Stoker vs. Guru products


 
J

Jason Perry

TVWBB Member
I'm ready to take the plunge and looking for advice. I have 2 22's that i'd like to control. I hope in the near future to add a third and wouldnt mine the capability to run a 4th. What suggestions would you guys make concering the stoker vs. a guru product? Thanks

Jason
Perry's Pork and Poppers.
 
Well, I think by stating you want to run more than 2 cookers (presumably with one unit) you've made your choice, Stoker. Unless anyone knows any different regarding the CyberQ II.
 
Jason,

Larry is correct that the CyberQ will only support 2 pits so if you wanted to run four from one controller the Stoker is the only option.

But, if my math is correct you can purchase two CyberQ's and outfit them for four pits about $117 cheaper that a Stoker configured for four pits.

You would gain redundancy in the controller and if one broke you would still have control of two smokers vs if Stoker went down you be manually controlling them all.

The biggest difference that I see is the Stoker gives you the ability to change the settings over the internet easier that the Guru.

In my analysis that wasn't important. I want e-mail reports on the status, and alarms. I mainly bought mine so that I could go to sleep and ignore the smoker but be alerted to any issues with temps.

The ability to move my temp from 225 to 250 etc remotely didn't matter to me.

I also purchased the CyberQ because if I ever did setup a second pit it was cheaper to configure it for two. The 10cfm fans from Stoker are $125 they are $68 from Guru as an example.

Let me know if you have more questions.

PS I'm running my Gure on a forty foot extension USB cable and it's working great. The computer is in the basement and the cable runs out the basement window to the smoker.
 
HERE'S a Feature Comparison done by the Whiz on the two products. I looked through it and it seems to be pretty accurate with the exception of it doesn't include several of the features the Stoker can leverage when using Stokerlog log (free product by Amir).

Not sure what a fully outfitted four pits Stoker unit would cost you but I doubt it would be cheap.

Only other major consideration that I would see is if you're wanting to monitor more than one meat product per pit (if you were running four pits). Stoker will support this, according to the Whiz CyberQ II will only support one per pit in that configuration.

In my opinion you can't really go wrong with either. As I see it probably comes down to two units vs. one and some of the additional different networking and Stokerlog features/options when using the Stoker. There's a lot to be said for redundancy too. Sounds like you've got a tough (but fun) decision on your hands.
 
One other thing to consider is that the CyberQ is water resistant and the Stoker is not.

That being said, I have owned a Stoker for almost 3 years and if it failed tomorrow I'd be on the phone with Rock's BBQ purchasing another ASAP. First off I feel the 10 CFM fan is overkill for smaller smokers regardless of which unit you choose, I easily run my Stumps clone, cooking chamber size is 24 x 24 x 36, with a 4 CFM fan. I purchased the 10 CFM fan and it is sitting in my garage as it is total overkill for my cooker, if you're in the Pittsburgh area I'll sell it to you for $75 you pick it up. Being able to remotely access the Stoker has made my life much much easier. I can go to my kids activities and monitor the cook from my cell phone. If the food is done I can turn down the temperature from wherever I am. I've also started cooking pork butts a little differently. I'll cook them at 220 until they are done then crank the temp between 275 and 300 when they are done to add a little more bark. Whenever I cook food for work people hover around my desk to check on lunch as well. Everybody laughs at me but they still come around all morning long to see how lunch is coming along. If you even remotely interested, (pun intended), in controlling your cook from afar the Stoker is the only choice. If you are sure you'll never ever have a need or desire to remotely control cooker it comes down to cost vs. features.

Good luck in your decision.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by r lacoume:
Joe, What program are you using to access the log from your phone? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

im pretty sure the stoker software comes with a web server that allows you to check the status remotely over the internet. if you have data on your mobile phone then you should be able to access it.
 
A web browser is all that's needed. The more technical guys can provide more detail on this but I believe the Stoker has a "web server" built into into it. I'm doing a brisket cook right now and I simply type in my network IP address and the port that I have forwarded to my Stoker and I'm in. Getting ready to take off to the store so I have Stokerlog sending me emails and graphs of my cook, Stoker tweeting the cook and I can log in using my BlackBerry SWEET!!! If you want to check out the cook on Twitter it's under Stoker_Ace.

BTW, thought I'd add PC is ONLY required for the Stokerlog piece, everything else is running without a PC just with a out of the box Stoker with a wireless Internet connection.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by r lacoume:
Joe, What program are you using to access the log from your phone? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, I've been out of town. As was already stated, I remotely access the Stoker through the built in web browser on my Droid, (data plan required)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top