Still Confused?


 
J

Jeff M. (El Jefe)

New member
I have gone back through the forums and read about the two sizes of the WSM but am still torn on what size to get. I think the 18.5" would be more than enough but read where if you really loaded it up the temp could be hard to control. I also know about the ribs and how you have to either cut them and use racks or roll them. Does either method affect quality? I also remember reading that someone had trouble keeping the 22.5" below 275 for a low and slow cook and could not even get down to 250 reliably. Any more advice on which size? Can anyone do a recap on how much each size can hold? Thanks in advance for all the help.
 
Welcome Jeff

I recently got my 18.5" WSM and the only things that would make me happier about it is if I got to use it more often and if it was bigger. I haven't filled mine yet but if you are torn and have the money I would get the 22.5" I can easily see myself filling it up and running shprt on space. Although if you get the 18" and you are running out of space often it gives you a good excuse to get another toy in the future. There are also options to expand no matter what you go with. Check the links below.

Increasing Cooking Capacity

Stacker

I wouldn't worry too much about temp controls with either size. It's something you'll need to learn on either model.
 
I've had no issues hold temp on my 18.5" even when loaded with 28 lbs of Pork Butt. Burns more fuel though.

Cutting rib racks to fit does not affect quality. If they are not St Louis trimmed, I prefer to trim from the ends instead of cutting them in half.

For me, I would only get the 22" if I knew I needed that much space. Having used the 18" for a few years, as much as I'd love to have a 22" WSM, I really don't need that much space. I'd rather have a 22" OTG or Performer.
 
I have done ribs layed FLAT also on racks and cut into half slabs ! actuall used a rack the other day on my bottom rack and layed them flat on the top grate on my 22 and if I would a mixed them up you could NOT a told what ones were layed flat and what ones were on racks .

So imho it makes absolutely NO diffrence .

As for what one to get a 18 or 22 you will only regret getting the smaller one when you need more room ! But I always try and load my 22 max out and freeze left overs IMO there dang near as good as the day you origanly done them .

I prefer laying my slabs flat for no good reason so the 22 fit my pistol better YMMV thou .
 
Jeff,

You may be making the decision harder than it has to be. The primary issue is capacity. If you don't need the extra size then you will probably like the 18 inch version just fine.
 
Thanks for all the advice guys. I do appreciate it. Speaking of capacity, what is the realistic capacity of the 18.5"? How many of the chickens can it hold for example from Gary Wiviott's Lesson 1?
 
Jeff,

I have had a 18 WSM for about 5-6 years now and have cooked everything from full packer briskets to ribs to 22lb turkeys to 4 chickens. Here is my input.....if you want to smoke ribs a lot or do full packer briskets, then I would get the 22 WSM. Reason being is that the size of the grates make it much easier to do these with the 22in. I will be getting a 22 WSM when we move into our new house just for these reasons.

As far as chickens, I have cooked 4 whole 7-8lb chickens (2 per grate) in my 18 WSM. It would be very hard to get 3 whole chickens on a grate unless they were small. Not sure if this is what you were looking for concerning chicken capacity, but I hope it helps.

Good luck,
Kg
 
Agree with KeithG.

This "Cary Viviott's Lesson 1"? - http://www.lowslowbbq.com/

If so, 2 on the top, 2 on the bottom.

BTW, he talks about getting his first WSM 10 years ago and the 22" wasn't around then, so I would guess all his WSM references are to the 18".
 
I just got my 22 last week and love the room, if I am only doing small cooks the 18 makes more sense. But if you do alot of ribs the 22 is for you!
 
I think the 22" has some convenience advantages - being able to use just the top rack and not worrying about how to fit larger cuts. But if the extra money's going to be a stretch for you, I wouldn't be too concerned about it. It's not like people haven't figured out all kinds of solutions like rolling ribs.

Personally I like just being able to plop two slabs on the top rack and being done with it, and at the time I bought mine there was a good sale for the 22" models and it was only $5 more.

To answer your specific question if somebody had trouble keeping a 22" below 275 they were doing something wrong. Add water to the pan and it'll hang at 260, and I've done multi hour smokes at 170 (bacon).
 
Forgot to add, I had no trouble keeping mine at 240-250 for a double butt cook and I was using a empty foiled water pan.

If yours is air tight it will run as low as any 18! I did have to tweak my middle section, lid and the door.

Just use a tape measure and guage at 12 and 6, 3 and 9. Doesn't take much at all to form to perfection.
 
One more thing I forgot to add: The outer inch or so of the WSM gets the hottest since the smoke and heat rise up around the edges of the WSM as it goes around the water pan. Therefore, if you have big/long cuts of meat like a full packer and ribs, or you have the WSM packed with meat (like 3 butts per grate), then the meat in that "outer edge zone" will cook faster......especially on the lower grate. So I like trying to keep my meat out of this outer edge zone as much as possible. And on a 18 WSM cooking ribs or a full packer, you can't do that. The outer edge zone is not as big of a deal on the top rack, but on the bottom rack it is a difference.

So having the larger grates with the 22 WSM, will help you in this area as well.

Good luck,
Kg
 
I had to make the same decision a month ago, 18" or 22".

I asked myself "Have you ever wished for less grate, or more grate?"

I bought the 22"
 
Well, with 240 posts and counting, at least a few people have, indeed, wished for less grate.
icon_wink.gif
 
Well, seems like a winning arguement, but I guess the keyword here is "Portable"?

I'm sure the 18" is much better in that respect.
icon_smile.gif
 
Originally posted by Geir Widar:
Well, seems like a winning arguement, but I guess the keyword here is "Portable"?

I'm sure the 18" is much better in that respect.
icon_smile.gif
Click to expand...

The little guys also use less fuel so in addition to any up front costs there are some ongoing costs as well.

In the case of the kettles if you cook for yourself it's worth owning a smokey joe because they're incredibly efficient and very cheap. With the smokers I don't personally have a feeling for how big of a difference it makes, but given the ability to turn dirt cheap meat into wonderful food (that would be expensive and yet crappy at a local restaurant) I find it difficult to care about fuel costs. But if you're cooking constantly in cold weather maybe it's a factor worth considering...
 
Jeff,I've fed 40+ people out of my 18.5. Plenty of room for three butts and a brisket. And I've squeezed 6 rack of ribs on there. Just my $.02.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top