• working on DNS.. links may break temporarily.

mesquite lump

D

DWFII

Guest
I have a small offset...probably the size of a Bandera. I am wondering if anyone on this forum uses mesquite lump regularly for their low and slow cooks? Like for a Boston Butt or for a turkey?

Mesquite lump is about the only lump I can get aside from Cowboy. I'd like to use lump but the cowboy is just not to my liking.

Thanks...
 
Welcome to the neighborhood - mosey over to Cattle Call and introduce yourself! :D

You can certainly use mesquite lump. You might consider reconsidering Cowboy lump so you can avoid too much mesquite flavor. I have not tried adding cold mesquite lump to my fire so I can't speak to that but if you started a chimney and added the lit coals you'd probably be ok.
 
Is there a particular reason why you prefer lump over briquettes?

I would probably use lump to cook a turkey, because I want a higher cooking temp., but I would think it would take an awfully small lump fire and a lot of tending to cook a butt low and slow at 225*.

Your thoughts?
 
I'd like to be able to mix in the lump for a possible kick in temp. My offset doesn't hold heat very well even though I have made most of the common mods. I'm adding some firebrick next cook hopefully that will help.

Also I do think there's kind of an off smell (something vaguely ammonia-like) with Kingsford and Kingsford might be the best, commonly found, briquet arround as far as ingredients is concerned. I'd like to burn more wood actually but I don't have much access to dry oak and top that off I've been told that it's hard to regulate the smoke and heat with wood in a small backyard offset.

So it's probably charcoal for me...but whether it's limp or briquets is the question.
 
I recommend doing a mix of mesquite lump and briquettes. And welcome!
 
You know when I was first starting to "research" BBQ and charcoal, etc...I ran across a website--the BBQ Faq, or something like that--that claimed that almost all of the "aromatics'" were burned off during the process of converting wood to charcoal. In other words, there should be little or no "mesquite" taste from the lump charcoal.

But since then (and before I could try it out, myself) I ran across other folks saying that mesquite charcoal would leave a bitter taste on the meat--just like the raw wood. So, then, I wrote to the manufacturer and they told me to I not use mesquite lump for low and slow.

That should have been all the answer I needed. But then I read posts on the KC BBQ forum from several people who said that they actively compete using mesquite lump.

So now I am actively seeking opinions and other people's experiences.

The Lazzarri lump (all I can get in this area) is visually beautiful--no plywood or tonque and groove, just pieces that look like limbs and tree. But SWMBO would not take it kindly if I ruined a brisket or a nice BB... and had the better part of 40 lbs of lump still sitting out on the patio.
 
I use exclusively lump, when I am not using wood. Mesquite is not a problem as long as you have a clean burning fire. It only tastes bad when the fire is choked from trying to cut the oxygen because it got too hot (voice of sad experience). Adjust to your personal tastes as to whether you need to mix briquettes with the mesquite to cut back on the mesquite flavor, but as long as you keep the fire burning clean, the taste will be pleasant.
 
I have had no problems with using lum and mixinf it with the little "bricks" The secret is to ensure the k side is up when adding to the fire. :wink:
 
tommykendall said:
DW - you live in OR right? Should be plenty of wood around.

Tom,

Lots of wood and plus I am a woodtuner but the prevailing wisdom is that my little horizontal (Chargriller with side fire box) is too small to burn wood.
 
Tom,

Lots of wood and plus I am a woodtuner but the prevailing wisdom is that my little horizontal (Chargriller with side fire box) is too small to burn wood.

Not so (unless you want to send us a pic for examination). With the exception of some guys here who have enormous rigs capable of burning logs, bunches of us use small splits of wood (approx 2x2x 8-12 long), or chunks the size our your fist. Get your self a small bed of charcoal going, add a small amount of wood, and keep it going either completely with wood or a combination of more charcoal and wood.
 
According to Wendy from customer service at Chargriller, the Side firebox id designed to burn wood.
 
smoker,

Yeah, I know. I called Wendy and asked that myself.

I also read and post to the BBQbible site. And that's a Chargriller heavy site. Most folk there will tell you that temperature control is a lot more difficult with all wood. And that you can get too much smoke in your food with a small offset.

I don't know. I hear it both ways.

I've added chunks of hickory to my charcoal basket and the temp does flare up and the smoke pours out. The smoke seems white to me but what smoke is truly white and what's not white enough? Heck, I'm inexperienced enough I wouldn't know if I was creosoting the dickens out of my meat or how to stabilize the temps if I got a major temperature spike. I think all wood is gonna have to wait till I get more comfortable with the pit.
 
Hello DWFII,

I have a Char-Griller with firebox, I use both lump and Kingsford charcoal I seem to have better luck with Kingsford then lump, but I am fairly new to this to. I also throw in chunks of wood while it cooks to get my smoke.

If I had supply to all wood I would give it a try that is what makes this all fun.
 
Lumps are harder to control temps. The varied surface areas make it so. Charcoal is much easier due to the even surface areas. I use lump for starting fires and gettting temps up quickly if they have dropped too low.
 
Back
Top