Water usage


 
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guest

Guest
I need a little understanding on H2O usage. I have read several posts about water use and the need to replenish during the cook. So far I've only done 2 cooks using 1 gallon of H20 and have had a nearly full bowl even after 5 hours. Am I doing something wrong and therefore not getting any evaporation or are some people just adding less water to start and adding more throughout the cooking session to control temp.

BTW - It only took the first meal for my wife to be convinced that the WSM was worth every penny I spent. I now just need to find the time to use it even more, but with all my other passions, I just have to schedule more time in.

Loving it and all the input from everyone.
 
I never need to replenish my water either.
I did an 8 hour pork butt recently and my pan
was still at least 3/4 full when I was done?!?!
(I filled the standard weber bowl full to start)

I don't get it either. I assumed from the millions
of posts I've read that I'd need to add water regularly. I never do though.
 
Dale & R.D.,

Likewise also, I have done several long cooks and when starting with 3/4 full Weber pan, I have never had to replenish. Now I have the Brinkmann pan and use sand. I still use water for Brisket and Ribs.
 
Thanks Rd and Bruce. I tend to get a little obsessive when I get into these things and worry I'm doing something wrong.

I need to follow the mantra from one of my other hobbies. "Don't worry have a homebrew" and make a new one "Don't worry have a barbecue".
 
I've never found the necessity to add water to the standard pan on cooks as long as 9 hours. Maybe it's the humidity. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
 
Must have been a little cockpit error over at Dale's PC. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Best to reply to the other active thread on Water usage until Chris can delete this one.
 
The meat juice/grease dripping down into the water changes (increases) the temperature at which water becomes a vapor so it lasts a lot longer than if the water remained pure.
 
I use a brinkman pan, and I'd like to give out a little warning to anyone doing a long cook. I've been 12 or 13 hours into a brisket and checked the water pan to find it had plenty of water in it (around half full. For some reason, the temperature kept rising in the WSM. Come to find out the water I was looking at was primarily fat from the brisket. Topped the pan up with water and temperatures normalized again.

Rick
 
Rick, I remember you talking about this back in May. I also remember your other words of warning....."Don't fill up the water pan too high when refilling. The first thing to overflow onto the hot coals would be the liquid fat....." Insert your imgaginative picture of what a WSM rocket would look like here. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Rich
 
I use sand exclusively, home and competition, so I don't have to deal with refill or mess. Bruce, I know that Jim M also uses water for brisket and ribs and wondering if you've noticed any advantage. The bark I'm getting using sand is consistantly good and there's no moisture loss in the meat, compared to using apple juice or water. Hey Jim, you out there? ...what do you think.
Dave
 
Ryan and I took second place in Brisket at Imperial Beach with our WSM on July 4th. No foil, and sand in the pan. We will be at the Oregon Open on July 25th and plan on not changing a thing. We have not found the need for moisture and the cleanup is ezpeasy.
 
Dave,

The reason I do that is because of the advice Jim gave on this forum. I do think that my ribs are kind of dry using the sand in the pan, which I do not experience with water. If I am cooking pork butt with a brisket beneath I do not use water, however, if it's brisket alone, I just feel there needs to be some moisture(who knows). They come out real well and I have noticed no significant difference in bark formation with or without water.
 
Found an old post of mine from another forum.

I did an experiment last year...
Five brisket flats, each cut in half and trimmed to weigh the same. The 10 chunks were then mixed to even out any advantage that a difference in marbling might make in the test. The idea was to cook five brisket halves with sand and five with water in the wsm pan to determine the difference between a dry and a wet cook in the wsm. The five flats were cut in half to amplify the results (more surface area exposed). Each group had a total weight of 10 lb. The dry cook had 48% shrinkage, the wet cook had 46% shrinkage. For a ten pound brisket, that's about two ounces of moisture. Which might be around 1/4 cup of liquid. The internal texture from both cooks were similar. Slices from both oozed juice when I squeezed them. The main difference was the bark on the dry cook was a little drier and chewier as well as being a little darker in color.
Not enough difference to stop using sand for ease of cleanup at home.
For a contest, If I use a wsm, I might stick with the water. I need all the help I can get in competition.
db
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

 

Back
Top