Two Butts at night, 22.5 needs more fuel?


 
D

Dave F (KickSaveDave)

New member
So I got my 22.5 last week, smoked some BB ribs that were delicious, which is purely a tribute to the WSM because I'd never in my life made ribs before. The ribs took about 5.5 hours but IMO they could have come off at 4.5 or 5 and been even better. The 22.5, even shiny and brand new on its first cook, hovered at 250 on the top, and 225 on the lower grate. The thing is simply perfect for the task. And let me just say thanks in advance to the entire TVWBB gang for sharing all this great advice, I used it all in prep for my first cooks and they have been great.

So last night I put two 8.5 lb Butts on the top grate, with a full (overflowing) ring of K using the MM and about 6 medium Apple wood chunks buried in strategically placed locations. Set her up at 250 degrees with a full water pan, and went to dinner out with friends at 7 PM. 3 hours later I checked it and there were plenty of unlit coals, and still a perfect 250. Looking good. I checked it again at 11PM and the same, steady, even, 250, some unlit coals around the side. So I go to bed and wake up at 3:30 AM, since this was my first over nighter and I wanted to make sure it was still fine. It wasn't. The temp had dropped to 210/215 and most of the coals were gone, the few that remained were completely gray - it seemed to be running out of fuel. I had started the fire at 7 PM, and by 3:30 AM it was dieing out - 8 plus hours. I added more coals (maybe 15) and that carried it to 6 AM, then added a few more coals and the butts were done (200 even) at 7:30 AM. The night was calm, dry, and about 50 degrees, typical SoCal fall night, no clouds either. The Butts came off great, nice bark, tender, lean, tasty, but it required a lot of maintenance to get them through to done.

So my question is, what could I be doing differently to get those 12-14 hour runs without adding coals? Or at least get me through the night without having to wake up at 3AM to check it? I filled the ring to almost overflowing, made a hole in the middle for the hot coals, and had 6 or 7 hours of perfect 250 with no adjustments needed. Will hot days make my burns last longer, or would they typically last longer on cool nights? The temp control is easy as pie, its just that my fuel isn't lasting as long as I hoped. Do I simply need to cram more K in there, like make a pyramid and get it almost up to the water pan?

Any tips from those who've achieved legit 12 hour cooks without adding fuel would be so much appreciated.

/Dave
 
Dave,
I'll pitch an awnser, although I have yet to use my 22.5...so I'm not completely certain this will work. This should be an all nighter plus, I've gotten at least 16-18 hrs cook time on my 18.5. It also assumes you don't care much about how much charcoal you use. It's not the more for less...type approach.

Stack the briquettes in there one at a time, like laying cinder blocks. One layer and ring at a time. Each layer should sit a 1/2 brick off the previous layer, if that makes any sense...like this _-_-_-_-_-. Go with rings about as high as the charcoal ring. On an 18.5, two rings leaves you about a coffee can or chimney sized hole in the middle. I'd guess on the 22.5 you should be able to do three rings to get a chimney sized hole.

It takes a while, and you can get a good bit more charcoal in there. Dump 1/2 to 3/4 chimney lit coals into the center, and if your still worried dump some unlit on the top. I'll bet a brisket this will keep you going 12 hours and more.

Edit...Dave I thought I'd mention a few more things. When stacking the rings, they don't have to be perfect, but it's better to set aside broken briquettes and toss them on top. The neatness of it is what makes it work, just simply getting more coals in there. You may be suprised on how much you can get in there this way. My cooks done like this have been long and predictable...some of the steadiest cooks I've done ever.

Dennis
 
Dave, try using it with a clay saucer in the water pan, no water. This will give better temperature control and less fuel useage, as you don't have to heat up all that water. Try it with shorter cooks before you do an all nighter.
 
I feel you. Im having a party next weekend so for more cooking capacity, my old man brought his 22.5"wsm up for me to use (I have an offset). filled the ring about 95% full and lit a chimney. threw the chimney on with a couple lit chunks of cherry. climbed to 300, cut 1.5 vents, she dropped to 240. about 9 hours later I was at 210 and only a couple remaining briquets. luckly, I just foiled and threw them in the oven at 275 to finish. now perhapse if I had the air throttled back more, she would have lasted longer but I was super suprised. My brothers 18.5 seems like it will hold temp for 20hrs
 
Running side by side, my 22 will run out way sooner than my 18. I use RO lump in both with dry foiled pan.

I firmly believe that the much increased space inside and surface area on the outside causes the increased fuel useage. Not a huge deal but just need to be aware of it.

In comps I will fire off both at about 7:00-7:30 and by 5:30-6:00 the next morning I will have to add 3 or 4 handfuls of lump to get the 22 through. The 18 will cook through the night and I'll end up snuffing it out at around 10. I almost always have some leftover to use again.

Russ
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Russ Sylvester:
Running side by side, my 22 will run out way sooner than my 18. I use RO lump in both with dry foiled pan.

I firmly believe that the much increased space inside and surface area on the outside causes the increased fuel useage. Not a huge deal but just need to be aware of it.

In comps I will fire off both at about 7:00-7:30 and by 5:30-6:00 the next morning I will have to add 3 or 4 handfuls of lump to get the 22 through. The 18 will cook through the night and I'll end up snuffing it out at around 10. I almost always have some leftover to use again.

Russ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The 22 in wsm has 25 -30 % greater surface area so expect it to use 1/4 to 1/3 more fuel for the same cook.
 
Doing a little quick math ...

The 22.5" has ~74% more volume than the 18.5" but its charcoal ring has only ~38% more volume.

The increased volume requires more fuel to heat but the increased fuel capacity is about half therefore it would be reasonable that the 22.5" would run out of fuel sooner or consume ~36% more fuel for the same cook.
 
Travis and John, thanks for dropping the science, that is helpful in understanding what to expect.

Dennis, thanks also for your tip on stacking the unlit K in the 22.5. It makes sense that if it needs more fuel, packing it properly will get your more fuel without simply reloading it in flight. I'm using 3/4 of a big bag of K anyway, so using the whole thing ain't no big deal.

Thanks to everyone else for your tips. I have more butts to do this weekend so I'll report back on how it goes.

/Dave
 
The important burn time is 9 hours.,it allows a full night sleep & time to drink coffee before refueling., any beyond that is gravy!
 
Your welcome Dave I hope it helps. It will be a couple weeks yet before I get to play with mine.
icon_frown.gif


Dennis
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TravisH:
Doing a little quick math ...

The 22.5" has ~74% more volume than the 18.5" but its charcoal ring has only ~38% more volume.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As John Ford indicated above, the surface area is going to have more to do with burn rate since probably a majority of the heat generated is being lost through the walls to the outside air.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by John Henderson:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TravisH:
Doing a little quick math ...

The 22.5" has ~74% more volume than the 18.5" but its charcoal ring has only ~38% more volume.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>As John Ford indicated above, the surface area is going to have more to do with burn rate since probably a majority of the heat generated is being lost through the walls to the outside air. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Simply 2 ways of looking at the same issue.

The point of using Volume was to illustrate that the 22's increase in size is greater than the increase of it's fuel capacity.

Thus the 22 cannot have the same 'burn time' as the 18.

One method estimates 25%~33% and the other estimates 36%. Pretty darn close, yes?
 
Well, its 11 PM, I just put three 7.5 lb butts on the top grate, stacked the K in there like I was building a log cabin out of them. Packed tight and over flowing. My wife came outside at 9:30 as I was stacking them and asked what I was doing... I told her "This is what a man does when he loves his pork". She rolled her eyes and went to bed.

Once the temp settles in I'm going to bed as well. I'll let ya'all know how it does in the morning.
 
dave, i'd roll my eyes too if i heard that line.
icon_biggrin.gif

goodluck with the cook!
btw, what is kicksave about? you a goalieboy?
 
I like DSchatte's concept. Very cool - and a labor of love. I think there are two important facts to take from that: 1) by carefully loading the cooker, you can get a lot of charcoal in there and 2) minimizing the air space between coals is going to give you a lower, slower burn. I'm not careful enough to stack the coals, but I get the chamber about 3/4 full, then shake, shimmy and pack that charcoal in good and tight. Then I finish loading it.
 
"Well, its 11 PM, I just put three 7.5 lb butts on the top grate, stacked the K in there like I was building a log cabin out of them. Packed tight and over flowing. My wife came outside at 9:30 as I was stacking them and asked what I was doing... I told her "This is what a man does when he loves his pork". She rolled her eyes and went to bed."


I Love It!
icon_biggrin.gif
 
So, 7 AM, sleeping all through the night, went to bed it was 250, woke up it was 248, 7 hours later, 2 degrees change. There is a special place in heaven for the folks who invented the WSM!!!

One of the butts was already at 200 and tender to I sent it to its tin foil igloo to rest. The other two are at 190 so they stay on the smoker. These three weighed 7.3, 7.4, and 7.6 and I have no idea which is which... but regardless, its a lesson on "its done when its done". One took 8 hours of cook time for a 7 plus lb butt. The other two are taking who knows how much longer... Butts are fickle creatures
icon_smile.gif


Jim, yeah I've played goalie for ice hockey teams since I watched Jim Craig and the Miracle on Ice as a kid. The back plate of my goalie mask has small print that says "1980, Lake Placid, USA, Do you believe in miracles"
 
For those that are interested, the other two butts came off an hour after the first one, finished in about 9 hours, well under 1.5 hrs per lb.

Its now 3:30 and the 22.5 is still cruising, although slowing down, its at 215 without touching it, adding fuel, tapping it, nothing. That's roughly 17 hours of usable cook time without adding fuel.

Packing it tight with the coals was the secret.

/Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top