Originally Posted by ---k---
It seems like this thread is having the opposite effect. My premise is that it has been demonstrated that a good cook can get good results with kbb. My humble opinion is that blaming the charcoal for bad results is like blaming the type of cooker. It is the cook, not the charcoal. The type of charcoal is probably one of those last 5% things.
I can accept all the personal preferences for using lump. Ash, heat, belief of taste are all good, acceptable reasons to use lump. You like lump, I got no issues with you. I use both myself.
But, those that blame a drum or such not working correctly on not using lump, well, I think you got a few screws loose.
Where are all those kbb defenders we normally see pop-up?
Since I just bought 510 pounds of it, I must be happy with it -- or nuts.
I only smell bad smells when my KBB is lighting up. Once it is up to temperature and burning efficiently, the smoke smells fine. The KBB is only providing the heat for my cooks. The wood chunks provide the smoke flavors.
If my friends are too busy shoving que into their pie-holes to talk to each other, I figure the charcoal didn't mess anything up.
I do use lump for some of my grilling. It is especially good for steaks. But, like my cookers and tools, it is just a means to an end. If I use KBB ten times with good results, and the eleventh time, the food tastes bad, how can I blame the KBB? Same goes for any fuel.
If I fark up a cook, it's my fault.
Well, sometimes it actually is the beer's fault, which I still
say is more important than the charcoal -- in the right quantities.