Its the cook, not the charcoal!

[16Adams]

All natural hardwood briquettes. Quality Lump.

Yes, your fuel source can make difference. A huge nasty bitter over smoked ruined meat difference

[jasonjax]

Being a convert to the power of the pellet myself, I got quite a kick out of the most recent BBQ Pitmasters episode where two of the cookers were my beloved FEC-100, and the one stick burner actually got a comment of "I didn't taste much smoke."

But if we're talking charcoal I am a big fan of lump myself. I do personally think I can taste some of the more common briquettes that are using binders sometimes.

[Mark Warren]

It all depends on what I am cooking. If I am cooking pizza I want a super hot fire so I use some smaller pieces of lump with mostly kiln dyed 2 x 4 pieces. If I want a long slow burn I use large pieces of lump and light it by placing hot cheap ass briquettes out of the chimney on top.
Burgers and steak is a mix of small and medium lump lit with the looftlighter.

[Butt Rubb'n BBQ]

Amen Brother!

[---k---]

Originally Posted by Butt Rubb'n BBQ

Amen Brother!

I'm going to assume that was directed at my initial post and not all these lump fan boys.

[Butt Rubb'n BBQ]

Yup

[Whistler]

Only time I use KBB is a small chimney to get the wood started (usually use a "Texas match" instead) but used as a starter I don't notice the chemical taste you mentioned. Could be the wood flames or the fact it's mostly burnt up by the time the wood is going good and I put the meat on. I start the chimney with a wad of paper under the KBB (no fluid) and that might help keep the chemical taste down some as well though I do notice the smell until the chimney gets going. YMMV

[charrederhead]

There IS an odor to KBB as it initially burns that is not present in any lump I've used.

BUT, my biggest gripe w/ KBB is the outrageous amount of ash it leaves behind.

I'm also beginning to think lump is actually more economical. Case in point- 2 WSM cooks ago, I did spares @ 250 for ~6 hrs., starting w/ a full ring. I shut it down. A few days later, I found some sweet Italian pork sausage in the fridge, went out to the WSM, lifted off the sections and saw ~1/2 of the ring left, w/ VERY little ash. This does not happen w/ KBB. I grabbed my Alaskan matchstick (sorry Texas brethren, but the flamethrower deserves a REALLY BIG ASS state name ), and fired up that remaining lump, and the WSM cooked @ 250 for 3 hrs, then I opened it up to 300 for an hour, then I took off the sausage (nice crispy skin) and let it stay at 270 for another hour before shutting it down. I haven't checked to see how much fuel is left, if any.

I swear lump is cheaper in the long run, and saves time by not having a chitload of ash to deal w/ after each and every cook.

Just my humble opinion. I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time (today).

[Smokin J's]

Ok, so I have only used KBB in my Webber. I need to try lump so help me a little: where is the best place to get it? And, what do I need to do with it to burn properly (I have seen many posts talking about uneven burn).

[Mark Warren]

Originally Posted by Smokin J's

Ok, so I have only used KBB in my Webber. I need to try lump so help me a little: where is the best place to get it? And, what do I need to do with it to burn properly (I have seen many posts talking about uneven burn).

Cash and Carry up here has 40 pound bags of Lazzari lump for $13.95

[---k---]

Originally Posted by Smokin J's

Ok, so I have only used KBB in my Webber. I need to try lump so help me a little: where is the best place to get it? And, what do I need to do with it to burn properly (I have seen many posts talking about uneven burn).

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?

[code3rrt]

Well, Id have to agree with the premise.....after all, it IS the cook who controls/chooses the cooker, the fuel, the choice of meats being cooked(usually), the rub/seasoning and tends to how it all works together to get the desired results.

All that being said, I am leaning more and more towards lump to get the results that I want personally, and the Kingsford competition seems to work a little better than the KBB for me as well.

That's what works for THIS cook.

KC

[TheJackal]

Originally Posted by MS2SB

Isn't the charcoal technically the cook? As it is the one doing the cooking?

That's his whole point. It's a take on the old phrase "It's not the arrow, it's the indian." Yes technically, the arrow will kill whatever the indian is shooting at. But without the proper training, skill, and practice, the arrow will not come anywhere near the intended target.

So, the OP is trying to say that it's not the meat, the charcoal, the cooker, etc that makes a perfect meal. A cook can still buy a Wagyu brisket or a Berkshire pork butt and still fark it up. (Don't ask me how I know)

Get it? It's not the charcoal, It's the cook. And for the record, I do not use KBB.

[SmokinJohn]

Originally Posted by ---k---

Its the cook, not the charcoal!

That's my thought for the month. Discuss.

never mind

[LT72884]

my theory with KBB and i have tested is this. Im thinking that as the fat drips on the charcoal and vaporizes, the chemicals in KBB may react to the lipids from the meats causing a foul taste, but when the lipids/fats drip onto hot lump, there are no chemicals for it to react with. Maybe the borax in the kbb doesnt like fat. it is an irratent to tissues and fat is a tissue... just an idea