RonB - For me some of it depends on the cut and the quality/grade of the meat. For example, I really dislike a super rare lower quality New York steak. Front steering, cooking then searing again is the only way I like that grade and cut. If I go up to Prime, the reverse sear method is fine but I still prefer to sear first. I find the texture much better with the depth of the cook.
For a filet, I like the reverse seer all the way. Again, it's a texture thing. I like it done more than my kids but I still get an even medium rare with very little if any banding doing the reverse method. To me there is something really pretty in the contrast of a red filet against a dark surface. To me, the taste, texture and juiciness are all better with a reverse sear on a filet.
With a Prime rib-eye it depends on the thickness. If I have cut it extra thick, I like the reverse seer method but if it is an inch or thinner I like to seer first. The rib-eye is one that I most often vacillate about, though. I may cook it one way today and the opposite tomorrow. I also may use the grate or flat side of the Grillgrates. I can go down a grade with a rib-eye and not have the difference in quality that I observe with a lower quality New York. I do find that I really like the edge fat cooked well on a rib eye. I find that if I font sear, back off for temp and sear again at the end I can get the fat cooked much better than with simply the front or reverse sear.
A big thick T-Bone is where I have always been goofy. In my old Weber days I would have the coals on one side and a water pan right next to them. I got the BBQ to 300 (temp gauge on BBQ) with the lid on. I would place the strip side over the coal side and the filet over the water pan. I would put the lid on, wait five minutes and flip. I would cover and wait another five minutes. I would move the steaks over the water pan and would cook for another 20 minutes, opening the vents a bit at a time until I had a roaring fire. Then I would put the whole steaks over the coals. In this manner, I got a front and reverse sear on the strip side and only a reverse sear on the filet side. The steaks would come out rare/medium rare. There was no science to it. There were no thermometers. It was my "secret" method for which I always got raves. Now I understand why. Those were my favorite steaks of all time. Not only are the cuts on the steak different but I was using two different techniques.
I have been able to do some of the same with my Santa Maria with a T-Bone. If I still had a Weber I would definitely have the SnS and would see how the old trick worked.
I know none of that solves the problem of what is better. I also know that some of my preferences probably goes against conventional wisdom. People who like their steaks really rare, regardless of the cut, will almost certainly always prefer the reverse sear. People who like their steaks well done, regardless of the cut, will definitely prefer the front sear method.
For a filet, I like the reverse seer all the way. Again, it's a texture thing. I like it done more than my kids but I still get an even medium rare with very little if any banding doing the reverse method. To me there is something really pretty in the contrast of a red filet against a dark surface. To me, the taste, texture and juiciness are all better with a reverse sear on a filet.
With a Prime rib-eye it depends on the thickness. If I have cut it extra thick, I like the reverse seer method but if it is an inch or thinner I like to seer first. The rib-eye is one that I most often vacillate about, though. I may cook it one way today and the opposite tomorrow. I also may use the grate or flat side of the Grillgrates. I can go down a grade with a rib-eye and not have the difference in quality that I observe with a lower quality New York. I do find that I really like the edge fat cooked well on a rib eye. I find that if I font sear, back off for temp and sear again at the end I can get the fat cooked much better than with simply the front or reverse sear.
A big thick T-Bone is where I have always been goofy. In my old Weber days I would have the coals on one side and a water pan right next to them. I got the BBQ to 300 (temp gauge on BBQ) with the lid on. I would place the strip side over the coal side and the filet over the water pan. I would put the lid on, wait five minutes and flip. I would cover and wait another five minutes. I would move the steaks over the water pan and would cook for another 20 minutes, opening the vents a bit at a time until I had a roaring fire. Then I would put the whole steaks over the coals. In this manner, I got a front and reverse sear on the strip side and only a reverse sear on the filet side. The steaks would come out rare/medium rare. There was no science to it. There were no thermometers. It was my "secret" method for which I always got raves. Now I understand why. Those were my favorite steaks of all time. Not only are the cuts on the steak different but I was using two different techniques.
I have been able to do some of the same with my Santa Maria with a T-Bone. If I still had a Weber I would definitely have the SnS and would see how the old trick worked.
I know none of that solves the problem of what is better. I also know that some of my preferences probably goes against conventional wisdom. People who like their steaks really rare, regardless of the cut, will almost certainly always prefer the reverse sear. People who like their steaks well done, regardless of the cut, will definitely prefer the front sear method.
Comment