limited basis.
The best case scenario is that little or nothing changes with the cooking process itself.
Obviously, kingsford did this to please the masses in general.
When the change in product came about, so did I.
A conversion to lump has been near seamless, and IMO, produces a superior cooked product.
The tradeoff however, is that it's not maintenance free (as the new kingsford appears to be as well).
I will still use charcoal on rare occasions when circumstances dictate, and I'll be prepared to refuel as necessary....so to me, it's just not a real big deal anymore.
The move to lump has changed that.
JMO.
Rick Moore
TVWBB Super Fan
My first cook with the new stuff was last night on my kettle. I found the product tended to go out when I put my kettle lid on with all vents wide open. This did not happen with the old product. But that was the only big difference that I noted so far.
Jeff T Miller
TVWBB All-Star
Erik here is a pic of the bag. It definately didn't say anything about petrol products. I think it would have said match light if it did.
Edit: forgot to mention the bag says 2.25 pounds.
Edit: forgot to mention the bag says 2.25 pounds.
Tony Hunter
TVWBB Pro
Craig, I agree with you on your entire post. I will say though that pleasing the masses is the same problem I have with Weber. I think there is enough of an authentic barbecue'er base to justify a larger WSM with built-in ash catcher and a few other bells and whistles too. I really think Weber would make money on this deal. Likewise, Kingsford is missing a huge opportunity (IMO) to rake in a lot of money by engineering a charcoal that is designed for low and slow with very little ash etc. I realize that it probably will not happen on the part of either company, but the ideas are plausible I think.
G
Guest
Guest
Tony, thanks for posting the link, a very interesting read.
I have to wonder why the Whiz did his time of burn test at such high temps. He started the timer when the temp hit 300 and stopped it when the temp dropped below 350. I would be more interested in the results of setting the Guru at 250.
Personally, my results with the new Kingsford have been fine. I did a short rib cook on Easter and kept the temps in the 220-235 range for 4 and half hours with hardly any adjustments. With the old stuff, my temp range was typically 235-260. I have only done a couple of low and slow cooks with the new stuff, but the results have been fine. As far as the ash goes, Kingsford always produces a lot, but I just dump it in the garbage can when I get my WSM ready for the next cook. The ash production has never been a problem for me.
TomK
I have to wonder why the Whiz did his time of burn test at such high temps. He started the timer when the temp hit 300 and stopped it when the temp dropped below 350. I would be more interested in the results of setting the Guru at 250.
Personally, my results with the new Kingsford have been fine. I did a short rib cook on Easter and kept the temps in the 220-235 range for 4 and half hours with hardly any adjustments. With the old stuff, my temp range was typically 235-260. I have only done a couple of low and slow cooks with the new stuff, but the results have been fine. As far as the ash goes, Kingsford always produces a lot, but I just dump it in the garbage can when I get my WSM ready for the next cook. The ash production has never been a problem for me.
TomK
I did my first cook with new K this weekend. I used the Standard to fire up because I don't like having to use so much fuel for MM for a 5 hr. cook. I did chicken butterflied halves low/slow.
Didn't really notice any problems and had fuel left. Temp got up in a hurry, but it always does with Standatd.
Maybe just my imagination, but I don't seem to ge that old "charcoal fire smell" with the new stuff ? Not a bad smell, just no smell ?
Paul
Didn't really notice any problems and had fuel left. Temp got up in a hurry, but it always does with Standatd.
Maybe just my imagination, but I don't seem to ge that old "charcoal fire smell" with the new stuff ? Not a bad smell, just no smell ?
Paul
When running thousands of burn tests over the years, you need a reproduceable process in order to compare results accurately. I don't know this for sure, but I would think that the use of a chimney or a paraffin starter cube or a weed burner would introduce more variables into the testing process that would be difficult to control. But I suppose if the majority of folks doing high-temp charcoal briquette grilling switch from lighter fluid to something else, Kingsford will eventually have to adjust their testing protocol to account for this.
Regards,
Chris
There's no question that the bottom line here was...well...the bottom line for Kingsford...that's why they changed and why they're stretching the truth a bit in their advertising...like everyone else out there...offer a product for the same price (or higher) but there's either less product or it takes more product to do the same job...whatever...it's the same old story in the marketplace...
Being manipulated like that does turn me off of the new product outside of the new Ks low and slow performance and is 75% why I'm experimenting with other products...lump included...
On the performance side (without the bias of feeling manipulated for the company's bottom line)...I still think that the new K will be ok in the long run with some experience with it...yup, it will be different and perhaps more "finicky" given what strikes me the most about the new product...it does burn much hotter and if your cooker doesn't control air flow well (isn't tight) and/or if it's a windy day (or night) your margin of error may be a LOT slimmer with the new K than with the old K...if you have a tight unit and/or it's a relatively calm day (and/or night)...ya may not notice as much of a difference...but we'll see with more observations from our backyards...
Just keep posting those results of home cooks WITH your vent settings...also, I'd like to see more results/observations using the GURU...
Being manipulated like that does turn me off of the new product outside of the new Ks low and slow performance and is 75% why I'm experimenting with other products...lump included...
On the performance side (without the bias of feeling manipulated for the company's bottom line)...I still think that the new K will be ok in the long run with some experience with it...yup, it will be different and perhaps more "finicky" given what strikes me the most about the new product...it does burn much hotter and if your cooker doesn't control air flow well (isn't tight) and/or if it's a windy day (or night) your margin of error may be a LOT slimmer with the new K than with the old K...if you have a tight unit and/or it's a relatively calm day (and/or night)...ya may not notice as much of a difference...but we'll see with more observations from our backyards...
Just keep posting those results of home cooks WITH your vent settings...also, I'd like to see more results/observations using the GURU...
I think what most people here are failing to realize is that the real issue for Kingsford isn't about pleasing amateur smokers like us. The issue for the Big K is GAS. Kingsford carries the burden of pleasing the largest share of what is proving to be a dwindling market. Every year, gas grill sales increase while backyard *true* BBQ becomes more of a niche "hobby."
I would guess that the R&D guys Chris spoke with are genuine in their concern, but not to the extent that they'd be willing to compromise one bit of the larger share. And remember, it was only sympathetic R&D guys, not the CEO.
It's no small coincidence that Duraflames major marketing effort isn't in their regular or hardwood briquettes, but in their "Quick Coals" light-the-bag stuff. Duraflame sponsored a Q comp out here on the west coast, and while they did provide charcoal for the competitors, the free stuff they were giving away was the Quick Coals. You can walk into almost any grocery store and find Quick Coals, but the story line on the Hardwood product is "unavailable shelf space." Oh, really?
I, like most, am quite upset about the "less product for the same price" BS, but that's the way it goes these days. How many backyard grillers are gonna notice the difference from one season to the next? Whatever the number, I'm pretty sure it's not enough to make even a minor blip on Big K's sales charts.
Gas is well on its way, and the big boys have to find a way to deal with it. We are destined to become marketing casualties as they become ever more focused on whatever it takes to retain market share. I'm not too worried though, as I'm sure there will always be somebody willing to take my money for the kind of product I want. I may have to drive a little farther, pay a little more, change my technique - probably all three - but that's the price I'll have to be willing to pay for my "hobby."
I would guess that the R&D guys Chris spoke with are genuine in their concern, but not to the extent that they'd be willing to compromise one bit of the larger share. And remember, it was only sympathetic R&D guys, not the CEO.
It's no small coincidence that Duraflames major marketing effort isn't in their regular or hardwood briquettes, but in their "Quick Coals" light-the-bag stuff. Duraflame sponsored a Q comp out here on the west coast, and while they did provide charcoal for the competitors, the free stuff they were giving away was the Quick Coals. You can walk into almost any grocery store and find Quick Coals, but the story line on the Hardwood product is "unavailable shelf space." Oh, really?
I, like most, am quite upset about the "less product for the same price" BS, but that's the way it goes these days. How many backyard grillers are gonna notice the difference from one season to the next? Whatever the number, I'm pretty sure it's not enough to make even a minor blip on Big K's sales charts.
Gas is well on its way, and the big boys have to find a way to deal with it. We are destined to become marketing casualties as they become ever more focused on whatever it takes to retain market share. I'm not too worried though, as I'm sure there will always be somebody willing to take my money for the kind of product I want. I may have to drive a little farther, pay a little more, change my technique - probably all three - but that's the price I'll have to be willing to pay for my "hobby."