G
Guest
Guest
I've been reading about using sand instead of water when cooking, and I was curious about the theory behind using sand instead of water. When cooking chicken or butts, why use sand as opposed to an empty water pan.
- Status
Pat Trammell
TVWBB Fan
Here we go again...........
Seriously Chris, I think that it is safe to say that the premise of putting water (or sand or rocks or whatever someone is experimenting with this week) is the pan is to serve as a shield to the high direct heat, and to distribute the heat from the coals more evenly throughout the cooker. That's my understanding of it anyway.
If you will do a quick search on "sand in the water pan" you will find that we have beaten this topic left and right over the past several months to no firm conclusion. Like everything else in cooking great barbeque, it is all a matter of taste.
Honest men can disagree and often do, but that is what makes boards like this so interesting and informative. Welcome and please post often of your experiences, that way we all learn!!!
Seriously Chris, I think that it is safe to say that the premise of putting water (or sand or rocks or whatever someone is experimenting with this week) is the pan is to serve as a shield to the high direct heat, and to distribute the heat from the coals more evenly throughout the cooker. That's my understanding of it anyway.
If you will do a quick search on "sand in the water pan" you will find that we have beaten this topic left and right over the past several months to no firm conclusion. Like everything else in cooking great barbeque, it is all a matter of taste.
Honest men can disagree and often do, but that is what makes boards like this so interesting and informative. Welcome and please post often of your experiences, that way we all learn!!!
Disclaimer: I'm not a sand user, but I hope to do some "experiments" soon to evaluate the differences between water, sand, and an empty pan.
It seems to me that water's biggest benefit is in temperature control, sort of like training wheels for the cooker. No matter how much fuel you get going in the WSM, as long as you keep that water pan full, you'll never get the cooker to run hotter than typical barbecuing temperatures. A side effect of using water is that evaporation produces a moist cooking environment, which may or may not be of value, depending on what meat you're cooking. Using water also consumes a lot more fuel than using sand or an empty pan.
The benefits of sand seem to be ease of use and cleanup, lower fuel consumption, and that it acts as a modest heat sink, sort of like putting a pizza stone in your oven. However, it can't keep the cooker temperature from running out of control like water.
The benefits of an empty pan are that it's the easiest to use and cleanup and has the lowest fuel consumption. However, it lacks the heat sink capacity of sand and the temperature control of water.
If using sand or an empty pan, you have to rely upon firing techniques like the Minion Method and good vent control to keep the cooker from melting down.
Just my thoughts. All other thoughts and opinions are welcomed. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Regards,
Chris
It seems to me that water's biggest benefit is in temperature control, sort of like training wheels for the cooker. No matter how much fuel you get going in the WSM, as long as you keep that water pan full, you'll never get the cooker to run hotter than typical barbecuing temperatures. A side effect of using water is that evaporation produces a moist cooking environment, which may or may not be of value, depending on what meat you're cooking. Using water also consumes a lot more fuel than using sand or an empty pan.
The benefits of sand seem to be ease of use and cleanup, lower fuel consumption, and that it acts as a modest heat sink, sort of like putting a pizza stone in your oven. However, it can't keep the cooker temperature from running out of control like water.
The benefits of an empty pan are that it's the easiest to use and cleanup and has the lowest fuel consumption. However, it lacks the heat sink capacity of sand and the temperature control of water.
If using sand or an empty pan, you have to rely upon firing techniques like the Minion Method and good vent control to keep the cooker from melting down.
Just my thoughts. All other thoughts and opinions are welcomed. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Regards,
Chris
Dave Lewis
TVWBB Super Fan
Its 00:30 and I'm about to go to bed. I'm cooking two 7 pound butts tonight for a party tomorrow and I'm trying sand for the first time. My reasons for trying sand are (1) curiousity and (2) I won't have to worry about running my water pan dry in the middle of the night! I'm not too worried about drying out my butts because they are difficult to dry out unless you overcook them and I injected them with Kevin Taylor's "butt injection recipe" ( /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif ) so they are chock full of juice now. (If curious, do a search for injecting butts and the discussion thread will come up from a couple months ago) I wouldn't use an empty pan for butts because they need a long, low, slow cook and the heat sink/shield of sand or water lets you achieve that in the WSM.
Chicken doesn't need low and slow and I get better skin with high heat so I always use an empty pan.
However, if I were cooking a brisket tonight instead of butts, I would probably stick with water because I have yet to cook a brisket that was as moist as I thought it should be and removing moisture from the cooking process seems counter-intuitive.
Chicken doesn't need low and slow and I get better skin with high heat so I always use an empty pan.
However, if I were cooking a brisket tonight instead of butts, I would probably stick with water because I have yet to cook a brisket that was as moist as I thought it should be and removing moisture from the cooking process seems counter-intuitive.
Well, after today I am a sand-in-the-pan convert. I have always had trouble maintaining dome temps on my WSM above 220 degrees. Today I tried filling the water pan 2/3 full with sand and then foil on top of the sand. My smoker stayed rock solid at 240 measured at the dome all day. It's too early to tell if sand is the way I'll always smoke, but I'm certainly encouraged by my first attempt. I cooked 3 slabs of pork spare ribs with the texas sugarless sprinkle. Aside from using too much rub, they were awesome! The next time I do pork shoulders I'll try sand as well.
Dave Lewis
TVWBB Super Fan
I had the same experience as Ed. My temps were also "rock solid" 250-260 for 18 hours during my butt cook. The butts were just as moist as when I used water. I filled my pan 3/4 full of sand and had no problems with temps. In fact, usually during my all night cooks when I get up at 5am to check temps (after going to bed around midnight-1am), my temps drop to 210 or less. This time my temp was 260 when I last checked at 1 am, I cracked my vents a little more open to counteract my expected temp drop. When I got up at 5am, my temp was 269, so I closed my vents a touch. My temps remained 250-260 the remainder of the cook with very little vent adjustment. It was the easiest overnighter I've had.
- Status