New to forum...too foil or not to foil butts?
- Thread starter A. Parra
- Start date
Chris Stanek
TVWBB Fan
I've made enough butts to feel good about my own preferences.
- I don't inject anymore since I think it changes the texture of the meat
- I slather if I remember only to hold the rub on better
- Fat cap down ... render more of that fat away and seems to make a noticable different in how moist the meat is
- I'm a foiler. At 175 I usually just plop them in a pan with some apple juice and cover it up with heavy duty tin foil.
I've made them every which way and have done several side by side comparisons since I always make at least two at a time in my big offset. The most raves consistently come from the process noted above. Of course, like everything, it's FORD vs Chevy. I think you try it one way, then the other, then see which one suits you. Some people say there's no difference with anything, some say "this" or "that" makes ALL the difference, yet others say it there maybe some difference. You'll find what works best for you.
- I don't inject anymore since I think it changes the texture of the meat
- I slather if I remember only to hold the rub on better
- Fat cap down ... render more of that fat away and seems to make a noticable different in how moist the meat is
- I'm a foiler. At 175 I usually just plop them in a pan with some apple juice and cover it up with heavy duty tin foil.
I've made them every which way and have done several side by side comparisons since I always make at least two at a time in my big offset. The most raves consistently come from the process noted above. Of course, like everything, it's FORD vs Chevy. I think you try it one way, then the other, then see which one suits you. Some people say there's no difference with anything, some say "this" or "that" makes ALL the difference, yet others say it there maybe some difference. You'll find what works best for you.
M. Rollins
TVWBB Super Fan
Welcome to our madness! You mention not using water...are you asking about the foil because you're worried about moisture? If so, don't! Water in the bowl is for a heat sink, used to help keep temps stable. Most here agree that water in the bowl does not add moisture to whatever is being cooked. I don't use water, either. I have never foiled a butt to finish, though some do, so I can't speak to any other benefits. Whatever you method you choose, have fun and ENJOY!!!
Mike
Mike
{QUOTE} - Fat cap down ... render more of that fat away and seems to make a noticable different in how moist the meat is
Thanks Chris!!
I always cook with the fat cap on top, my thinking is that the fat cap will 'render' down into the pork > keeping the meat 'moist'. Do you think the fat cap being 'down' keeps the 'fat marbling' in the muscle (not the fat cap itself) from rendering out of the pork? I'm wondering if the fat cap being on the bottom will act like a natural 'tray'?
Thanks Chris!!
I always cook with the fat cap on top, my thinking is that the fat cap will 'render' down into the pork > keeping the meat 'moist'. Do you think the fat cap being 'down' keeps the 'fat marbling' in the muscle (not the fat cap itself) from rendering out of the pork? I'm wondering if the fat cap being on the bottom will act like a natural 'tray'?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M. Rollins:
Welcome to our madness! You mention not using water...are you asking about the foil because you're worried about moisture? If so, don't! Water in the bowl is for a heat sink, used to help keep temps stable. Most here agree that water in the bowl does not add moisture to whatever is being cooked. I don't use water, either. I have never foiled a butt to finish, though some do, so I can't speak to any other benefits. Whatever you method you choose, have fun and ENJOY!!!
Mike </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks Mike, seeing how 90% of the time I smoke butts, I quit using water years ago and have never looked back. Such a pain to deal with the mess. Never had a problem with temp spikes and I've extended my cook times 15-20% on average.
Welcome to our madness! You mention not using water...are you asking about the foil because you're worried about moisture? If so, don't! Water in the bowl is for a heat sink, used to help keep temps stable. Most here agree that water in the bowl does not add moisture to whatever is being cooked. I don't use water, either. I have never foiled a butt to finish, though some do, so I can't speak to any other benefits. Whatever you method you choose, have fun and ENJOY!!!
Mike </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks Mike, seeing how 90% of the time I smoke butts, I quit using water years ago and have never looked back. Such a pain to deal with the mess. Never had a problem with temp spikes and I've extended my cook times 15-20% on average.
Dave Russell
TVWBB Honor Circle
A., since you use a dry pan, foil away.
I don't foil because that I notice that the water in the pan slows down the bark formation, and as long as I don't overcook 'em, the bbq comes out nice and moist with great texture throughout.
Now if I used sand or a clay pot base for a heat sink, I might start foiling again...but then again, it's cramped on my 18.5" with 18lb of pork butt to a grate. Other than simply over-cooking, even though I get less bark, I avoid dry bbq by starting off with larger WHOLE BONE-IN pork butts...eight pounds and up, preferred.
I don't foil because that I notice that the water in the pan slows down the bark formation, and as long as I don't overcook 'em, the bbq comes out nice and moist with great texture throughout.
Now if I used sand or a clay pot base for a heat sink, I might start foiling again...but then again, it's cramped on my 18.5" with 18lb of pork butt to a grate. Other than simply over-cooking, even though I get less bark, I avoid dry bbq by starting off with larger WHOLE BONE-IN pork butts...eight pounds and up, preferred.
Dave Russell
TVWBB Honor Circle
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dave/G:
My preference is no foil, fat down, empty foiled water pan. I like fat down because if I get sticking, it's fat and not meat that sticks. I cook butts at 300 so I can start at a reasonable time in the morning and be done in the late afternoon. JMO </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Been there, done that... but in all due respect Dave/G, I wouldn't do it again UNLESS, maybe just cooking one or two pork butts....and I know, most folks here probably ARE only cooking on the top rack and/or doing one or two...but humor me as I relate my own experience for the benefit of any who might fill the cooker up and are tempted to "hit the gas" and skip the foil.
Generally speaking, I get significantly harder and thicker bark after cooking so fast...even cooking fat down. But yep, look out
if you cook fat side up at HH for too long. I guess if only cooking one or two butts, it's easy to chop up all that bark to mix in, though. You also might want to chop up some of the pieces of fat that's left when cooking fast. That might sound gross, but nobody'll complain, trust me.
Now getting to my main concern, cooking more than one pork butt on the bottom grate, it stands to reason that if you are cooking at 300* on the top grate, that means that anything outside of the pan on the bottom grate is cooking on one side at well OVER 325*....and if you go to the effort of removing the top grate and rotating the butts on the bottom grate (which I never have needed to do cooking low-n-slow), then you very well will have a significant temp spike from having so much air exposed to the coals....because you don't have water in the pan for a heat sink.
Sorry, just sayin', you might've had an assistant help wrap those butts up on the bottom when you rotated them. Know what I mean?
Another thing I noticed when I tried a 275*-300 cook on the wsm was that I should have allowed more time than I thought I should when cooking so fast. Foil not only helps keep the bark softer and thus slows moisture loss, but speeds the cook up as well, especially if you do it once the bark is set (around 160*), and don't put off too long. Anyway, cooking that fast, even if not foiling you'll want some rest in the foil to try to soften up the bark up some.
I guess if you can't tell, I'm kind of biased against cooking pork butts at higher temps on the wsm with no wrapping, but it's not only for my own wsm experience. It's for the COMPARISON with my UDS experience, trying to cook butts in short cook times with no foil.
Cooking butts in the UDS as fast as eight hours, I was MUCH happier with the end product since the heat came up uniformly over the center of the drum, the meat well over the coals near the top of the drum. I used ONE grate in the top under a kettle lid, and I flipped the butts a couple of times during the cook, starting and ending with the fat down.
Why don't I cook on the drum anymore? Several reasons, really, but mainly, I don't dig the "fat in the fire" flavor. The other reasons are pure laziness to be honest...ie, cleaning and putting the drum back in the shed since it rusts up so quick and the Missus got tired of lookin' at it.
However, if I didn't have any foil or enough time to do a low-n-slow cook, I might cook one or two at 300* again. If I couldn't cook low-n-slow overnight as usual though, I'd just rather get up with the chickens and shoot for 275*.
My preference is no foil, fat down, empty foiled water pan. I like fat down because if I get sticking, it's fat and not meat that sticks. I cook butts at 300 so I can start at a reasonable time in the morning and be done in the late afternoon. JMO </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Been there, done that... but in all due respect Dave/G, I wouldn't do it again UNLESS, maybe just cooking one or two pork butts....and I know, most folks here probably ARE only cooking on the top rack and/or doing one or two...but humor me as I relate my own experience for the benefit of any who might fill the cooker up and are tempted to "hit the gas" and skip the foil.
Generally speaking, I get significantly harder and thicker bark after cooking so fast...even cooking fat down. But yep, look out
Now getting to my main concern, cooking more than one pork butt on the bottom grate, it stands to reason that if you are cooking at 300* on the top grate, that means that anything outside of the pan on the bottom grate is cooking on one side at well OVER 325*....and if you go to the effort of removing the top grate and rotating the butts on the bottom grate (which I never have needed to do cooking low-n-slow), then you very well will have a significant temp spike from having so much air exposed to the coals....because you don't have water in the pan for a heat sink.
Another thing I noticed when I tried a 275*-300 cook on the wsm was that I should have allowed more time than I thought I should when cooking so fast. Foil not only helps keep the bark softer and thus slows moisture loss, but speeds the cook up as well, especially if you do it once the bark is set (around 160*), and don't put off too long. Anyway, cooking that fast, even if not foiling you'll want some rest in the foil to try to soften up the bark up some.
I guess if you can't tell, I'm kind of biased against cooking pork butts at higher temps on the wsm with no wrapping, but it's not only for my own wsm experience. It's for the COMPARISON with my UDS experience, trying to cook butts in short cook times with no foil.
Cooking butts in the UDS as fast as eight hours, I was MUCH happier with the end product since the heat came up uniformly over the center of the drum, the meat well over the coals near the top of the drum. I used ONE grate in the top under a kettle lid, and I flipped the butts a couple of times during the cook, starting and ending with the fat down.
Why don't I cook on the drum anymore? Several reasons, really, but mainly, I don't dig the "fat in the fire" flavor. The other reasons are pure laziness to be honest...ie, cleaning and putting the drum back in the shed since it rusts up so quick and the Missus got tired of lookin' at it.
However, if I didn't have any foil or enough time to do a low-n-slow cook, I might cook one or two at 300* again. If I couldn't cook low-n-slow overnight as usual though, I'd just rather get up with the chickens and shoot for 275*.
B Lauchnor
TVWBB Member
My last butt cook was Friday night-
Costco boned butts. The package weighed about 15lbs. (2 butts)
Slathered w/mustard and rub
Fat down
No Foil
2 small pieces of Hickory and 2 med pieces of cherry
No water in the pan
started at 10:00 pm -temp leveled at 248 dome @11:00pm
ran it until 7:00 am and it was 249 dome.
put in a bout 10 more unlit briquets and knocked down the ash.
At 10:00 am the butt's were 195 internal and they came off (12 hours total cook)
Rested them about 2 hours with foil cover.
Ate like a pig for lunch. 3 heaping sannies.
Delicious.
Costco boned butts. The package weighed about 15lbs. (2 butts)
Slathered w/mustard and rub
Fat down
No Foil
2 small pieces of Hickory and 2 med pieces of cherry
No water in the pan
started at 10:00 pm -temp leveled at 248 dome @11:00pm
ran it until 7:00 am and it was 249 dome.
put in a bout 10 more unlit briquets and knocked down the ash.
At 10:00 am the butt's were 195 internal and they came off (12 hours total cook)
Rested them about 2 hours with foil cover.
Ate like a pig for lunch. 3 heaping sannies.
Delicious.
Chris Stanek
TVWBB Fan
Here was my eventually conclusion after doing fat cap comparisons side by side, individually, etc.
I'm just not totally convinced that fat cap up renders the fat into the meat to keep it moist. If you look at the amount of fat in your trap, it's the same. Then again, let's say it does... all that fat in the meat is really not that enjoyable. Some yes... a bunch no. One unscientific test I did was making two butts at the same time in my offset. Each had their own pan. I pulled them each let them sit and then put them in the fridge. Once cooled and the fat had hardened (you know the orange-y solidified fat you see) there was much more of it in the fat cap up... and when I served both... I had a couple of different family members say the fat cap up one was "greasy."
I just think there's plenty of fat already in the butt and along with the collegen that melts away there's enough going on in there. I'd rather protect the meat from too much direct heat by using the fat cap as the barrier.
Now take all this with a grain of salt because I'm sure therea are guys here and everywhere, who do the exact same opposite of what I do and have fantastic results. Great Q is very much about preference, so you just sorda experiment and figure out what you like best. The thing is... it's all good... even when it's not great so there's nothing to loose really by not trying different things and figuring out what you dig the most.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by A. Parra:
{QUOTE} - Fat cap down ... render more of that fat away and seems to make a noticable different in how moist the meat is
Thanks Chris!!
I always cook with the fat cap on top, my thinking is that the fat cap will 'render' down into the pork > keeping the meat 'moist'. Do you think the fat cap being 'down' keeps the 'fat marbling' in the muscle (not the fat cap itself) from rendering out of the pork? I'm wondering if the fat cap being on the bottom will act like a natural 'tray'? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm just not totally convinced that fat cap up renders the fat into the meat to keep it moist. If you look at the amount of fat in your trap, it's the same. Then again, let's say it does... all that fat in the meat is really not that enjoyable. Some yes... a bunch no. One unscientific test I did was making two butts at the same time in my offset. Each had their own pan. I pulled them each let them sit and then put them in the fridge. Once cooled and the fat had hardened (you know the orange-y solidified fat you see) there was much more of it in the fat cap up... and when I served both... I had a couple of different family members say the fat cap up one was "greasy."
I just think there's plenty of fat already in the butt and along with the collegen that melts away there's enough going on in there. I'd rather protect the meat from too much direct heat by using the fat cap as the barrier.
Now take all this with a grain of salt because I'm sure therea are guys here and everywhere, who do the exact same opposite of what I do and have fantastic results. Great Q is very much about preference, so you just sorda experiment and figure out what you like best. The thing is... it's all good... even when it's not great so there's nothing to loose really by not trying different things and figuring out what you dig the most.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by A. Parra:
{QUOTE} - Fat cap down ... render more of that fat away and seems to make a noticable different in how moist the meat is
Thanks Chris!!
I always cook with the fat cap on top, my thinking is that the fat cap will 'render' down into the pork > keeping the meat 'moist'. Do you think the fat cap being 'down' keeps the 'fat marbling' in the muscle (not the fat cap itself) from rendering out of the pork? I'm wondering if the fat cap being on the bottom will act like a natural 'tray'? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by B Lauchnor:
My last butt cook was Friday night-
Costco boned butts. The package weighed about 15lbs. (2 butts)
Slathered w/mustard and rub
Fat down
No Foil
2 small pieces of Hickory and 2 med pieces of cherry
No water in the pan
started at 10:00 pm -temp leveled at 248 dome @11:00pm
ran it until 7:00 am and it was 249 dome.
put in a bout 10 more unlit briquets and knocked down the ash.
At 10:00 am the butt's were 195 internal and they came off (12 hours total cook)
Rested them about 2 hours with foil cover.
Ate like a pig for lunch. 3 heaping sannies.
Delicious. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well done B Lauchnor!
My last butt cook was Friday night-
Costco boned butts. The package weighed about 15lbs. (2 butts)
Slathered w/mustard and rub
Fat down
No Foil
2 small pieces of Hickory and 2 med pieces of cherry
No water in the pan
started at 10:00 pm -temp leveled at 248 dome @11:00pm
ran it until 7:00 am and it was 249 dome.
put in a bout 10 more unlit briquets and knocked down the ash.
At 10:00 am the butt's were 195 internal and they came off (12 hours total cook)
Rested them about 2 hours with foil cover.
Ate like a pig for lunch. 3 heaping sannies.
Delicious. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well done B Lauchnor!
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dave Russell:
...I don't foil because that I notice that the water in the pan slows down the bark formation, and as long as I don't overcook 'em, the bbq comes out nice and moist with great texture throughout.
Now if I used sand or a clay pot base for a heat sink, I might start foiling again...but then again, it's cramped on my 18.5" with 18lb of pork butt to a grate. Other than simply over-cooking, even though I get less bark, I avoid dry bbq by starting off with larger WHOLE BONE-IN pork butts...eight pounds and up, preferred. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks Dave, since I 'dry pan', the method of 'foiling' during the cook to help with maintaining my butts during the last few hours seems beneficial. I always foil them anyways for resting, it'll just happen sooner.
Couldn't agree more with "I avoid dry bbq by starting off with larger WHOLE BONE-IN pork butts...eight pounds and up, preferred". Pick mine up from a meat distributor that does cash sales. IBP, heavy wrap cryovac style, always satisfied with quality.
...I don't foil because that I notice that the water in the pan slows down the bark formation, and as long as I don't overcook 'em, the bbq comes out nice and moist with great texture throughout.
Now if I used sand or a clay pot base for a heat sink, I might start foiling again...but then again, it's cramped on my 18.5" with 18lb of pork butt to a grate. Other than simply over-cooking, even though I get less bark, I avoid dry bbq by starting off with larger WHOLE BONE-IN pork butts...eight pounds and up, preferred. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks Dave, since I 'dry pan', the method of 'foiling' during the cook to help with maintaining my butts during the last few hours seems beneficial. I always foil them anyways for resting, it'll just happen sooner.
Couldn't agree more with "I avoid dry bbq by starting off with larger WHOLE BONE-IN pork butts...eight pounds and up, preferred". Pick mine up from a meat distributor that does cash sales. IBP, heavy wrap cryovac style, always satisfied with quality.
The conventional wisdom is: in a WSM where heat rises from the bottom.. fat cap down for both butts and brisket. The fat cap helps protect the bottom of the meat from the heat.
Fat does not render into and baste the meat if placed with fat cap up. It just renders down the sides. Fat down also helps your rub stay in tact instead of losing it on the grill rack.
Fat does not render into and baste the meat if placed with fat cap up. It just renders down the sides. Fat down also helps your rub stay in tact instead of losing it on the grill rack.
Mike Willis
TVWBB All-Star
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chris Stanek:
I've made enough butts to feel good about my own preferences.
- I don't inject anymore since I think it changes the texture of the meat
- I slather if I remember only to hold the rub on better
- Fat cap down ... render more of that fat away and seems to make a noticable different in how moist the meat is
- I'm a foiler. At 175 I usually just plop them in a pan with some apple juice and cover it up with heavy duty tin foil. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I do it the same way as Chris, but I start with a foil pan under the butt. The butt sits on a rack on top of the pan, not in the pan. I put my seasonings on the butt while it's over the pan, letting the pan catch the excess. I add apple juice and water to the pan and it goes on the smoker. Once it hits at least 165 I foil the butt, pan and all, and leave it on until done. I am a fan of the high heat method and I really like how it turns out for me this way.
I'll try to post some pics of my smoke today. I was going to try using the rotisserie instead of the WSM but chickened out. I might put up some pics in my post in the Barbecuing forum under "Boneless pork butt on the rotisserie" (even though I'm not doing it that way).
Best of luck to you - whichever way you decide to go!
I've made enough butts to feel good about my own preferences.
- I don't inject anymore since I think it changes the texture of the meat
- I slather if I remember only to hold the rub on better
- Fat cap down ... render more of that fat away and seems to make a noticable different in how moist the meat is
- I'm a foiler. At 175 I usually just plop them in a pan with some apple juice and cover it up with heavy duty tin foil. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I do it the same way as Chris, but I start with a foil pan under the butt. The butt sits on a rack on top of the pan, not in the pan. I put my seasonings on the butt while it's over the pan, letting the pan catch the excess. I add apple juice and water to the pan and it goes on the smoker. Once it hits at least 165 I foil the butt, pan and all, and leave it on until done. I am a fan of the high heat method and I really like how it turns out for me this way.
I'll try to post some pics of my smoke today. I was going to try using the rotisserie instead of the WSM but chickened out. I might put up some pics in my post in the Barbecuing forum under "Boneless pork butt on the rotisserie" (even though I'm not doing it that way).
Best of luck to you - whichever way you decide to go!
Ken Keating
TVWBB Fan
I've foiled and not foiled butts and have had great results both ways. You'll need to try both ways to see if you have a preference. The only issue I have with foiled butts is because the fat renders out and has no where to go. To remove the fat off the butt I'll either put the butts back onto the grill for 15 minutes to let it drip off or use paper towels to absorb it.
Now foiling does have it's advantages, especially in shortening the cooking time. They'll be times when guests are expecting to eat at a certain time, and an hour before the butts may only be at 170 degrees and not near close to being done. At that point one can foil and greatly speed up the completion time to keep everyone happy. The point being, don't be afraid to foil because you've heard it's not the way to truely barbeque or it won't come out perfect because that's not the case.
You should foil the butt after cooking and allow it to sit 30 minutes to reabsorb any moisture.
Now foiling does have it's advantages, especially in shortening the cooking time. They'll be times when guests are expecting to eat at a certain time, and an hour before the butts may only be at 170 degrees and not near close to being done. At that point one can foil and greatly speed up the completion time to keep everyone happy. The point being, don't be afraid to foil because you've heard it's not the way to truely barbeque or it won't come out perfect because that's not the case.
You should foil the butt after cooking and allow it to sit 30 minutes to reabsorb any moisture.