To Brine or not to Brine? That is the question...

Kenny Rogers said:
Interesting expirament, and thank you for sharing!

I gotta say though, I don't brine my ribs, and I would NEVER cook them that fast. Maybe brining helps accelerate the cooking process? So the brined ribs cooked just right, but the rubbed ribs didn't?

I think the true test of this would be to cook brined ribs as you described, and then cook the rubbed ribs using a more traditional method.

Again, thanks for gettin' my noggin thinkin! They call me Kenny Rogers, cause I like to gamble, by trying new cooking methods! I may have to do this test as I described above!
Click to expand...

You need to try the high heat method before you make a claim like that. More traditional doesn't make it better. The 3-2-1 method is really way too long to cook ribs. I did it for years, but I make better ribs, in much shorter time. A lot of what has improved my grilling is challenging the traditional mantra and testing it against other methods and I've found that many times traditional isn't always the best. But there's only one way to find out. Saying things like you would never do whatever is not the way to go. You need keep an open mind...
 
blues_n_cues said:
brining ribs & then rubbing overnight definitely makes for a "hammy" rib in my experiences.
Click to expand...

I didn't brine for the longest time because someone I respect a great deal said the same thing. It took me maybe another two years when I first considered it before I finally did it.

If they do become hammy, then 100% of the people who have done this taste test have preferred the hammy ribs. One thing I do, is I don't brine for more than about 12 hours. Maybe that reduces the hamminess, or that I don't change the brine as one would do with a typical brine.

As for someone who mentioned the saltiness and salty commercial rubs, that's an easy answer. Go with rubs without salt, or make your own without the salt...
 
GrillinFool said:
You need to try the high heat method before you make a claim like that. More traditional doesn't make it better. The 3-2-1 method is really way too long to cook ribs. I did it for years, but I make better ribs, in much shorter time. A lot of what has improved my grilling is challenging the traditional mantra and testing it against other methods and I've found that many times traditional isn't always the best. But there's only one way to find out. Saying things like you would never do whatever is not the way to go. You need keep an open mind...
Click to expand...

I don't do my ribs 3-2-1, that is one sure way to overcook ribs. HOWEVER I DO cook my ribs for about 4.5 hrs, using a modified Harry Soo method.
And yes, I would NEVER expect my ribs to be done that fast. I cook them until they're done, not according to any chart.

I think it's a bit presumptuous to expect your ribs, using two different methods, to be done at the exact same time. That's all I'm sayin
 
GrillinFool said:
You need to try the high heat method before you make a claim like that. More traditional doesn't make it better. The 3-2-1 method is really way too long to cook ribs. I did it for years, but I make better ribs, in much shorter time. A lot of what has improved my grilling is challenging the traditional mantra and testing it against other methods and I've found that many times traditional isn't always the best. But there's only one way to find out. Saying things like you would never do whatever is not the way to go. You need keep an open mind...
Click to expand...

Grillin' Fool, I wouldn't exactly call 275-300* for loinbacks the "high heat method", but I wouldn't chide someone about "keeping an open mind" when they've already told you thanks and that they just might try your method, either. Actually, in all due respect and gentleness, you might want to save the bbq lecture for blogs or those more deserving. It never hurt a Yankee one bit to try good ole' southern, gentleman-like manners. :thumb: Sorry if that's offensive, but just trying to be real here, and I'm also just really trying to be helpful...honestly. Please forgive me if any offense is taken, and thanks again for the method. :pray:
 
Kenny Rogers said:
I don't do my ribs 3-2-1, that is one sure way to overcook ribs. HOWEVER I DO cook my ribs for about 4.5 hrs, using a modified Harry Soo method.
And yes, I would NEVER expect my ribs to be done that fast. I cook them until they're done, not according to any chart.

I think it's a bit presumptuous to expect your ribs, using two different methods, to be done at the exact same time. That's all I'm sayin
Click to expand...

I'm not saying to go by any chart either. Sorry if it came across that way. Although, I'm pretty consistent with 275-300 for BBR's right at 2 hours to be perfect. Not fall off the bone, but I consider that to be overdone. I throw them in foil with some fluid for an extra 30-40 minutes if my guests want them FOTB.

I took two slabs of 12-13 bones each that were very similar in size and weight. I shortened the slab on the thick end to just 8 bones for each, as that's how many tasters I had. While one was brined and the other wasn't, both were perfectly done at around the 2 hour mark. I'm not entirely sure if it was 2 hours and 10 minutes or 110 minutes as I'd done a little drinking that day. I judged doneness on pull back from the bone and the flex of the slab.

Brining doesn't alter the cooking time to any degree that I know of. I don't recall anyone telling me that since a turkey was brined to cook it longer or shorter based on it being soaked in a salt solution.

I cooked them side by side on the same grill with the same smoke and the same heat. I'm not sure how I could've made the cooking process more uniform, which is the goal here, not cooking them two different ways because then I wouldn't be able to determine if the difference came from the brine/not brine, or different cooking techniques...
 
GrillinFool said:
...I'm pretty consistent with 275-300 for BBR's right at 2 hours to be perfect....

...While one was brined and the other wasn't, both were perfectly done at around the 2 hour mark. I'm not entirely sure if it was 2 hours and 10 minutes or 110 minutes as I'd done a little drinking that day. I judged doneness on pull back from the bone and the flex of the slab.

Brining doesn't alter the cooking time to any degree that I know of. I don't recall anyone telling me that since a turkey was brined to cook it longer or shorter based on it being soaked in a salt solution.
Click to expand...

Don't know the exact size of your "BBR's", but pullback and drape of ribs when lifting with tongs is what I'll call "restaurant tenderness" since most places aren't gonna see that as a sign to START checking for true tenderness with a toothpick.

As to brining and poultry, yes, it speeds up the cook a bit, and like I posted earlier, in my experience the same goes with enhanced ribs. I believe I learned about brined poultry cooking a little faster here or on the bullet site.
 
I don't think you can compare the processes and have a side to side test like that. As Kenny Rogers said above, you've enhanced your own ribs and cooked them in 2 hours. The other ribs were prepared convenionally and still cooked in 2 hours. I'd prefer the brined ones in that situation as well. Conventionally prepared ribs, cooked for 2 hours are just never really tender, no matter what. Everything else you've done is fine, but you really do need to compare the two after cooking them both in the prime conditions for the preparation of each style. If you don't you will always have one kind of rib that does not meet expectations.

Cheers!

Bill
 
Not to say your experiment is invalid, worthless, wrong, or any negative comment, but rubbing the ribs over night with a liberal coat of salt could be considered a dry brine.

I think there is more than one method that can be used to achieve the same results. Thank you for sharing.
 
SmokinAussie said:
I don't think you can compare the processes and have a side to side test like that. As Kenny Rogers said above, you've enhanced your own ribs and cooked them in 2 hours. The other ribs were prepared convenionally and still cooked in 2 hours. I'd prefer the brined ones in that situation as well. Conventionally prepared ribs, cooked for 2 hours are just never really tender, no matter what. Everything else you've done is fine, but you really do need to compare the two after cooking them both in the prime conditions for the preparation of each style. If you don't you will always have one kind of rib that does not meet expectations.

Cheers!

Bill
Click to expand...

Again I disagree. I've been doing the 2 hour method on untreated or unenhanced ribs for a lot longer than I've been brining them. I need to have King from here chime in on a couple things. One he was skeptical of the 2 hour method big time. Two, he's had the 2 hour ribs. Three, he was there for the taste test.

I keep hearing there more than one way of doing things here but nobody seems to think 2 hours at 300 is one of them. I thought the Brethren were more open minded. All you gotta do is try it...
 
I like to think that I AM open-minded, and that's why I've already tried smoking ribs at 300*. I have no idea how long they took though, although I suspect it was longer than two hours. Tenderness trumps time. What I remember most though was a chewy bark, and so I try to cook ribs 250-275* unless I foil.
 
GrillinFool said:
Again I disagree. I've been doing the 2 hour method on untreated or unenhanced ribs for a lot longer than I've been brining them. I need to have King from here chime in on a couple things. One he was skeptical of the 2 hour method big time. Two, he's had the 2 hour ribs. Three, he was there for the taste test.

I keep hearing there more than one way of doing things here but nobody seems to think 2 hours at 300 is one of them. I thought the Brethren were more open minded. All you gotta do is try it...
Click to expand...

i've done the anti-bobby flay throwdown hot & fast kettle bb's @375 for about 2 hours although i didn't brine them. i've also done ribs @ 275 & a quick sear @ the end for just a char....

it just depends what you like & what works for your guests...:thumb:

i've been in every kind of competition from the battle of the bands to car shows to surf contests.. once you slap the "title" of judge on someone they tend to forget everything else but prestige objectivity.
 
GrillinFool said:
Again I disagree. I've been doing the 2 hour method on untreated or unenhanced ribs for a lot longer than I've been brining them. I need to have King from here chime in on a couple things. One he was skeptical of the 2 hour method big time. Two, he's had the 2 hour ribs. Three, he was there for the taste test.

I keep hearing there more than one way of doing things here but nobody seems to think 2 hours at 300 is one of them. I thought the Brethren were more open minded. All you gotta do is try it...
Click to expand...

You've got a persuasive argument, I do agree on that. To be perfectly honest, you're way more experienced than I will ever be and I am looking at the two processes more from a chemical and molecular perspective. The breakdown of proteins from the unbrined ribs should take longer than 2 hours even at 300. They'll be cooked, but simply can't be as tender and juicy as the brined ribs that have had a process of protein degradation occuring overnight in the brine.

I sure can't argue with your position however. Doing it, and tasting it is the real proof. Mind you, please undertand I am VERY open minded to new ways of doing things. As an Australian, I'm learning so much from being on this forum. When I do BBQ for my friends and family, trust me... I'm breaking all the rules of what is considered BBQ in Australia.

I've got no problem at all in testing your recipe and theory, but for the immediate future, I do want to get better at true "low and slow" BBQ before I start experimenting as you have done.

Cheers!

Bill
 
i've done the 2-3 hour cook at 300+ on my kettle.

the ribs were technically "done" and they were very good.
I've done them this way for years....until i got a smoker and tried low and slow methods and REALLY understood what 'probe tender' meant

i don't know if my wife would let me try the old method again, and I don't know if i'd argue with her :)
 
Think of this way. Charlie Vergos makes a mint off ribs that he cooks for 1 hour. I've replicated his method and they are indeed done, but don't have the smoke that I like. They aren't fall off the bone, but I don't want that.

All I can say is that my experiments have produced a lot of converts and I've yet to have someone pick the unbrined rib. Next time I have an afternoon to myself, I'll drop it down to 200 and do them side by side just to test that aspect of it.
 
With all due respect to my buddy, GrillinFool, the mad scientist...everybody in this thread has an open mind, otherwise I don't think they would be part of the discussion.

But I have to man up and admit that brined ribs are better than unbrined. It's my opinion and I'm judging by taste and tenderness. I'm not saying these are the best ribs on earth and I'm not saying these are better than low and slow (my preferred method), but under the constraints of the comparison, brine wins...no question.

Did the ribs taste amazing: Yes
Will I try this method?: Yes
Is it easy to do in a pinch for guests?: Yes
Is it better than my ribs?: ????

It's not for everybody, but I recommend at least giving it a try.
 
What I find interesting also is the rub. Pumpkin spice? Sounds to me like a crazy but intriguing experience. Did you like it? And did you get enough spice from the black pepper and white pepper? Would you add some cayenne next time?
 
I use brine on my comp ribs and it has increased my scores. It allows me to get the sweetness down in the meat so that our final glaze doesn't have to be very sweet and the flavors are layered.

I have always brined my pork loins when I cut them and pan fry. Yesterday I had half brined and had pulled down another loin because some freinds were going to stop by and I wanted enough fried pork sandwiches for all. I had brined a once frozen enhanced Tyson loin and also used a fresh UN-frozen enhanced loin I picked up from the store yesterday. The first loin brined for 24 hours.

HUGE, HUGE difference. The pork loin brined...cut with a fork and deep flavor.
The fresh un-brined loin...decent taste and not even half of the moisture. I would never cook pork chops or loins anyway without brining first. You can bring flavor to the meat if you want or just moisture. It's very versitile.

I find the same thing in my ribs, chicken and butts that sit in brine as soon as meat inspection is over. These have won GC & RC in some smaller 20-35 team comps. However i do know many win without brining...or at least that's what they say??????
 
Killersmoke said:
What I find interesting also is the rub. Pumpkin spice? Sounds to me like a crazy but intriguing experience. Did you like it? And did you get enough spice from the black pepper and white pepper? Would you add some cayenne next time?
Click to expand...


Dude! Doctor it up however you like...I used pumpkin spice rub so far on ribs, pork butt, and chops...It's good! Don't ask why, it just works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

halfcocked
Dry Brine Question
Replies
6
Views
561
halfcocked
halfcocked
S
Buckboard ham
2
Replies
24
Views
719
stickman
S
H
Who likes Chick Fil A?
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
bonz50
bonz50
B
Natural Experiment-dry brining
Replies
17
Views
819
Newglide
N
BuffettFan
Harvest Brine, do I still season as usual?
Replies
12
Views
592
Big George's BBQ
Big George's BBQ
Back
Top