Size of the 22" WSM


 
Dwain Pannell

Dwain Pannell

TVWBB Hall of Fame
I often hear folks say how big the 22" WSM is. When compared to other cookers such as a Backwoods, Stumps, Yoder, Traeger, Horizon, Lang, etc -- all have a larger footprint than the WSM 22". I guess since I have a 22" kettle and I am just used to a 22'' footprint. Your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I started with 22" Kettles too and wasn't sure which WSM to get as I heard the 22 was huge. I was never able to look at them side by side for true size comparison. When I did finally find a 18 version WSM I knew the 22 was for me even though it was " Larger " than my 22 kettle in total size. It really is smaller in size compared to some of the gas ones I have seen around and smaller than some wood burning ones...I`m happy with the 22" size.
 
No, I don't think that the big bullet is too big...just too big to strap on my Hitch-haul standing up.

I think that maybe the reason Weber held off so long on marketing the big bullet was concerning charcoal lighting and loading. I'm not at all inclined to do a hot squat to load or stir coals with my big bullet, and we all know what it says on a bag of Kingsford about not using until being fully ashed over. On the same note, I've read where Jim Minion implied that he would've been concerned about his lighting method given non-natural briquettes. So I guess given the popularity of the Minion method and the lack of concern about using unlit briqs, Weber finally decided to go with the flow, especially given the requests for a bigger wsm.
 
Compared to my 08 18.5" WSM yep I thought it was huge seeing it in person @ Ace. Now my previous smokers was a ECB and a small horizontal.. so no comparison!

Tim
 
Same here,saw both sizes at the store and figured yeh the 22.5 is bigger but the general thought is better to have and not need than to need and not have.
 
My children are grown and two of the three live out of state. We don't do much entertaining (although now that I have my new WSM that may change:wsm:). I gave careful thought to which cooker I should get. The initial cost had little to do with it ($100.00 difference is pretty dern small over the long haul). I ended up with the 18.5" as I thought it would be much more efficient for the cooks that I will be making. It will use considerably less charcoal and has plenty of capacity for us. I have only done a couple of cooks but that last was three racks of baby back ribs. I cut them in half so they would cook evenly in a rib rack (no burnt ends on my ribs). It worked perfectly. If I need or want more ribs at a time, I'll just do another three racks on the second grate. When doing Boston Butts for pulled pork, I can do several at a time with my 18.5. I am pretty dern happy with my choice.

If I were cooking for large groups, of course, I would go with the 22.5 but under my particular circumstances, the 18.5" is more than enough. I think some times, we tend to always think "Bigger is Better" (that can apply to me, too:confused:) but Bigger is not always better...

I suggest that you buy for what most of your cooks will need, not the occasional one. I reasoned that my 22.5" OTG will turn out fabulous pulled pork or ribs, also. So, I have that for a back up should it be needed...

Just a thought or two...

FWIW
Dale53
 
i have both. i use the 18 more but cook ribs on the 22. i like cooking whole racks better than cutting them but if my son takes my 22 camping then 1/2 racks for the 18. kids......
 
Started with kettle here too.

It isn't the Diameter that makes it big, It's the height. The thing easily hits the middle of my chest with the top handle and I'm average at 6 foot tall.
 
I don't find the size to be a problem. It's a substantial unit but as noted the footprint isn't that big. If you needed to move it around a lot you might want to put it on some wheels or something, and as one person noted doing a "hot squat" (moving the center section off the coals while it's lit) isn't fun. The good news is there's no real need to do that - the charcoal ring holds a ton of charcoal and once I started filling it up every cook I've never needed to add any mid-cook (and I've gone 17 hours).

There are pros and cons for either unit and they have their fans but I think it's a rare situation where the raw bulk of the 22" is a problem.
 
I am prowling the forum trying to decide on the 22 vs the 18. One day I am thinking 22 the next 18! The 22 in size is impressive and can be a good show-off item.
Smoking I usually do ribs or chicken, but the last couple years I haven't even fired up my Black Diamond doing the ribs on the Silver B indirect. It is the wife and me and two twenty-something boys and when we do ribs it is just 2 racks cut in half and often there are left-overs.
The 22 looks like it would be easier to replenish coals and water, it sounds like the 18 you have to lift off the middle and top (I would put handles), is that dangerous or messy?


I think today I am again leaning towards the 18! Besides if it isn't enough I could sell it or get either another one or a 22.

If our usually dinner is 1 chicken, or 2 racks of ribs, or a 1 1/2 pound steak for 4 people, the 18 sounds like it would be it.

Robert McGee said:
My children are grown and two of the three live out of state. We don't do much entertaining (although now that I have my new WSM that may change:wsm:). I gave careful thought to which cooker I should get. The initial cost had little to do with it ($100.00 difference is pretty dern small over the long haul). I ended up with the 18.5" as I thought it would be much more efficient for the cooks that I will be making. It will use considerably less charcoal and has plenty of capacity for us. I have only done a couple of cooks but that last was three racks of baby back ribs. I cut them in half so they would cook evenly in a rib rack (no burnt ends on my ribs). It worked perfectly. If I need or want more ribs at a time, I'll just do another three racks on the second grate. When doing Boston Butts for pulled pork, I can do several at a time with my 18.5. I am pretty dern happy with my choice.

If I were cooking for large groups, of course, I would go with the 22.5 but under my particular circumstances, the 18.5" is more than enough. I think some times, we tend to always think "Bigger is Better" (that can apply to me, too:confused:) but Bigger is not always better...

I suggest that you buy for what most of your cooks will need, not the occasional one. I reasoned that my 22.5" OTG will turn out fabulous pulled pork or ribs, also. So, I have that for a back up should it be needed...

Just a thought or two...

FWIW
Dale53
Click to expand...
 
Jeff Padell said:
I am prowling the forum trying to decide on the 22 vs the 18. One day I am thinking 22 the next 18! The 22 in size is impressive and can be a good show-off item.
Smoking I usually do ribs or chicken, but the last couple years I haven't even fired up my Black Diamond doing the ribs on the Silver B indirect. It is the wife and me and two twenty-something boys and when we do ribs it is just 2 racks cut in half and often there are left-overs.
The 22 looks like it would be easier to replenish coals and water, it sounds like the 18 you have to lift off the middle and top (I would put handles), is that dangerous or messy?


I think today I am again leaning towards the 18! Besides if it isn't enough I could sell it or get either another one or a 22.

If our usually dinner is 1 chicken, or 2 racks of ribs, or a 1 1/2 pound steak for 4 people, the 18 sounds like it would be it.
Click to expand...

Given the cooks you feel you are likely to undertake, I tend to agree that the 18 may be better suited for you. I went with the 22.5 as we entertain quite a bit and I like to keep my racks of ribs whole... I don't regret my decision in the slightest, but I did build myself a mini for when the menu is much smaller...

ImportedPhotos00010.jpg
 
Jeff Padell said:
I am prowling the forum trying to decide on the 22 vs the 18. One day I am thinking 22 the next 18! The 22 in size is impressive and can be a good show-off item.
Smoking I usually do ribs or chicken, but the last couple years I haven't even fired up my Black Diamond doing the ribs on the Silver B indirect. It is the wife and me and two twenty-something boys and when we do ribs it is just 2 racks cut in half and often there are left-overs.
The 22 looks like it would be easier to replenish coals and water, it sounds like the 18 you have to lift off the middle and top (I would put handles), is that dangerous or messy?


I think today I am again leaning towards the 18! Besides if it isn't enough I could sell it or get either another one or a 22.

If our usually dinner is 1 chicken, or 2 racks of ribs, or a 1 1/2 pound steak for 4 people, the 18 sounds like it would be it.
Click to expand...

Jeff - I agree with BrianBishop, the 18 sounds like it's right for you based on what you cook. My wife and I decided on the 18" just this past weekend because it's really just the two of us. If you are able I'd suggest trying to do a side-by-side comparison in person. It really made the difference for me. I went back and forward like twice a day for a good 2 weeks before seeing them both up close.

Also it sounds like you may be under the impression that you have to do a hot squat to add coals to the 18". That is not the case, you don't have to, but it might be easier considering the size of the access door and the depth of the water bowl. As far as it being messy and dangerous, I think it has the potential to be both. I think adding handles would make it a little less dangerous because you have a secure grip on it, but you still would run the risk of spilling your meat and/or water or misjudging the distance from the charcoal bowl and hitting it. All that to say you don't have to move the middle section to refuel, that's what the door's for after all.
 
Brian B
First my wife said "why do you need a smoker? you have lots of BBQ gear" I said "need, I don't need anything, why do you need another box of pinecones or 18 pumpkin plants in a 20x20 garden? Need doesn't come into it. I don't need golf clubs since I really

I mentioned to her the "hot squat" and she doesn't like that at all, mainly because I had a stroke a few years ago and am not as strong or coordinated (she calls me Tim from Tool Time) as I used to be. So it could be dangerous, especially where I cannot feel any warmth or heat on my right side since the stroke so I cannot tell if something is hot, but I do feel pain faster (it is the sizzle LOL), the ability to easily load through the bigger door would be nice.

I did go to the BBQ Barn in Arlington MA where they have them both on display side by side and the 22 didn't seem too big, just a taller version of my 22 OTG.

A further thing I hadn't thought about is that my 28 year old likes to make pulled pork, he has been using a crockpot, and loves full racks of ribs, he doesn't live with us anymore (only 2 boys still at home) but he is about 3 miles away, if I get the 22 I wouldn't me surprised to see him show up with a shoulder or two.

Brian J
all the you and Brian B said makes sense, which is why I am still agonizing big time. Of course if I get the 18 I could always get the 22 if I found I really needed it or sell it. It just seems so small, but I really don't know what I am talking about. I would assume you cannot do a whole shoulder on an 18, but the butt sounds like it would fit fine.
18, :wsm: 22 :wsm: I always like bigger and it took me a while to realize my Silver B was the perfect size for 98% of what we do and when we have a cookout on the 4th of July I fire up the 22 OTG at the same time.
So maybe the 18 and use the money saved to buy accessories and meat!

although my wife likes the bigger door on the 22 and feels that is what I should get. How often do you have to replace coals on the 18 and 22? my NBBD you are constantly adding and fiddling.
 
Last edited:
Jeff

I have only used my 18" once, just brought it home this past Saturday, so I only have limited first hand experience. I cooked a pork butt in about 7.5 hours and did not have to add any fuel or water, although I did stir the coals a bit to knock off some ash about 5 hours in--probably didn't need to but with it being my first smoke and expecting it to take longer I didn't want to chance it.

Take a look at this page http://virtualweberbullet.com/wsmcapacity.html. It might give you a better idea of the capacities of each sized smoker. I know it helped me decide, and knowing I can use rib racks or roll my ribs if I need to cook more for a big group. Honestly, what sealed the deal and put my mind at ease about getting an 18" was the picture and comments about the whole packer brisket. Once I saw that Chris had cooked two 13lb whole briskets at once on his 18", I was convinced that the 18 was big enough for me. Of course I did warn my wife that I reserve the right to buy the 22 in a couple of years if and when we outgrow the 18!

Bottom line, based on my limited experience and what you've told us, I don't think you'll go wrong with the 18. That said, if your wife feels you should get the 22, I say go for it!
 
I debated between the 18 & 22 from the day I decided that I would have a WSM until about 20 minutes before buying the 18. When I looked at the assembled cookers side by side, I didn't really think that the 22 was all that big, afterall I've got a 22" OTG so I'm used to that diameter. What caught my eye as being "huge" was when I looked past the cooking grates and down into/across the water pan. Maybe I'd read too many comments about how much of a fuel hog the 22 can be, but I guess it just clicked in my head that I'd mostly be cooking for two people and how inefficient the 22 must be for relatively small cooks (i.e. 1 or 2 pork butts at once or 2-3 racks of ribs at once). I also remembered that there are 2 cooking grates in the 18, and if needed I can still fire up my 22" OTG and/or my 18" OTS if absolutely needed to feed a crowd.

So for me it really wasn't that the 22 is so big that it would be an imposition in my yard, but that the 18 would be more efficient for the size of cooks that I would normally do.
 
I got the 22 WSM and love it! I will say that I was shocked at how much charcoal I go through with it. Now I watch for the 1/2 price sales at H. Depot and stock up!
 
Brian Johnson said:
I debated between the 18 & 22 from the day I decided that I would have a WSM until about 20 minutes before buying the 18. When I looked at the assembled cookers side by side, I didn't really think that the 22 was all that big, afterall I've got a 22" OTG so I'm used to that diameter. What caught my eye as being "huge" was when I looked past the cooking grates and down into/across the water pan. Maybe I'd read too many comments about how much of a fuel hog the 22 can be, but I guess it just clicked in my head that I'd mostly be cooking for two people and how inefficient the 22 must be for relatively small cooks (i.e. 1 or 2 pork butts at once or 2-3 racks of ribs at once). I also remembered that there are 2 cooking grates in the 18, and if needed I can still fire up my 22" OTG and/or my 18" OTS if absolutely needed to feed a crowd.

So for me it really wasn't that the 22 is so big that it would be an imposition in my yard, but that the 18 would be more efficient for the size of cooks that I would normally do.
Click to expand...


I checked out the link for how much food the 18 can hold and other than the once in a while gathering, we had a BBQ for my fathers Funeral with 30 people, ribs chicken etc, it was a great time, he would have approved, I think the 18 is it! :wsm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top