So I recently bought a sous vide and for my initial cook I found a steal of a deal on 1" thick bone-in New York steaks. For comparison purposes, I also cooked one on my pellet smoker (RecTec 680) using reverse sear. Both were dry brined about 6 hours before the cook, but I didn't use any other spices. The sous-vide steak was "bathed" at 130 for an hour. Its counterpart was smoked at 225 for about 45 minutes. Both were seared on a Weber Genesis II with the flat side of the grill grates. Long story short, the smoked then reverse seared steak, with it's awesome smoky flavor blew the sous-vide steak out of the water. I can't see this being a close race, unless I totally blow the timing on the smoke and overcooked the meat. Granted, the sous-vide wasn't bad, and if I was comparing it to a just grilled (not smoked) version, it might come out on top, but I'm having trouble guessing what scenarios the sous-vide will outduel a smoker/reverse sear. Does it need a thicker or tougher cut? Or do I need to interject a smoking phase either before or after the sous-vide phase?
Edit: While the reverse sear was the better tasting steak for the main meal, the sous vide steak has still been excellent for leftovers. The perfect done-ness across the section has kept the meat extremely tender, where as sometimes cold leftovers firm up a bit. I have really enjoyed this steak in salads or as a cold-cut with cheese/crackers
Note: Prior to the cook, I had checked out the sous-vide-Q links and was surprised to learn the recommended sequence was basically 1) sous-vide, 2) ice bath 3) delay up to 2 days if needed, 4) smoke 5) reverse sear. I didn't think this would be a fair method for my comparison purposes, since it takes so much more time, which is why I went with the above comparison instead. While this sequence is supposed to yield the best result, I thought the sous-vide was supposed to save me time and help ensure a perfectly cooked meal. If I'm still doing the smoke/reverse sear sequence anyway, what does the sous-vide bring to the table?
Any & all thoughts appreciated. Thanks!
Edit: While the reverse sear was the better tasting steak for the main meal, the sous vide steak has still been excellent for leftovers. The perfect done-ness across the section has kept the meat extremely tender, where as sometimes cold leftovers firm up a bit. I have really enjoyed this steak in salads or as a cold-cut with cheese/crackers
Note: Prior to the cook, I had checked out the sous-vide-Q links and was surprised to learn the recommended sequence was basically 1) sous-vide, 2) ice bath 3) delay up to 2 days if needed, 4) smoke 5) reverse sear. I didn't think this would be a fair method for my comparison purposes, since it takes so much more time, which is why I went with the above comparison instead. While this sequence is supposed to yield the best result, I thought the sous-vide was supposed to save me time and help ensure a perfectly cooked meal. If I'm still doing the smoke/reverse sear sequence anyway, what does the sous-vide bring to the table?
Any & all thoughts appreciated. Thanks!
Comment