second "waterless" smoke with spares.(not good)


 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jacob samarin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
(Basting with a water-based baste--in my area, often grapefruit juice--cools the meat's surface after flipping.)

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

so then in this instance you are using water?very interesting.
icon_wink.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL. Yes, but it's used to cool the ribs after flipping. If one wants to minimize evaporation, however, one uses a fat-based baste.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">the traeger is waterless.although people say its more like a convection oven,than a "smoker". </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now that you mention that I've heard this also. Everything takes longer huh, interesting, I wonder why? One would think with the convection aspects of it it would cook faster?

I've had my eye on a Backwoods Party or the Small Spicewine. I like the idea of a cabinet style smoker. Unfortunately, both want around $500 shipping to get it to me bringing the price up to around $1,700
icon_frown.gif


Anyway, didn't mean to take your thread off topic.
 
Kevin

Thanks for your informitive explanation as usual. just when i think I'm gaining some ground, on this smoking stuff, you guys on here, talk about things,, that only make me realize how much more I have to learn. Thanks Again. Very interesting. John
 
Just to chime in I used water once in my WSM, when i first got it 4 years ago. That water was nasty afterwards. After reading on here that you can use it without the water I haven't used it since.

jacob, you got to go with what works for you. if the water works, go for it. but I am in the camp that the evaporation/steam doesn't help moisture. The meat has to accept the moisture for that to work. That's why you can boil meat dry. water all the way around it, but if the meat isn't taking it in, moisture won't help the dryness.

Hmm, all this talk, I'm going to have to do some ribs this weekend.
 
Funny you mention steam not changing the texture of the food Kevin. I was watching a show and the were mixing up spices and juices and putting them in a can inside the smoker It evaporated. They thought it was going into the food. I say if it makes you feel good try it.

If it was steaming your food you could try apple juice or something in the pan to see if it adds flavor

Kinda like basting your food but thats a different topic
 
Folks,

Very interesting thread IMO.

On one hand we have Jacob who has cooked the same ribs for the same time at the same temperature, and found that they are drier (indicating they may be overcooked) when he doesn't use water, and on the other hand we have a number of folks pretty convinced that evaporating water will not add moisture to cooking food.

Could it be that everyone is right?

Perhaps it is just the case that cooking time is determined by both temperature and humidity, and that for a given temperature food will cook more quickly in lower humidity.

So 5.5 hours might be the right time for Jacob's ribs using a full pan of water, where the evaporating water may not be absorbed by the meat or affect the air temperature, but will raise the humidity of the air, whereas this is too long for the ribs cooked at the same temperature without a pan of water, due to lower humidity.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? Is this already known or am I just plain wrong?

Cheers,

Rohan
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">whereas this is too long for the ribs cooked at the same temperature without a pan of water, due to lower humidity. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

All my no water spare cooks are at least 6 - 7 hours at 225 grate, never a dry rib.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Anyone have any thoughts on this? Is this already known or am I just plain wrong? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, thoughts; no, you are not wrong. (And welcome to the board, btw.) The problem in the scenario you cite is the same problem in numerous similar scenarios--cooking by time.

Regardless of how one cooks--with water or without, in this cooker or that--whatever--cooking by time is not the way to cook. Time can give you an idea of the finish point but that is all it will give you. One must check for 'done' and if it ain't done it ain't done--simple as that. If it's overdone it's overdone--which means you waited too long to check. It is never the fault of the meat--it's the fault of the cook. The admonitions one sees--'every cut is different', yada, yada, is pretty much garbage. It doesn't matter. Get in there and check your meat. If it is overcooked or undercooked it's sure not the meat's fault.
 
I recently experienced a first for "quick cooks" involving a briskit i posted about. Although out of a couple this was the only one that seemed to be done very quickly, w/ no water btw. I personally think it speeds the cook up, cause as I look back it was similar w/ ribs... i think. As Krug says, time is a good guidline but I just really keep a look out for doneness on anything best I can. Have you also read on the forum what I have, Rohan,that "water gives you a bigger window, to not overcook" or something like that. I truly believe that myself, and w/ my math figure that means it cooks a bit slower in a humid environment... giving you more oppertunity to pull the food out at the right time, so i guess what i mean is maybe this goes for the WHOLE cook, in my eyes.. these guys could tell ya, this has been my experience.. btw dry cooker (no water) ribs turn out great for me.. Brian S or Larry (i forgot) made me aware of not using water w/ a guru setup. I was unsure at first but it works great, although it sounded new to me at the time. but also for the record, I still use water sometimes... gotta fire it up old school once in a while just cause I can. I'de like to hear Jim Minion talk about briskit and my last experience.. only cause AS FAR AS I KNOW uses the water pan... interesting -dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top