Second WSM smoke in progress - spare ribs


 
C

Costas C.

TVWBB Member
So I've finally had the chance to fire up the WSM for my second cook. Been traveling for work quite a bit lately.

After a pretty good first cook of baby backs (IMHO), I'm doing spares today. Decided to use the same BRITU rub as I used for the baby backs.

The spares were bought from Costco. It was a cryopacked 3-rack pack. They needed a bit of cleaning up, and unlike the bbr's I bought from Costco, these still had the membrane attached, so I finally had my try at that as well. Looked like a decent cut, but I'm not an expert at trimming, so they still look a little rough.

Lit the WSM using the minion method, and the ribs went on at 1pm, with the smoker holding a steady 265-270. I'm guessing they will be on for not more than 5 hrs, but we will see. Not going to foil this time.

Pics will be taken when I open lid in 30 minutes.
 
The point of the Minion Method is to make it easier to get to your target range on the way up. Your preference, but a lot put the meat on immediately after adding the lit coals. I think you might like that way better.
 
OK, here's some pr0n:

At 4 hrs:
Untitled-2.jpg


After saucing:
Untitled-3.jpg


Looking somewhat dry but still very tasty:
Untitled-4.jpg
 
If you don't want to mess with foiling ribs, I'd suggest try smoking some at around 250* with water in the pan. That's just my preference for spares if not foiling, and you might like them as well. While yours certainly look good, ones cooked in the steam produced from the water pan will have noticeably moister and thinner, more tender bark. Not as thick and chewy bark as if cooked in purely dry heat.
 
Last edited:
Dave Russell said:
If you don't want to mess with foiling ribs, I'd suggest try smoking some at around 250* with water in the pan. That's just my preference for spares if not foiling, and you might like them as well. While yours certainly look good, ones cooked in the steam produced from the water pan will have noticeably moister and thinner, more tender bark. Not as thick and chewy bark as if cooked in purely dry heat.
Click to expand...
Thanks Dave! While I didn't foil this time, I did have water in the pan.
 
Costas, sorry, I just couldn't tell from the pics, and from here the bark looked a little thick. Keeping temps closer to 250* will help with that, but like I said, they looked pretty darn good. Lots of folks like thicker bark, but my crew doesn't care for it, at least if it isn't tender. I'm not the best with pics on a monitor screen, though....Anyhow, regarding water, lots of folks claim they don't notice a difference with the bark. I always suggest trying different methods to find out what YOU like best. By the way, the color and pull-back looked great, and I'll take half a rack, please. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top