IMT for wrapping meat w/out further cooking

D

Dave Russell

Guest
I goofed up recently on some pork butts and ended up with two out of the three dry. The first mistake was in not monitoring the IMT of any of them. (I guess it's all been good for the last few butt cooks, so I got lazy.)

I took a peak in the door at about 10 hours and the bone wasn't poking out much in the one on the bottom, so I figured they had a couple more hrs. to go. Anyway, needless to say, two hours later the fat caps are left on the grate and I need three hands to keep 'em together....So I've already made two mistakes that I know of....

Anyway, I checked with my thermapen and they're all at 200-205. Last big mistake (that I know of): I double wrap all in foil and cooler for two hours or so.

My first queastion is this: Assuming you take your butts or brisket all the way like that, what temp should you let them cool down to before holding in a cooler? I didn't need any more juices to sizzle and ooze out...When I unwrapped to pull, two of the three didn't even have much grease in the foil, though, so I don't know.:confused:

I think I've heard that fat doesn't render until 185 or 190 or something like that, but is that the deciding factor? What would YOU do? It all got eaten, but it sure wasn't my best, and I want to know how to avoid dry butts in the future.

I guess another way to look at it is this: Is the best thing to start checking at 180 IMT for a loose shoulder blade and foil as soon as it's loose? That temp seems to be no higher than 190 for me if I remember correctly. It will surely come up several degrees and fat will continue to render for a few hours if held hot. Right? What do you do?

Any help would be really appreciated!
Dave
wsm, wotg, wots, uds, wsj, char-griller w/sfb

PS:
WSM users, FYI, my wsm was 250-275 over night and the eight pound butts were (over)done in less than twelve hours. I used Stubbs and water pan and didn't get woke up until 6:30 when the Maverick beeped since temp went over 275. I'm now using the Brinkman pan, and I've learned that if cooking in this range the water will boil off much faster than if cooking at 225-250. (That makes sense, but I'm saying that the higher simmering temp is probably a little more a determining factor than the time.) It's ok though. I had topped it off the night before at about 11 something and still had enough water the next morning to keep the grease from burning, just not enough to keep temps down without shutting the vents some. (Oh, and the rub was Dr. BBQ's big time rub and the color was mahogany and texture really nice. My butt that I cooked recently at 275-300 had some black spots and not so good looking bark.)
 
I usually wrap my butts once the bark is where I want it and the temp is somewhere over 160-165. Once I can probe and it slides like warm butter, I pull them and wrap in another layer of foil. The foil will hold all that yummy juice in. Then I cooler for at least an hour but sometimes several hours. The meat will hold its temp for a very long time. Once you have pulled the butts, the juice can be added back (some people strain the fat out) to the meat for more moisture and flavor.

As far as a temp to let them cool down to, I cannot give you a good answer. I do know that I usually have to wear gloves because the butt is still too hot to handle.
 
bbqbull said:
This is from KCquers Roadmap found at the top of this section.

http://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8351

When I do butts I foil them around 165 to 170 internal temp and I put a little apple juice with it.
Seal up foil and I run them up to 200 + degrees before I cooler them to rest.
Click to expand...

Thanks a bunch. Do you look for that 200+ reading by leaving a probe stuck in one while in the foil or do you just open occasionally and check with a thermapen? I've learned that I can get 200 degree readings while in the foil with briskets and they still not quite be ready yet.

From reading, it seems that some of the foilers remove from the cooker at about 200, while the ones that don't foil til resting, pull closer to 190.
 
colonel00 said:
I usually wrap my butts once the bark is where I want it and the temp is somewhere over 160-165. Once I can probe and it slides like warm butter, I pull them and wrap in another layer of foil. The foil will hold all that yummy juice in. Then I cooler for at least an hour but sometimes several hours. The meat will hold its temp for a very long time. Once you have pulled the butts, the juice can be added back (some people strain the fat out) to the meat for more moisture and flavor.

As far as a temp to let them cool down to, I cannot give you a good answer. I do know that I usually have to wear gloves because the butt is still too hot to handle.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tips. I have foiled butts several times, but usually only foil briskets. I do realize it's a much better way to assure moist bbq, though.

I assume you don't go by temps after foiling. I wish there was a way to keep from having to keep opening all the butt's foil up to check for tenderness. That's probably one reason I like to foil after cooking only, more convenient going by temps and bone looseness for doneness than having to open foil up, especially when two butts are on the bottom and hard to get to.
 
I stab my thermopen into the butt itself right through the sealed up foil.
I usually do that near the top so none of the juices leak out the hole.
 
hi dave,
i cook on a stokered WSM 22.5.
for butts, i try to stay as simple as possibe. bone in 5 to 8 pounders, 225 lid/250 stoker temp, for at most 8 hours, no foil. can't really tell you temp cuz i don't check it.
i probe for butta and wiggle the bone.
i haven't had a dry one...yet!(now boneless prepared the same way was a disaster)although i've probably only cooked like 10 this summer.
BUT, from time to time the bark can get a tad dark without the foiling step.

oh and they vent/cool for about 5 minutes while i fumble with butcherpaper wrapping before coolering them for a good 4-5 hours. still can barely hold them with a naked hand.
 
Last edited:
Dave Russell said:
Thanks for the tips. I have foiled butts several times, but usually only foil briskets. I do realize it's a much better way to assure moist bbq, though.

I assume you don't go by temps after foiling. I wish there was a way to keep from having to keep opening all the butt's foil up to check for tenderness. That's probably one reason I like to foil after cooking only, more convenient going by temps and bone looseness for doneness than having to open foil up, especially when two butts are on the bottom and hard to get to.
Click to expand...

Just like bbqbull said, I still monitor my temps by just sticking the probe through the foil. I should only have to make one hole. Once the temp gets up to around 200* I will check occasionally for doneness.
 
boogiesnap said:
hi dave,
i cook on a stokered WSM 22.5.
for butts, i try to stay as simple as possibe. bone in 5 to 8 pounders, 225 lid/250 stoker temp, for at most 8 hours, no foil. can't really tell you temp cuz i don't check it.
i probe for butta and wiggle the bone.
i haven't had a dry one...yet!(now boneless prepared the same way was a disaster)although i've probably only cooked like 10 this summer.
BUT, from time to time the bark can get a tad dark without the foiling step.

oh and they vent/cool for about 5 minutes while i fumble with butcherpaper wrapping before coolering them for a good 4-5 hours. still can barely hold them with a naked hand.
Click to expand...

What do you think your actual cooking temp is? Eight hours isn't that long, or do you slice instead of pull? I agree on the way you check, though. I usually monitor temps to have an idea how they're progressing and when to start checking.
 
thats an interesting question dave.
i've only had the WSM for a couple months and the 1st few cooks i did not have the stoker. i also cooked lonslo exclusively, 225*. now i cook only butts @ 225*.
now, to answer your question. the first few cooks i used the OEM lid therm reading 225* to cook. they ALWAYS were done WAY faster than i expected or read or had experienced in my offset. same with st. louis spares. 8 and 3-4 hours respectively.
now comes along the stoker...set at 225* and let her rip. hmmm lid says only like 200*, crank up stoker to 250* and bango lid temp says 225*!

so, i had been cooking a hotter than i thought resulting in the faster cooking times.

also, and possibly more importantly is the design behind the WSM(which i don't know the how/why/science behind it) that can lead to a quicker cooking time. i have read that it acts naturally very simliar to a convection oven, which cooks food much faster(and better cuz it moves the air all around the food). add a stoker fan and boom, you've got some "fast" and tastey cue.

i slice the MM, the wife won't eat anything else since its discovery, and pull chunks, not shred, by hand, the rest.

i'd go with the stoker therm at the grate being the actual cooking temp.
its about 25 degrees hotter than the lid reading. BUT, this changes and become less of a difference the later in the cook. don't know why.
 
boogiesnap said:
thats an interesting question dave.
i've only had the WSM for a couple months and the 1st few cooks i did not have the stoker. i also cooked lonslo exclusively, 225*. now i cook only butts @ 225*.
now, to answer your question. the first few cooks i used the OEM lid therm reading 225* to cook. they ALWAYS were done WAY faster than i expected or read or had experienced in my offset. same with st. louis spares. 8 and 3-4 hours respectively.
now comes along the stoker...set at 225* and let her rip. hmmm lid says only like 200*, crank up stoker to 250* and bango lid temp says 225*!

so, i had been cooking a hotter than i thought resulting in the faster cooking times.

also, and possibly more importantly is the design behind the WSM(which i don't know the how/why/science behind it) that can lead to a quicker cooking time. i have read that it acts naturally very simliar to a convection oven, which cooks food much faster(and better cuz it moves the air all around the food). add a stoker fan and boom, you've got some "fast" and tastey cue.

i slice the MM, the wife won't eat anything else since its discovery, and pull chunks, not shred, by hand, the rest.

i'd go with the stoker therm at the grate being the actual cooking temp.
its about 25 degrees hotter than the lid reading. BUT, this changes and become less of a difference the later in the cook. don't know why.
Click to expand...

Gothcha there. I bet the stoker fan makes the cook faster, and you're not taking as far as we do in the south, but it's cool. I'm definately not taking them as far as I did last time anymore. Thanks for the info!
 
as an addition, if you take the data i've gathered(well just stumbled on and remebered)
that the gap between the stoker temp and the lid temp changes over the cook, it would mean that in a WSM:
if you maintain 225* lid temp for the duration of the cook you are AT SOME POINT actually increasing the temp by 25 degrees or more, which could result in less than desirable results.

i certainly don't have anywhere near enough experience to back this up, but i have READ that it is preferable to DECREASE temp later in the cook than increase.

it has something to do with collagen/moisture/fat breakdown/retention/render, i think.
 
boogiesnap said:
as an addition, if you take the data i've gathered(well just stumbled on and remebered)
that the gap between the stoker temp and the lid temp changes over the cook, it would mean that in a WSM:
if you maintain 225* lid temp for the duration of the cook you are AT SOME POINT actually increasing the temp by 25 degrees or more, which could result in less than desirable results.

i certainly don't have anywhere near enough experience to back this up, but i have READ that it is preferable to DECREASE temp later in the cook than increase.

it has something to do with collagen/moisture/fat breakdown/retention/render, i think.
Click to expand...

Man, I have no clue about temp ramps and sub-boiling point cooks and such.....but I guess the idea of a decrease in temp is to slow the rate that the fat is rendering...sort of the idea of the sub-boiling point cook. I've heard some say that you should lower the temp if you hear the fat sizzling.

I'm probably way off track, though, but that's sort of why I was wondering how much you should let a fully cooked butt cool before wrapping it if you didn't want it to cook anymore.

Anyway, I'm trying to wrap my brain around what you said. I know that at the first of the cook when the meat's still cool, the lid gauge is off the most, probably as much as 30 too low. That differential gets less as the meat warms up, right? So if it says you're at 235, you're only a few over 200 at the start. Moving several hours later, it says 235, and.... yep, you're right, but I really don't think it's enough of a temp increase to matter. I like to fill the cooker up, so I don't go by grate temps. I measure at the vent.

Thanks for the observations!
Dave
 
To begin with, I inject my pork butts. Blow 'em up like a basketball before you cook 'em.

I don't foil. I just bring them to 195F and they're done. If I am going to pull them that day, I would probably wrap them and put them in a cooler or Cambro to hold temps, letting the juices redistribute.

Nobody has ever called my pulled pork dry. Not one time ever.
 
hmm, checking at the vent, thats a good point dave. i might give that a try and see what readings i get.

i agree in general that a few degrees here and there won't make much of a diff in the end, really. its just good to know the cooker and what it is actually doing, as i'm sure you know already.

the only real issue would be is if lid temp says 225 and you're actualy only at 200 or less. not much cooking or smoke penetration going on there.
 
boogiesnap;1362397 the only real issue would be is if lid temp says 225 and you're actualy only at 200 or less. not much cooking or smoke penetration going on there.[/QUOTE said:
Oh, you're getting smoke and cooking, but it's gonna be a long cook. A few folks cook at 200-215, trying to keep below the boiling point. These folks are the TRUE lownslow cooks, I guess. A place in Mobile Al cooks pork shoulders for 30 hrs and ribs for 12. I've never had 'em, but hear their bbq is fine. Maybe one day I'll try lownslow.
Click to expand...
 
fair enough. i would, however, consider that an extreme...and not necessarily the best use of time and materials.

but certainly to each their own.
 
My method for butts is super simple. I use a light brine for at least 12 hours(more if I can spare the time). Rub then down, and throw them on my WMS at 225. I put a probe in the butt, and use a long therm stuck down into the top vent to read temp near grate. After a couple of hours, once the rub has set, I spray them down with apple juice periodically. I typically hammer the smoke until 140 internal, and then I don't add much more wood after that. Once they reach 195 internal(typically takes around 90 minutes/lb), I get them off the smoker, let them rest for 15-30 minutes, and start pulling.

I don't foil or cooler mine because I don't want to make the bark soggy. When I am pulling the pork, I will chop up the crispy bark and reintegrate it back into the pile. That way the flavor really goes all the way through the meat, and there is a little bit of texture throughout. I have never been a fan of sliced or chunked pork, so I just pull the whole thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
pork butt
Replies
14
Views
286
bonz50
bonz50
E
Easter Ribs
Replies
4
Views
318
creek bottom
creek bottom
D
Sous Vide Chuck?
2
Replies
25
Views
751
pmad
pmad
snadamo
Well, I pharked up a brisket
2
Replies
24
Views
3K
ssv3
ssv3
F
My experience with beef belly
Replies
0
Views
180
Fsonicsmith
F
Back
Top