Water in Pan or Sand

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guest

Guest
I'm just got a WSM and was wondering if there was any noticable difference in using water in the pan or sand.

Is the temp more stable using sand? Since the water evaporates.

Does the food that you are bbq come out dry using sand compared to using water?

Any help would be great.

Thanks,

JJSmith
 
First of all, welcome to the bulletin board. Glad to have you aboard!

While you're waiting for responses, click the "Find" button and do a search on the phrase "sand water pan". You'll find lots of past discussion on water vs. sand.

I've also posted an article that shows temperature readings of water vs. sand.

WSM Temperature Tests

Regards,
Chris
 
I'm also a new WSM user. After reading everything I found on water or sand in the pan, I decided to use sand. Seems to me there is a learning curve with both and the clean up is why I choose sand.
 
This is for Chris regarding his temp experiment.

I think what I would be most interested in knowing is whether there was any significant difference in the appearance or taste of the chicken.

Thanks,
Terry
 
Thanks for the great info guys.

I'll have to try my own experiments.

JJSmith
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terry McCann:
...what I would be most interested in knowing is whether there was any significant difference in the appearance or taste of the chicken.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
These chickens were sacrificed for science. I was only interested in temperature behavior of the cooker, not chicken taste or appearance.

Regards,
Chris
 
I started out being a believer in water. Got a Brinkman charcoal pan to use as a WSM water pan, been using sand ever since. Have noticed no difference except the sand keeps temps more constant, don't have to add water, and clean-up is SOOOOOOO much easier.

Tom
 
I have nothing to base this on, but I would have to believe that water=steam has to play a role in the consistency (tender/juicy) than a dry heat. Kind of like a sauna vs. a steam room.

I do of course understand the clean up process being quicker/easier with sand, but, if we are investing 8, 10, 18 hours with a particular cook, what is an extra 10-mins of cleaning time to gain that extra oomph?

My 2 cents worth.

~ Sean
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> These chickens were sacrificed for science. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL. (Wiping coffee off the screen)
 
With sand, I definitely keep my lower vents closed more than with water - often only one vent partially open. Seems like less oxygen would mean the fire is not burning as fast and you would therefore get a longer cook from your fuel - maybe helpful on very long cooks ?

Paul
 
Sean.....

2 things.....

The meats we use are so full of fat that no additional moisture is needed to keep them juicy.

It is my understanding that the temps in the WSM will evaporate the steam so quickly as to make no additional moisture available to the meat.

All I know, after a couple of years of using sand, my meats are just as juicy and tender as they have ever been.

Keep in mind...I travel and cook a lot so clean-up and disposal of that greasy water is a real problem for me.
 
Kevin,
Understand the spirit of this next comment - I am only trying to understand and not being combative.

WRT - "no additional moisture is needed to keep them juicy". Why do people foil w/juices? Why do people spray AJ on their cooks? Why do people wrap their cooks and have them sweat in a humid environment after cooking?

I have a whopping 4 (water) smokes under my belt, and am just curious as to the effects of things vs. just blindly doing them.

Thanks,
~ Seam
 
I'm with stoogie. The WSM uses water as a way to regulate temp controll. You can use sand or a pizza stone and get the same results as water. (JMO). I find i get a better bark without water.(IMO)
 
Chris' Experiment

ok, I'll ask the first dumb question about the experiment.

I assume the one vent had to be closed more with the empty pan than with either of the other two methods to maintain the low temp. Did you keep records on the percent open to maintain these temps ? What really surprised me and the point of the post, is the apparent showing that no heat sink, empty pan, maintained temp as well as either of the other two methods. I've always thought that was very important to low/slow cooking. Did you have to frequently adjust the vent to maintain the temp and is that a reason for the heat sink, i.e. were more adjustments necesarry with the empty pan ?

Looking forward to some response.

Paul
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Paul G.:
Did you keep records on the percent open to maintain these temps? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The vent percentage open is shown in the last column of each data table.

Regards,
Chris
 
Thanks. I'm sorry I overlooked that column. Were you surprised that you could maintain those low, steady temps with an empty pan ? It didn't seem like you made that many more adjustments than when you used the two heat sinks - water and sand. It just surprised me but obviously that was not the purpose of the experiment.

Paul
 
So if you use sand, do the drippings kind of clump up, like kitty litter, and you just scoop them out, or do you dump the whole thing of sand and start fresh with a new batch for the next cook?
 
David,

When using sand, only fill the water pan with enough sand to within an inch or so below the top. Then cover with heavy duty Reynolds Wrap making a depression to collect drippings.

When your cook is finished, remove the foil from the top and toss it.
 
/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif, I knew that (LOL).

I assume you can just get this sand from Home Depot or something, nothing special like "BBQ sand"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

 

Back
Top