Not sold on Stubbs (22.5 WSM)


 
S

StanHenson

TVWBB Member
Hey everybody,

I got a couple of bags of Stubbs at the Lowes sale and tried one out last night. I did an 11 lb packer brisket with a coffee rub, a cured oak split, and clay saucer in my 22.5 WSM. This was my second overnight in the 22.5; I did my first one with around 20 lbs of KBB. To give the Stubbs the best chance at a long burn, I took the time to layer it in concentric circles and really pack the heck out of it.

I did a chimney with 20 lit briquettes at 9:30 pm. The WSM was up to 200 by 10pm, so I closed 2 out of the 3 bottom vents and knudged the temp up to 225 with the last vent. I added the brisket and my oak split and walked away for an hour. Temp hovered between 225 and 250 for s few hours until I adjust the vent and settled in to 225 all night. I came back at 6 and kicked the legs. At 11:30 am, brisket fully passed the poke test.

Here's the thing. I started with 15 lbs of Stubbs and probably have half a chimney left of partially burned briquettes. That's about what I had with the KBB, even though I started with 5 more lbs in the cooker. Both times the WSM burned a pound and change of charcoal an hour.

This tells me 2 things:

1. My 22.5 WSM likes to eat charcoal. A overnight cook will cost me a bag of charcoal.
2. Theres no significant performance advantage in my cooker for Stubbs over KBB. However, KBB is significantly cheaper and reliably available. This makes a big difference when it's going to cost me a whole 15-20 lb bag for every overnight cook.

Anybody else with the 22.5 have similar experiences? It seems our cookers will burn through whatever we give them, and I'd like to hear if other 22.5 owners are having the same experiences with overnight cooks. I can go 14 hours or longer, but it costs me a FULL ring of charcoal.

Stan
 
I like Stubbs over K because I don't have to tend to the smothering (light ash) and the smell is way better. Not because it burns longer per se, just get 15-18hrs without touching.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Here's the thing. I started with 15 lbs of Stubbs and probably have half a chimney left of partially burned briquettes. That's about what I had with the KBB, even though I started with 5 more lbs in the cooker. Both times the WSM burned a pound and change of charcoal an hour </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you used 5 less lbs of Stubbs and ended up with the same leftover as 20 lbs of K? I would say that would be more efficient.

As for the 22", yes it burns more charcoal the 18". My 22 is getting much better now that it has 7 months on it. The more cooks you do, the more efficient it will be as the gaps seal up.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Glenn W:
I like Stubbs over K because I don't have to tend to the smothering (light ash) and the smell is way better. Not because it burns longer per se, just get 15-18hrs without touching. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

For burn time and heat, I find they are both pretty much on the same line. I do find that there is less ash from Stubbs and I find that K gives a smell while it's lighting up that I don't like.
 
I have the 22 and bought a lot of Kingsford Blue when Home Depot and Walmart had it on sale. I just plan on using 15-20 lbs. when I smoke meat. I also put a good quantity of meat on the smoker. I figure $40 of meat and $4 for charcoal for 1 day of BBQ isn't any worse than any other hobby plus a lot of good eating. I also hate sifting through to reuse charcoal later, just not my thing, so once the meat is finished, I open up the vents and let her rip until it's finished burning. Honestly, I think I spend more in spices than charcoal and it's sure a lot cheaper than propane for those long cooks.
Just my 2 cents.
Tom
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tom L:
I have the 22 and bought a lot of Kingsford Blue when Home Depot and Walmart had it on sale. I just plan on using 15-20 lbs. when I smoke meat. I also put a good quantity of meat on the smoker. I figure $40 of meat and $4 for charcoal for 1 day of BBQ isn't any worse than any other hobby plus a lot of good eating. I also hate sifting through to reuse charcoal later, just not my thing, so once the meat is finished, I open up the vents and let her rip until it's finished burning. Honestly, I think I spend more in spices than charcoal and it's sure a lot cheaper than propane for those long cooks.
Just my 2 cents.
Tom </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks for the info. I was wondering how much it would cost to run a wsm instead of my ceramic. Ceramic s really efficient but I have been using my kettle more. I like the taste of the food better. I was thinking of getting rid of ceramic for wsm and performer but wasn't sure f that was a bad move. I don't do a ton of long cooks. Sorry didn't mean to hijack the thread.
 
Joe
keep your Grill Dome and get a WSM. Can never have too many toys
icon_smile.gif
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Darryl P:
Joe
keep your Grill Dome and get a WSM. Can never have too many toys
icon_smile.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's what I will do. I got a killer deal on my ceramic or I probably would have never got it. So I may as well keep it. Don't get me I wrong I do really like it. For now I use my kettle/ceramic combo maybe add a wsm later. Ceramic is great when I want to do a long smoke.
 
I stocked up on Kingsford Blue during the July 4 sales and stocked up on Stubbs when it was on sale at Lowe's later that week. I'll probably use KB for shorter smokes and Stubbs for longer ones.

I'm still amazed at how long charcoal will last in the 18.5 WSM. I haven't tested the upper time limits of one ring of Kingsford yet but was thrilled to get 17.5 hours of good, consistent temperature from a ring of Stubbs (+ 20 starter briquettes) without touching it. It's much closer to "set it and forget it" than I expected.
 
Maybe I'm not as persnickity as some, but I honestly can't see much difference in the Kingsford blue and Stubbs. I bought some of both at Lowe's and they both do the job just fine. In my 22" WSM, I usually load 15 pounds of briquettes, along with sufficient wood chunks to do butts or brisket for an overnight smoke. I use the entire 15 lb Stubbs bag or a 16 lb bag of K. Either does the job just fine, and after 13-14 hours at 225*, I am pulling meat off with glowing coals still available. I use a Guru ATC, so maybe that aids in efficiency, but both brands work fine for me.
 
Josh,

I'm not knocking it, per se. I'm just saying that in my cooker (on my patio in a warm Florida night) there's not as much of a difference in performance as there is a difference in cost. I will say that the 20 lbs of KBB I used were just dumped in and not meticulously packed. I'm betting if I had taken the time to do the concentric ring thing, I would have had more KBB left over.

I think it's just going to take 15-18 lbs of charcoal, no matter the brand, to get a 22.5 up to temp and keep it there for 12-14 hours. At the $.19/lb I paid for an enormous amount of KBB, that means the cost of an overnight cook is roughly $2-$3.40 .

For my own purposes, a more "natural" briquette (whatever the heck that means! Briquettes aren't natural...) isn't worth the sometimes 100% increase in cost/pound unless it really brings something else to the table such as a longer burn time. Thank GOD Wicked Good isn't in my area...

Stan
 
Stan, Stubbs and the like are "natural" briquettes because the first ingredient is WOOD char, and there's nothing artificial about that. Yes binders are used, but I believe it's usually just starch of some sort. The evidence of a significant difference is in the burn, the smell, and what's left over after a cook.

Whether the ingredients make a difference in taste or not is always gonna be debated, but that's not an issue with me since I think that the smoke flavor comes from WOOD SMOKE, not charcoal.

Back to burn characteristics though, if you go to the trouble and pack your Kingsford in a tight "concentric" circle as you mentioned, you might just find out how bad all that ash can end up being. Ash suffocation is just as big a reason for a lot of us Stubbs users, if not more, than the secrecy of what the heck is in Kinsford and it's funky chemical smell.

One other thing...I absolutely HATE the current skinny notched K briquettes. I could have spread a chimney of Stubbs or similiar briqs nice and even while I'd still be trying to unwedge the skinny K briqs out of the grate with my tongs.

Just yesterday, I lit one heaping chimney of Stubbs for grilling a batch of wings on one kettle, and another heaping chimney of Kbb for kabobs on my other kettle. (Yeah, I buy the Kbb when Home Depot practically gives it away as a loss leader.) Well, the Stubbs ashed over first...no surprise there, and none of the briqs at the bottom of the chimney were burnt down enough to fall through the grate. However, there was a HUGE difference with the Kbb chimney, though, and the ones at the bottom of the chimney were just like they usually are...burnt down to a mini-briq....so yeah, Kingsford briqs are really sub-par, thus they oughta be a LOT cheaper. Doesn't matter though, Kingsford has their old "the other briquette" tv ad campaign back on now showing how K lasts so much longer....
icon_rolleyes.gif
 
I agree with you stan. I got ~19 hrs out of packed ring of 23 lbs of k. As mentioned there is less ash though so for overnights it is nice.
 
Now I don't know that I'd call them "sub-par." It's the most popular charcoal in the world, and too much OUTSTANDING barbecue has been created with KBB for it to be completely sub-par.

As to "natural," I'm simply saying that briquettes are entirely unnatural. They're made of wood char, but it's been ground and bound, and I don't know that I'd call it a natural product anymore. A good summer watermelon or a choice beef brisket, those are closer to natural than a charcoal briquette.

All I'm saying is that in choosing briquettes, I think I've chosen temperature stability, availability, and cost over the unpredictability of lump and the time involved in wood.

As for ash...there was a lot of ash in the WSM at the end of the Stubbs cook. Not as much as KBB, but significantly more than lump.

Stan
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StanHenson:
...All I'm saying is that in choosing briquettes, I think I've chosen temperature stability, availability, and cost over the unpredictability of lump and the time involved in wood.

As for ash...there was a lot of ash in the WSM at the end of the Stubbs cook. Not as much as KBB, but significantly more than lump.

Stan </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly....and that's why I use Stubbs, because the only thing I'd add to that would be a "nearly" as the second word in your last sentence.

THAT difference to me can mean having to stir the coals in the wee hours of a long cook, (as Chris Allingham has documented in his long cooks here on the site), or stirring them to keep temps up for smoking chicken or ribs at higher temps.

No tapping the cooker legs or coal stirring necessary with the Stubbs, and if you want high temps, it's about like using lump, only a LONGER and more STEADY temp.
 
I think Dave hit on the issue. Stan you stated that on this cook you layered the bricks in concentric circles and really packed them in. I believe one advantage to using briquettes is within their shape. The pillow shape of a briquette allows them to lay against one another yet leaving small areas for air to gather and ash to fall-thus resisting suffocation of the fire. I dont think is is best to pack them in tight like you would with lump.
 
Dave Russell really said everything for me.

Kingsford is cheap. For some that's all that counts -- I started out that way myself. All we really know about it's content is that it's NOT simply charcoal (at least that's what Kingsford says).

Stubbs IS natural (so far as we know). Charcoal ground so that it can be shaped into briquettes is still charcoal. Starch binders are not the same "conglomeration" of fillers and binders that makes K smell so bad when it is being started.

So if you want to say "to-mah-to" that's fine. I'll say "to-may-to" and will stock up with Stubbs (hopefully for a year) at the good sale prices. And I will use K if I run out of Stubbs (and I have a stash of the K even cheaper sale priced stuff). If I have to buy either at normal pricing, Stubbs it will be.

Rich
 
Stan, FYI. The K-Mart on Apalachee Pkwy. carries Royal Oak (briquettes) that is made in the US if you want to try it. I don't recall the cost per pound, but it was reasonable enough for me to buy six bags a couple of months ago. I also use Stubbs and Kingsford.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top