Prime Rib Roast, why so pink/rare?

thirtydaZe

thirtydaZe

Full Fledged Farker
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
481
Reaction score
153
Points
43
Location
Omaha
Last night i did a 2nd attempt at a prime rib roast, small, boneless.

My first one was 1.85#, the one last night was 2.02#.

This time i went to 137* IT, in hopes to have a more "medium" result.

Anyhow, i cooked both fast, around 275*-300*, using oak splits exclusively as fuel.

Here is the one from new years, done IT 120*
IMAGE_F0FDD935-88C6-416F-B8AE-5CB83397F738.JPG


Here is the one from last night, done IT 137*
IMAGE_23229B94-E12E-46F9-B791-79EC3F845DBE.JPG


Are they looking a little rare, does the smoke cause a little of this effect, or is my next plan to cook these until 145*?
 
You cooked fast, so you will have a larger temperature gradient through the roast. Note that the outer edges are much more done than the interior on that second roast. The temperature throughout that roast is going to vary. And you are going by whatever temperature your probe happened to be at. Unless you are dead center, that center is going to be rarer than what you're going for. A couple of things to note. These are very small roasts. I've cooked steaks bigger than these. How long did you let these rest. Medium rare is between 130-140*. If you let these rest, covered in foil, the temp will continue to climb in the center, typically about 10* for a roast. Did you bring these up to room temp before you cooked them? You'll get a much more uniform result if you take them out of the fridge an hour beforehand to let them come up to room temperature.

That first roast is on the rare side, which is exactly what I'd expect if you took it off at IT120*. It will still be rare after the rest. The second one is a very nice medium rare. I would've expected that to be done more at IT 137*, so I'm guessing you have a thermometer placement issue with that. The last roast I did, I stuck it with two thermometers. There was a 10* difference between the two due solely to thermometer placement!
 
I don't see anything wrong with either of them. I do understand about people having preferences though, and there is nothing wrong with that.

What kind of meat thermo are you using? I don't think that second one looks like 137.
 
Gore said:
You cooked fast, so you will have a larger temperature gradient through the roast. Note that the outer edges are much more done than the interior on that second roast. The temperature throughout that roast is going to vary. And you are going by whatever temperature your probe happened to be at. Unless you are dead center, that center is going to be rarer than what you're going for. A couple of things to note. These are very small roasts. I've cooked steaks bigger than these. How long did you let these rest. Medium rare is between 130-140*. If you let these rest, covered in foil, the temp will continue to climb in the center, typically about 10* for a roast. Did you bring these up to room temp before you cooked them? You'll get a much more uniform result if you take them out of the fridge an hour beforehand to let them come up to room temperature.

That first roast is on the rare side, which is exactly what I'd expect if you took it off at IT120*. It will still be rare after the rest. The second one is a very nice medium rare. I would've expected that to be done more at IT 137*, so I'm guessing you have a thermometer placement issue with that. The last roast I did, I stuck it with two thermometers. There was a 10* difference between the two due solely to thermometer placement!
Click to expand...

yeah i had it room temp before placing on the pit.

had actually poked it a few times with a thermapen and was happy with what i was seeing.

on a rib roast, be it large or small, would you suggest a cooking temp closer to the 225-250 for better results?
 
I prefer cooking at a lower temp - 200 - in order to get uniform doneness throughout. I think yer PR's look good, but if you want more done, you can either cook it longer (I wouldn't suggest raising the cook temp, but you can if you want different doneness throughout the roast, which can be a good thing when cooking for a lot of people).

I think a great way to bring up a cut of PR is to put a slice in a pan of warm jus or beef stock for a little bit - that's good eating right there. :thumb:
 
To me, that second roast looks like 137* as it is. If you told me you took it off at 137* and then rested it for 10 minutes before cutting into it, I would be surprised if that is your outcome -- did you rest it? To me, what you show is a VERY good example of medium rare. I do not necessarily recommend cooking at a lower temperature. I think it is easier to get a more uniform result and less chance of error, but the end results are different. I really like and appreciate the outer cap being cooked more. It gives it a nice flavor.

Usually, the bigger the steak (roast), the lower the temperature I cook at.
 
Gore said:
To me, that second roast looks like 137* as it is. If you told me you took it off at 137* and then rested it for 10 minutes before cutting into it, I would be surprised if that is your outcome -- did you rest it? To me, what you show is a VERY good example of medium rare. I do not necessarily recommend cooking at a lower temperature. I think it is easier to get a more uniform result and less chance of error, but the end results are different. I really like and appreciate the outer cap being cooked more. It gives it a nice flavor.

Usually, the bigger the steak (roast), the lower the temperature I cook at.
Click to expand...


rested 30 min. FTC. which is also why i was so surprised at the color.
 
I would bet two things, thermo placement is off and too hot of a cook. Those are very small roasts, I would be tempted to cook them more as steaks. Which means I would cook them closer to pulling temperature. A 2 pound roast will not have a load of retianed heat, it will start to cool quickly unless in a warmer.

I do not cook a 2lb roast by thermometer anymore, I use the poke method, I cook until when I poke the eye in the middle with my finger, there is a slight resistance, if you hold your hand out, fingers spread to the max and poke the heel of your hand at the base of your thumb, you want that feel on the roast.
 
Lots of good thoughts and advice above.

The bottom line is:

However you cook your roast, and however you measure your temperature,
you will need to cook to a higher internal temp to get the results you want usng the process you use now.

I would be tempted to just do what you are doing and make that temperature adjustment.
I know I have moved up to about 150 IT to make my family happy and it is still warm pink, juicy, and tender.

But then, changing the process as suggested above might be a good thing too. :-D

TIM
 
When I do mine, and I've done a lot of them, I will cook at 325 on BGE direct cook for 75 minutes flipping halfway. This is Christmas pulled at 110. We do like it rare.

DSC00487.jpg
 
I recently did a reverse sear on a 1.2lb prime rib steak (so pretty close to your roasts size wise). I had the et732 probe in the meat and pulled it at 102 and let it rest while I raised my heat for the sear. While most people will say the 10 degree rest heat rise, I only saw an additional 4 degrees on my steak (as I left the probe in until I was ready to sear) , so if you were expecting a fair degree of carry over cook to bring you up to heat that may have been your issue. I would say that with skinny meats and cooler surrounding environments, it is probably best to not factor in too much carry over cook.
 
Photo 2 looks like a good rare - medium rare to me.

I pull mine at 130 and let them rest.

lthe ower the temps, the more even the cooked product will be.. Hig temps will yield a more well done ring along the perimeter witha rarere center.. Same for cold meats that have not equalized. (thatsd why we take themout of the fridge.

cooking at Lower temps on a meat that starts with even temps throughout will give even cooking throughout.
 
The_Kapn said:
Lots of good thoughts and advice above.

The bottom line is:

However you cook your roast, and however you measure your temperature,
you will need to cook to a higher internal temp to get the results you want usng the process you use now.

I would be tempted to just do what you are doing and make that temperature adjustment.
I know I have moved up to about 150 IT to make my family happy and it is still warm pink, juicy, and tender.

But then, changing the process as suggested above might be a good thing too. :-D

TIM
Click to expand...

Yes, if you dont like the med-rare (use this temp to finnish on the grill)
however, I have done roasts at pit temp of 250 as not as much shrinkage, or as high as 550 on my Backwoods..the higher temps give you a nice bark...the fat is a beautifull tastey crispy when cooked on high heat..but I also use 6 to 17 pound roast, so adjust a small one by finnishing in sealed resting pan...also if using high heat, dont let the fat drip on lower plate put in a catch pan under roast away from heat and STAND OFF TO SIDE of cooker when opening door, I have had the heat flash the grease...but the taste is the best...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

okiej
First Prime Rib for family Christmas
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
Smoked&Baked
S
NCGrimbo
Making Au Jus with prime rib bones.
Replies
5
Views
4K
Itsdone
I
D
Any advice for beef “blade “ roast for pulling?
Replies
6
Views
551
Debmar
D
T
Should I wet age PRIME rib grilling whole roast?
Replies
2
Views
390
TurboLover
T
Headgear
Ribeye Roast Last Evening
Replies
13
Views
651
Headgear
Headgear
Back
Top