Kingsford Pro V. Kirkland Pro

[mcook2201]

Charcoal seems to be a hot topic right now (I will see myself out). This question may have been covered previously and I am just not seeing it.

Have you compared Kingsford Pro to Kirkland Pro?

While back I purchased several bags of Kingsford Pro and found they do burn hot however, they burn really fast. Using 1 full weber Charcoal chimney in the 22" kettle I can barely get through reverse sear cooking 2-4 ribeyes and almost no time left over to cook a smaller pan of say veggies. Usually have to start another half chimney to finish a grilling session.
I have tried this fuel using the Santa Marie attachment on the 22" and spend a lot of time feeding the fire, usually with small splits. Bottom vent fully closed. If I leave the bottom vent cracked/open, I spend more time fire tending than cooking.
To this point, don't know if I will buy Kingsford Pro again.

On the other hand, finally picked up a bag of Kirkland Pro about two weeks ago. Same fuel amounts- 1 full chimney. I have reverse seared 4 ribeyes, 4 thick pork chops and a pile of jerk chicken (legs and thighs). When each cook was done, i had plenty of fuel remaining to cook veggies and/or orher items. I dare say even an hour or so later there was still enough heat to cook something else. Last two cooks i even asked the wife if there was anything else she wanted me to cook. I haven't had a chance yet to test the Santa Marie on the same way but hopefully soon.

The Kirkland Pro just seems better to me all around. It is hot but appears to have a much longer burn time. And it is cheaper per pound too.

Anyone else have a similar experience with these two products in comparison? Any thoughts are appreciated.

[RonB]

I concur with what you have posted, (if that helps ).

[jayjordan]

I bought Kingsford Pro once, never again. Get better performance from regular KBB

[HawkerXP]

Thanks for your testing. I'll be picking up some Kirkland next time at Costco.

[Panhead John]

I’ve bought and used both before, but it’s been a while since I used the Kingsford Pro. I remember that it was ok, used it for grilling and not low and slow. Didn’t really have any issues that I recall. I do know that the Kirkland Pro has always worked well for me and at a better price. I’d use the Kirkland brand over Kingsford Pro all day.

[mcook2201]

Believe we are on the same page with Kirkland Pro. Hope you're doing well John.

[Panhead John]

Hope you’re well too Mark, thanks!

[Purc]

Kirkland Pro over any Kingsford.

[Santamarina]

Never tried the Kirkland Pro, but had the same experience as you with Kingsford Pro - too fast, and honestly didn’t get much hotter. If I was using briquettes KBB was my preference.

Eventually I switched to lump to keep the ash down. May be subjective, but I like the flavor better too. Fogo black bag always treats me right.

[Trunkmonkey]

I'm wrapping up cooking a pork butt on my PBC using Kirkland Pro. I've been using Kirkland Pro most of Spring (since they started stocking it), mainly grilling yardbird thighs and carne asada, stuff like that with good results. I wasn't sure how it would do on a long cook in the barrel, it seems to burn hot and fast, but I have to say I'm impressed. I had to tap the brakes for the first 3 hours with foil in a few of the rebar holes (something I do with other charcoals on a long cook), but it looks like it's going to go the whole cook on one full charcoal load. My experience is that it will burn hot and fast if you let it, but it seems to be pretty forgiving when you want to control your burn for a long cook, at least for this first long cook I've used it on. Temp profile started around 380, then a slow, induced temperature stall overnight (all the way down to 200ish), then settling in back up at 270 as the morning heated up. Overnight low temp was around 53. I'm going to pull it in an hour or so. It will be a 12 hr cook by the time I pull it off. Never forget those that gave it all.