Hot 'n Fast vs. Low 'n Slow for Pork Ribs

[thedonald78]

I did a quick search and found a few minor discussions about this, but nothing too in-depth. I'm interested in reading about everyone's thoughts on pros and cons of cooking spare or baby back ribs hot and fast vs. low and slow. I have long subscribed and touted the 3-2-1 method or variations therein, but my relatively new (know him for about 15 months) father-in-law likes to cook ribs hot and fast over charcoal (mostly direct heat) on his Weber kettles and I have to admit that they generally come out pretty good in a fairly short amount of time, although I have had ribs from his cooks that were way over done and a little dry. I thought he was pretty much an anomaly, but now it seems like I'm seeing posts on Facebook often about hot and fast cooks. I've always done pork butts at 250-275, mostly because I'm impatient by nature and never could really see much difference in the final product vs. waiting it out at 225. What are y'all's thoughts and opinions on the pros and cons for cooking ribs hot and fast vs. low and slow? I have a UDS, two Green Mountain pellet burners (DC and DB), and a standard Weber kettle with a vortex. Historically I've done most of my Q on the UDS. Pretty new to the pellet game and haven't yet done ribs on one. So many weapons and so little time it seems . . . Thanks!

[JeffJ]

I've never cooked them hot and fast but to me it seems like it's a technique that is wrought with problems. It takes time to break down collagen and render fat which would seem to be difficult to achieve cooking hot and fast. I'd also be concerned about a grease fire if the fire is hot enough and big enough. Maybe it can be done successfully, but I have my doubts. You should consider doing a side-by-side with your father-in-law. Just make sure to control as many variables as possible so that you are truly only comparing the 2 cooking techniques.

[thedonald78]

A side-by-side test would be fun, but I wouldn't want to make the poor guy feel bad. He's a pretty humble guy in general but proud of his ribs (my wife and here sister have built them up) and he is a good cook. He does a lot of whole pigs for community events. Not interested in showing him up I guess is what I'm trying to say.

[JeffJ]

Yeah, it can be a bit sensitive. Although the point isn't to show anybody up but to see which technique produces better results. thedonald78

[Rod]

I've only done low and slow. Whenever I've been to other peoples house's that just throw them on a hot grill they are always a tough chew. Of course you tell them, "man those were some good ribs" and then focus your appetite on the sides.

[Jerod Broussard]

I do mine at 300+/- now. In the pellet it works perfectly, bark:30 and done:30 both occur at the same time.

[bep35]

Two questions Jerod. How long do you cook your ribs at 300? And now that you have the Blaz-n-Grill, do you ever cook ribs in the PBC at 300? Thanks.

[Troutman]

I've upped my temp to just 250* and get mine done in about 5 1/2 hours. I suppose going to 275-300* might cut that by as much as an hour. Personally I'm very happy with my methodology and hate to argue with perfection . Seriously though, I've done grilled ribs and they end up either burnt or chewy with little or no smokiness imparted. Good bbq takes time, why rush it? Kick back with a beer and chill.

[bardsleyque]

I concur,Da Beerz!!!

[Troutman]

DA Bears

[LA Pork Butt]

Hot and fast are food, different. They tast fine and tend to have more chew which some folks like better. I’ve had them direct grilled hot and fast, too, which is how Rendezvous in Memphis does them about 36” from the fire. They continually mop them and after cooking shake their spices on the ribs. When it come to ribs to each their own.

[marvinpotter]

The last time I did maybe 3 hrs low and slow and finished them hot and fast. Got great color and bark on them. The bite definitely was different. There was a little more pull/chew...almost felt like a little crunch but it came clean right off the bone and the flavor was great. I want to keep experimenting and see what happens.

[Ahumadora]

I do most of mine hot n fast now 275-325 F Also with 3 kids a lot of the time I don't have a choice. Hot n fast it is.

[Jerod Broussard]

Raising kids is like getting pecked to death by a bunch of ducks, you say?

[Steve R.]

I came here to mention Rendezvous, but somebody beat me to it. I can't say that's my preferred way of doing it. I love the atmosphere and service there, but the ribs are just ok, imho.

Around 275 (not all that hot and fast) is the sweet spot for my stick burner, so I let it do its thing and they turn out just the way I like them.

[EdF]

Back in the early 80's before I got smokers, I had a recipe for ribs done at 325 or 350 or so, for about an hour. They actually came out pretty well. But these days, centering around 235 with some temp swings in the smoker is my method of choice. No wrap or fancy prep, just ribs with a simple rub (could be S&P). Always good.

[Troutman]

Paella ribs?

[EdF]

Troutman - those paella pans are one of the most versatile weapons in the armory. Very easy to clean, sez the potwasher.

[shify]

You are talking more about direct grilling vs. smoking. Some people still smoke but cook at higher temps (saw 275-300 vs. 225) and then you have cooking over direct heat. I've done thinner baby backs over mostly direct heat, flipping often, for around 45 minutes but prefer smoked ribs. Just two different styles. If I bought thinner baby backs (not quite shiners) i'd probably go for direct heat but would prefer buying st. louis ribs and smoke them on my PBC for 4-6 hours.

[Polarbear777]

Worst beef ribs I ever attempted to eat were direct grilled. So tough you could only just get the sauce off them. I don’t ever see that being successful.

Hot around 300 indirect makes more sense, but I like the reliability of catching a target moving a bit slower.

[Santamarina]

You can get away with hot(er) and fast(er) with baby backs, but all other cuts difinitely benefit from low-n-slow. If I’m doin babies hot and fast I’ll still cook with indirect heat, then sear at the end.

[wrgilb]

On the BGE. Raised indirect, BB's @ 325 for approximately 1 hour 20 minutes. For St.Louis style @325 for approximately 1 hour 40 minutes. Had good bite with a little tug, but pulled clean off the bone. BB's are the curved ones in the picture, SL are the straighter ones.

[jfmorris]

I spent many years cooking ribs direct over charcoal or gas, then using my offset would smoke them, but never felt good about the results until I did the 3-2-1 method (2-2-1 for baby backs). Family finally loved them! I've since learned more about ribs and temperature and fire management, and get good results without the 2 hour wrap in foil. I attribute a lot of that to now knowing not to trust the dome thermometer, even the $40 one on my offset, and to use a digital grate level thermometer to monitor the pit temperature.

Most recently, the "blasphemy" method is what I am using, where you separate the ribs before cooking, so they get rub and bark and sauce all around each rib. They cook in half the time indirect (2.5 hours), and family says they are the best yet.

I suggest you read Meathead's article about hot and fast ribs, which is the style served up by the famous Rendezvous in Memphis.

https://amazingribs.com/tested-recip...ipe-ribs-hurry

My take away is that you can cook at high heat to get done faster, but are best served by not doing the entire cook over DIRECT heat, but indirect. Unless you have a Santa Maria style grill, most of us cannot get our ribs far enough above the charcoal to do it like the Rendezvous.