wet rub vs. dry rub


 
j biesinger

j biesinger

TVWBB Platinum Member
I had an interesting cook on friday. I tried two new things on my wsm, a small brisket flat and a corned beef point. I was running really hot (250-275) so I foiled them both after 4 hours and they were fork tender after 7. The thing that I was wondering about why the brisket took in far more smoke flavor than the corned beef.

I cured them both, overnight with rubs, but the pastrami rub had fresh garlic in it and the piece of meat was a lot wetter when I put it in the smoker. The flat had a standard dry rub.

I've heard people debate whether the meat picks up more smoke when its been dried or when its wet or oiled.

certainly external moisture wasn't the only variable.

any opinions?
 
here's the pics:

pastrami brisket

for both being first tries, I really liked how they both came out. sure the pastrami tasted like corned beef, but the rub was really tasty and it was tender and moist.
 
It could be that the corned brisket didn't seem as smokey because of the brine/pickle that it was cured/soaked in. Most of them have vinegar, pickling spices etc. which could have masked the smoke flavor somewhat. Both look great.
icon_cool.gif
 
I figure the pickle included nitrites which made the meat pink and masked a smoke ring. thought that filling meat with nitrites pre-smoke might prevent it from absorbing more. but hams are filled with nitrites and smoke.

yesterday, I wasnt in much shape to dig into left overs (keg party saturday), but I try some today to see if smoke's in there.
 
Meat doesn't really absorb smoke, smoke adsorbs onto meat. Penetration, if any, might occur over a long period of time I suppose, though as common as 'smoke penetration' is in barbecue circles, I've still never seen any data that actually supports this.

Anyway, one thought on the disparity between the two meats is that the corned beef was likely brine injected. Most of the moisture is expelled during cooking. Perhaps during this process the smoke particulates, some anyway, wash off.

Bacon and fish are allowed to dry first (form a pellicle) because smoke adherence is better when the surface of the meat is sticky rather than wet. Wet rubs aren't usually a problem because they dry enough during smoking and the time involved, and so smoke adheres. Though bacon and salmon are often hot smoked, if cold smoked the temps are too low to efficiently dry the surface. If smoking occurs before the surfaces are sufficiently tacky, the surfaces often end up streaky black and unattractive, as smoke adherence is spotty.

I'm guessing smoke disparity between the two is due to the corned beef having been injected but it is just a guess.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">and masked a smoke ring </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The smokering, btw, does not indicate that smoke has 'penetrated'. It can occur in the absence of smoke, and can not occur in its presence. It is a chemical reaction at the surface.
 
I thought one of the reactions that caused a smoke ring was the presence of nitrites in smoke/meat.

I thought the original observation was interesting. That two pieces of meat in the same wsm came out with differing amounts of smoke flavoring.

I was just reading:
Great Sausage Recipes and Meat Curing by Rytek Kutas
http://www.sausagemaker.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=413

according to the author meat has to be totally dry before it will absorb smoke. maybe my original question, wet vs dry, might be the solution.
 
When NO2 from the smoke of wood combustion forms nitric acid at the meat's surface the smokering forms.

I think the observation is interesting as well.

Though there are substantial data that show that smoke particulates adhere I've never seen any that show they absorb. I use wet rubs quite often and do not notice a difference in smoke flavor. I have had injected and brined meats though that do seem less flavored, hence my guess.
 
I purchased a corned beef point around st patty's day and froze it thinking I'd smoke it when things warmed up around here and I had some free time. It seemed like a good strategy and I plan on buying at least two next year.

I soaked it for 8 hours in a couple of gallons of cold water. I found this step to be essential since corned beef is typically boiled which pulls out most of the salt. I like to bake my corned beefs at st patty's and they usually end up too salty. the soak worked and the end salt level was just about right.

I found a rub recipe on about.com, which I applied the night before smoking. tThis is what I approximately used:

Pastrami rub:
2 kosher salt
2 paprika
1 ½ coriander seeds
1 ½ brown sugar
1 black peppercorn
1 mustard seeds
½ white peppercorns
3 large garlic cloves, minced

Wood:
Apple, hickory, oak

I backed off on the salt from what they specified, and halved their amounts.

I cooked it on a wsm 250-275 for 4 out of foil and 3 in foil.

It was loaded with marbled fat, so the result was juicy and super tended. the crust was great too. I just reheated some with whole grain mustard and some garlic, jalepeno dill pickels and had a nice breakfast.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Though there are substantial data that show that smoke particulates adhere I've never seen any that show they absorb. I use wet rubs quite often and do not notice a difference in smoke flavor. I have had injected and brined meats though that do seem less flavored, hence my guess. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

great info. something is diffusing down into the meat (resulting in a smoke ring) I just assumed the smoke would too.

not to overemphasize diffusion but what if pickled meat is saturated with "stuff" and wont absorb as much "stuff" (in this case smoke) as an unpickled meat. guess its moot if diffusion/absorption doesn't occur with smoke.

has anybody noticed a difference in smoke flavoring with position in the wsm? the pastrami was on the lower grate closer to the water pan.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">something is diffusing down into the meat (resulting in a smoke ring) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'd argue that it is not diffusion at all. it is a reaction at the surface which then chain-links toward the interior if the circumstances are right. Reagardless, smokerings are not indicative of smoke flavor or else barbecued meats that lack rings would also lack smoke flavor. This isn't the case.

I have seen arguments for smoke diffusion but nothing past (somewhat shaky, imo) theory to substantiate them. It would be nice to have something definitive one way or the other for those of us who like that sort of stuff.
icon_smile.gif
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by j biesinger:
but hams are filled with nitrites and smoke.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes hams are but they are cold smoked for days sometimes. Whole different proccess than what we do on the WSM.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I have seen arguments for smoke diffusion but nothing past (somewhat shaky, imo) theory to substantiate them. It would be nice to have something definitive one way or the other for those of us who like that sort of stuff. Smiler </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree that most info in books or the internet is unsubstantiated by empirical evidence (and often contradictory). However, I've noticed a common theme that meat stops "picking up" smoke after 4 or so hours so it pointless to add wood after that mark. I seem to recall one account attributing this to the fact that the internal temp of the meat has reach a point where moisture is being forced out (sweating), the general direction of flavoring switches outward.

It seemed to make sense at the time, but if your suggestion is true that smoke adheres but is never absorbed, it wouldn't be the stopping of the inward movement of smoke thats creating this 4 hour limit.

Might it be the presence of external moisture (sweat) that preventing smoke from adhering?
 
I have seen the 'meat stops picking up smoke' theme repeated time and again but there is simply no evidence to support it, and experience (anecdotal evidence) strongly suggests the opposite. Like 'searing seals the juices in the meat', these sorts of nonsensical repetitions get treated as facts when they clearly are not or at least are not established as such.

I cannot say and do not say that smoke is 'never absorbed' but the automatic assumption that one sees frequently--that smoke 'penetrates' or that meat 'absorbs'--simply isn't supported by even cursory evidence nor anecdotally. It would seem to me, to extrapolate further from what you're saying, that it is possible for there to be some smoke particulate and, perhaps, smoke volatiles migration during or after cooking when juice migration occurs but this is hardly the same thing as penetration or absorption--well, at least not in the way i view it. Further, most smoke particulates, though small, aren't small enough to go very far. It would seem that this would be left to the volatiles but I still do not see anything to suggest that the movement or intermingling of volatiles would necessarily occur (they are, after all, volatiles).

There are claims that diffusion and solution-diffusion are the processes that carry smoke volatiles into the meat. (See here, scroll down to find it.) But, though it might sound impressive to the casual reader, it doesn't hold up to me, and there are many points made that are illogical or out-and-out faulty.

I don't think moisture 'prevents' smoke particulates from adhering but it would seem to me that in a low-temp environment (think cold-smoking) excessive moisture might cause unevenness of adherence and/or discoloration or variance in coloration and adherence between the non-moist, moist and wet areas. This would seem to be why it is so important to form a pellicle on items that one wishes to cold smoke. In typical barbecue, however, evaporation will begin as surface temps rise and continue apace. Particulates will adhere to whatever they can.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">See here </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

nice link, I haven't read that yet. I've seen bbq faq and almost thought they were the same until I check them both just now. I guess I'll take some time to read through it before I post any more guesses about smoking.

I'm fairly sensitive about the smokiness of my meat. I'm actually looking to beef it up. Although for home cooking, I'm where I want to be (and even a bit too much for my wife), I feel like a need a bit more in my competition meats. I don't think subtlety works when judges are tasting lots of que (but then again I've been wrong before).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top