Sear Before or After Smoking?

[pmillen]

What is your preference and why?

Reverse sear is all the rage. I switched to it a few years ago but after a few months I switched back to searing first because I think that reverse searing burns off the smoke flavor.

Meathead writes in What You Need to Know About Wood, Smoke, And Combustion, "Smoke includes as many as 100 compounds in the form of microscopic solids including char, creosote, ash, and phenols, as well as combustion gases that include carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitric oxide, syringol, and liquids such as water vapor and syringol, an oil."

What happens to them when they’re exposed to searing heat? One at a time–
Char . . . . . . . . . . . . . . It’s what’s left behind if wood is burned without adequate oxygen. Wood char is charcoal. Searing the meat will burn off the char.
Creosote. . . . . . . . . . . It burns, as anyone who’s had a chimney fire will tell you. So, it burns off during searing.
Ash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . It’s not combustible. It stays behind after searing.
Phenols . . . . . . . . . . . Phenols will sublimate and boil off at searing temperatures.
Carbon monoxide . . . It’s a gas. If it hangs around the meat, it’ll burn and become carbon dioxide.
Carbon dioxide. . . . . . It’s a gas. I doubt that it stays with the meat but if it does, it’s without odor or taste.
Nitric oxide . . . . . . . . It’s a gas. It’ll burn and become nitrogen dioxide.
Syringol . . . . . . . . . . . It ignites at about 285°. Searing will burn it.
Syringol oil . . . . . . . . It's a mix of syringol and water. The water evaporates and the syringol burns.

So, smoke flavor sitting on the meat’s surface is hit with searing heat and all but ash boils or burns off.

Interestingly, wood ash and water make caustic lye, potassium hydroxide. It’s not likely that we get much lye in a bite, but I wonder…

Frankly, I don’t sear at all. I use a much lower temperature to brown steaks in a frying pan before smoking (and seasoning). To me, seared meat is burnt black and bitter tasting. I prefer the Malliard reaction flavor.

As I wrote, what is your preference and why?

[FireMan]

You bring up a most interesting question/topic. My answer to what I do is dumb, now that I think about it. I sorta do it cuz everybody does it. Which actually ends up exposing the action to the myth busting department. Recently, the best steaks I have cooked is almost what you described. I do em in a CI skillet, get the maillard, then start basting em in butter or my recent favorite duck fat.
You do present an interesting case agin reverse searing by Meatheads own words. Outcome will be a fascinating discussion. Well done my man (no pun intended at all)!

P.S. Searing is fun!

[djl]

Not sure if I follow. Are talking about several cuts/meats?

The items I truly smoke are not seared afterwards (including wibs).

Steaks on the other hand depends on my mood and location (not mention the thickness of the steak). Thinking about it I only reverse sear thick steaks when I am home and cooking 1 or 2 steaks that are at least 1.5 inches thick. Otherwise I sear the steaks flipping and rotating as needed to get a nice crust.

Roasts I typically reverse sear. However, no rule goes unbroken. I'm going to do a pot roast in a dutch oven today were I will sear it first.

[texastweeter]

Steaks I like blue, so I just sear. Roasts I smoke cool then sear, so reverse sear.

[Huskee]

I front sear burgers and steaks, then finish indirect....you might say that's reverse-reverse sear. No, reverse searing doesn't burn off the smoke flavor, but perhaps it changes it enough to the point it's not what you prefer, more char flavor than smoke/rub/Maillard. I don't sear heavily, like you say it can result in char and no longer a sear. I like a heavy Maillard, not char.

[FireMan]

Yup in the H M!

[ofelles]

I am such a creature of habit. When I find something I like, I am VERRRRy reluctant to change (to a fault).
Those are some interesting points brought up. I need to buck up and try searing first!

[Red Man]

I don’t know the scientific reasons why, but I do know that searing after smoking does not burn off the smoke flavor. I prefer reverse sear for a couple reasons. Front searing takes more time over the direct heat, resulting in a thicker band of over cooked meat. With front sear you never know how the exterior will end up when the interior is done, this is more of an issue on roasts or really thick steaks. The best way to reverse sear is to let rest before the sear to give better control over the final IT.

[Huskee]

Practice! No band of overcooked meat if you sear a very cold steak over very hot coals. Try it!

[RonB]

Front sear because:

1 - better control of internal temps. With a front sear, I am not worried about over cooking because I start with refrigerator cold meat and flip every 30 to 60 seconds. Then the meat goes in the kettle with a low fire - somewhere between 225 and 275 with lower being better. This way it's easier to pull at the desired temp because the temp is rising slowly. At searing temps, the internal temp can rise too fast and I can easily over shoot my final temp because the meat has warmed up by this time. At 225* and using a leave in probe, I am less likely to miss my final temp, and there is less carry over which seems to me to be easier to judge when to pull.

2 - better control of the Maillard reaction. Flipping frequently first allows me to start the slow portion of the cook when I want to. If I sear at the end, I have to pull when I hit my temp, (hopefully). The Maillard reaction may not have reached the point I want at this time using a rear sear.

I front sear beef and chicken although I finish chicken at high temps.

[pmillen]

I do know that searing after smoking does not burn off the smoke flavor.

You "know" this because you can taste it? And I "know" it does because I can't taste it. All I taste is the sear.

I guess that's the beauty of cooking. We all have somewhat different tastes and tasting abilities. So it boils down to us doing what we think gives us the best results.

BTW, there are some people who are super tasters. Some may even have synesthesia, a neurological condition where stimulating one sense (e.g., taste) produces a discrete reaction in a different sense (e.g., sight). About 4% of the population have some form of it. Maybe 1% of syntesthetes have sensory crossovers that affect their relationships with food.

So, about 0.04% of people can "see" flavor. To them, different beers look different after tasting them. They're at the apex of the tasting curve. The rest of us are somewhere down it. I'm probably near the bottom.

As another aside—we should give some thought to what happens to seasonings that we expose to high-temperature searing. Garlic, for instance, tastes awful if burned.

[IowaGirl]

"....Interestingly, wood ash and water make caustic lye, potassium hydroxide...."

Being a soap maker as well as an engineer, I want to explain that this is a common misunderstanding about the alkali in wood ash. Wood ash contains mostly potassium carbonate and some sodium carbonate (washing soda).

The proportions of the two carbonates depend on the botanical matter used to make the ash. Inland vegetation will produce mostly potassium carbonate. Marine and coastal vegetation will produce ash with a higher proportion of sodium carbonate.

Unlike smoke particles which are light enough to float in air, ash particles are heavy and large and do not float easily. Ash would not normally get on your food, unless something happens to disturb the ash layer while you're cooking. Ash is alkaline, but wood smoke is acidic -- wood smoke is a known contributor to acid rain.

[Dr. Pepper]

Ah, science! Thanks. Gotta love those engineers!