Pork butt on a PBC

[jfmorris]

Thanks to all who responded. BBQ has way too many variables, and I keep trying to pigeonhole them, i.e., if x is this, then y will be that. BBQ just doesn't seem to work that way and I've got to get my head around that. Sometimes if x is this, then y will come out to be that, but don't count on it. Go with the flow. LOL.

That's exactly it - its more art and less science. You cannot go by the old rules like "x hours/minutes per pound" and predict an exact cooking time. I know from experience with a given cooker, approximately how long a cook of a type of meat will take, but always plan for an extra 2 hours with butts and brisket, if I am on a schedule, as I would rather have the meat done and held in a cooler early, rather than have dinner late! Trust me - I've done that!

About the only things I know exact times on are ribs and chicken, mostly as I always buy the same size baby backs, and same size chickens, and those are shorter cooks.

[jfmorris]

Stick burners are much drier, but even on my offset, I don't spritz butts. Just so much fat content that its self-basting. I don't think I've spritzed ribs or brisket in many years either...

[RustyHaines]

+1 jfmorris and fzxdoc for not spritzing. IMO just not needed in the PBC for any cook.

[AZ Fogey]

Thanks to all who responded. BBQ has way too many variables, and I keep trying to pigeonhole them, i.e., if x is this, then y will be that. BBQ just doesn't seem to work that way and I've got to get my head around that. Sometimes if x is this, then y will come out to be that, but don't count on it. Go with the flow. LOL.

[mountainsmoker]

Agree every cooker cooks different and every piece of meat cooks different. Your meat may have been grocery store common hog meat, while, Franklin uses one of the heritage breeds. That is just one example of what could be different.

[Steve R.]

My hunch is the more humid environment of the PBC inhibits evaporation and speeds up the cook, sort of like wrapping. When I had a PBC, I did notice less bark formation than with my other cookers, so who knows.

[fzxdoc]

pkadare , are your PBC and Traeger running at the same temps?

When I run my PBC at 275° and my WSCGC at 275°, the WSCGC powers through the stall faster, more often than not. I'm guessing it might be due to the drier environment in the Weber. You're seeing the opposite effect with your Traeger. Interesting.

K.

[fzxdoc]

...If you all wouldn't mind wading in here again, I watched Aaron Franklin cook pork butt for at least 8 hours at a steady 275° and I think the meat temped at 206°, and his piece of meat looked smaller than what I cooked. I know the PBC is a fast cooker, but I don't get why, cooking at that same steady temperature, it took an hour and half less cook time to reach the same internal temp.

Just to clarify, I'm assuming you mean that your cook was 1.5 hours shorter than Franklin's, since you noted a 6 hr. 35 min cook time for this PB.

Cook time for most smokers is based more on the thickness of the piece rather than the weight. Perhaps Franklin's piece was thicker in places.

Plus, did Franklin wrap the butt? Many folks (myself included) don't. Wrapping like you did usually shortens the cook time.

In addition, you amped your temp up to 300° the last hour or so of the cook, which also must have helped to shorten your cook time compared to Franklin's.

Kathryn

[pkadare]

Every hunk of meat and cooker are different. I too have a PBC and what I notice is that the stall time, for some reason, is far shorter on the PBC than it is on my Traeger.

[holehogg]

That looks really good Sir.
I think MMD is a rub that's hard to match let alone beat imho.

[AZ Fogey]

Thank you for all your comments. OK, no more spritzing pork butts on the PBC. Now that I think about it, almost all of the pitmasters on YouTube that recommend spritzing are cooking on stick burners which, I think, is a much drier environment.

If you all wouldn't mind wading in here again, I watched Aaron Franklin cook pork butt for at least 8 hours at a steady 275° and I think the meat temped at 206°, and his piece of meat looked smaller than what I cooked. I know the PBC is a fast cooker, but I don't get why, cooking at that same steady temperature, it took an hour and half less cook time to reach the same internal temp.

[jfmorris]

Great looking cook from here!

As others have said, main change, aside from reducing the number of wood chunks based on your smoke preference, would be to eliminate spritzing altogether. Boston butts simply don't need it as they have such a high fat content. Plus it hurts the bark, cools things down (slowing the cook), and potentially in a PBC environment snuffs out some coals from the liquid dripping.

I used to spritz many years ago - mostly with apple juice. It's just what I saw people doing online. Ribs, butts, etc. I've not done it in years, and think my BBQ results are better for it, among other things.

[JeffJ]

I use very little wood when cooking with the PBC. It tends to get overpowered by all of that grill smoke from the drippings hitting the fire.

[fzxdoc]

The important thing is that your guests were pleased, AZ Fogey . I bet it tasted great, despite your misgivings. After all, we're all our own worst critics.

I agree with mountainsmoker about the spritzing. The PBC generates a very moist environment on its own, so more moisture might be counterproductive. Plus it might wash off some of the rub as the bark is setting.

And you're right, that might have been way too much wood. One or two (4 to 6 oz) pieces are more than enough for a 6 hour cook.

I'm with you on the fact that MMD and pork is a match made in heaven. Hard to find a better rub, but we all keep experimenting. That's part of the fun of smoking.

Kathryn

[Sweaty Paul]

Looks delicious