I thought I would share an observation from a recent cook on my Primo XL. I cooked two pork butts (each of equivalent weight) for a family gathering on the Primo XL. In the past, I have very successfully used Kingsford Competiton briquettes and would smoke with the temp around 225 (using the Digi Q as an air controller). On this last cook, the temperature would rise to 275 (and as far as 292) and, no matter how much I would shut the vent, it would hold at that higher temperature (I think it's time to replace the gaskets). The interesting thing is that the pork butt closest to the Digi Q temperature probe hit 195 five hours earlier than the butt on the other side of the Primo. Given their equivalent weight, I think this means there was a fairly signifiant temperature variance in the Primo (which came as a surprise to me). But more importantly, all agreed that the pork butt that took much longer to cook was much much better. While the first butt to come off the Primo was perfectly fine, it lacked what I call the "liquid gold" aspect of the second butt, where every piece of the butt is infused with a rich silky layer of fat juice that makes a BBQ pork butt so special. Next month, I plan to do a comparison of pork butts smoked on the Primo XL and the PBC drum smoker (yes, I suffer from MCS) and will report back the results. Comments and observations welcome.
-
-
Is there any chance that the first butt was a false temp reading? Five hours is a huge difference. If I'm reading your account correctly the two butts were sitting side by side? My gut says that the second butt was "done" and the first butt wasn't, explaining the difference in texture/taste. Thank you for sharing and let us know how it goes next time!-
I used two different temperature thermometers on each butt. Each thermometer was consistent with the other which leads me to believe there was a temperature variance in the Primo. I think the side with the second butt was running cooler because the gasket has worn down allowing heat to leak out on that side (and letting oxygen seep in which kept the temperature higher than normal). And, yes, they were sitting side-by-side. I was very surprised by all of this. -
Two butts in the same cooker and one got done five hours earlier. Huh. I can't explain that! Ah, but the fun is in the pursuit, isn't it? Best wishes!
-
-
Thanks for those observations on your Primo, Bobmcgahan . It will be fun to learn what you decide on your next PB experiment.
I did a hot 'n fast chuckie experiment on my WSCGC 325° or so compared to a PBC chuckie cooked at the same time at an average temp of 260° or so. The pulled beef in the PBC chuckie was far superior to that done hotter and faster in the WSCGC. As you found with your PBs, there was the silkiness of the rendered fat that made the mouthfeel and flavor better on the PBC chuck. Both chucks were purchased the same day in the same butcher case and looked like chuckie twins, so I'm going with the fact that hot 'n fast, at least with the smokers I use, may not be the way to go for smoked chuck.
OTOH, I did two briskets in the PBC (separate cooks) and was not as impressed with the brisket done at 225° as I was with the one done at 275°. There could have been a lot of reasons for that difference, but it pretty much convinced me to continue doing my PBC briskets at the temp the PBC likes to run the best.
KathrynComment
-
Thanks fzxdoc. Generally, what is the temperature that the PC likes to cook at? 275? -
Bobmcgahan , mine likes 275ish. Remember I use two ambient probes, one on either side of the barrel--vent side vs. side opposite--and take the average of the two to record as PBC temp. Those readings can vary, depending on the length of the cook and the amount of meat I've loaded into the barrel, by 40 to 60 degrees. The temp readings change through the cook and often the "hot" one will become the cooler reading of the two as the cook progresses.
K.
-
-
mrteddyprincess I've seen variance of 30-45 minutes before when cooking two butts so the fact that there was some variance wasn't completely surprising. But I can't explain the 5 hour difference either other than my worn-gasket theory allowing for a substantial difference in temp within the Primo. The Primo is now five years old and I also think I need to tighten down bolts on the cover connecting hinge to ensure the lid/cover closes evenly.Comment
-
thermoworks did a side by side. One at 225° one at 300° came to the conclusion that the low and slow was superior as well.Comment
-
I find than cooking butts can be done at 275-300 without any loss of texture or juiciness. Yes I used to cook them at 125-135 but there is not a bit of difference at 275. I have been smoking for 40 years and have experimented with all temps before settling on the 275 degree temp.
Well you do what you feel is right for you., don't want to influence you.
Comment
-
Lookin forward to yer comparison, an results...
BTW: Howdy from Kansas Territorry, Welcome to Th Pit!
Lookin forward to learnin along with, an from ya!
Comment
-
I’m not surprised that the hot and fast butt was not as good. I recall that ChefSteps did an experiment where they went with higher temps to see if the shorter cooking time was worth the trade-off. The low and slow butt usually won the taste test.
Comment
-
Do you think it depends more on the thickness, cut and quality of the meat than the cooking technique-temp. I could have two PB's or Briskets or whatever and if one is from a Duroc vs a mixed market hog or Angus vs longhorn they will cook different let alone taste different. That's why I think at times we have big differences in our cooks even though we do everything the same during the cook.
Comment
-
Well, both butts were bought from Harris-Teeter here in Charlotte, NC. And, as mentioned, they were basically the same weight, give an ounce or two. So, as far as a control test, I don't think I could have found two butts more ideal to test. The only explanation is that there is a wide temperature variance in my Primo because of worn gaskets which I will fix (already ordered the gasket kit from BBQ Guys). Once I have fixed that, I will do the "butt-off" between the PBC and Primo. -
That's true and I think your on the right track with differing temps but here's how my weird mind thinks..Ha. If you were to send me to the but her along with say someone half my size and cut the same size shoulder roast out of each.... Mine might have a tad bit more marbling than the other...HA. We were both from the same farm fed the same diet and sent to the same butcher.
I think that's why it's very important that if your looking for consistency you have to put your own eyes on each piece. -
Hmmm, interestin... awhile back, (ain't found th post, yet), I did two racks of BBRs...they were literally 0.01 lb.s different, but each cooked very differently, due to thickness...I learned new things...
Always up fer, an lookin forward to a good ol fashioned Butt-Off, though!!!
-
-
BTW, apropos of not much, having now had the PBC for a month, I can say definitely that I much prefer ribs cooked in it as opposed to the Primo. Also, pretty blown away by chicken as well on the PBC. Make no mistake, I've had great ribs come out of the Primo but there is something sublime about ribs hung in the PBC. I have had fantastic pork butt and brisket (the latter Gold Grade Waygu from Snake River Farms) on the Primo but the PBC convention smoke for ribs is pretty great. The butt-off approacheth . . . .Comment
-
The quality of the meat has a lot to do with the final results. I picked up a chuck roast yesterday and was not pleased with the marbling. Our local grocery store usually has excellent chuck but not yesterday. I picked the best-looking piece they had but it was still inferior to chucks I've gotten there in the past. It smoked up kind of tough, although I cooked it VERY fast in my 14.5 WSM with the bowl removed. It ended up being cubed and went into a pot of beef stew. I'm hoping the extra hour or braising in the pot tenderized it.
As for this debate...Given how people rave about the results the PBC produces (I love mine) and given that it runs hotter and faster (270+ range) I'm guessing that the anomalies are due to the cuts of meat. I remember cooking 2 chuck roasts in my WSM, one on each grate, and the one on the bottom grate took a couple of hours longer than the 1 on the top. I pondered why that was given that temps between the bottom and top grate of the 14.5 are very close and a member of this site said the meat likely came from 2 different cows.Comment
-
I have noticed the relative lack of juiciness and tenderness of butts and chuck roasts when cooked at higher temperatures. But for these chunks of meat, I think a long hold above 140 makes all the difference. In fact, when pressed for time, I will bump the temperature up enough to get it "done" and buy some extra time for the hold.Comment
-
First, I love side-by-side comparisons. They are both fun and informative. Done several over the years with various cuts. My very first cooking post on here was a comparison of four different ways of cooking pork ribs. The result of that told us we don't like the Parkey, butter, brown sugar sweetness of the final step that so many pitmasters prefer.
One thing I'd ask of any of these comparisons, did you do blind taste testing or did you know what you were going to sample? We eat with our senses, not just taste alone. If you go into something with a psychological preconceived notion, then your taste buds are skewed toward that result. What I'm suggesting is that you gather friends and or family to a blind taste test. That's the best way to tell in a comparison cook.
Even then, as mentioned, there are so many variables involved. One cook done one day that yielded great results versus another with the same exact variables (or as close as you can get them) ends up giving you different results. Will look forward to see this done again, controlled and blind taste tested.Comment
-
What’s the definition of this line between the two? 300F? The temp at which you don’t get any stall?
Seems to me anything from 225-275 is still LaS.Comment
Comment