Too low, too slow?

[NRA4Life]

Originally Posted by Zin

I think she pulled your leg.

This...she isn't going to give up her secrets. It's pretty clear that it was cooked at higher temp - the seasoning she told you probably isn't anywhere near truth either. If you were making a living off of a recipe or cooking process would you give it up?

[woodpelletsmoker]

1."for 24 to 27 hours." she must refer to 140 F instead of 140 C.
2.In Sous Vide you can simmer your meat at 140F for 24 to 27 hours.
In oven it is even safer
3.More often than not Oven temp. display is different from true temp. inside the cooking chamber. She was told 140F by the oven, but true temp. may be 150F or 160 F

[woodpelletsmoker]

Originally Posted by StanDaMan79

No. I don't think she tried to mislead me. Like I said, her oven runs hotter then she thinks. As stated, I saw the roast, it sure as heck wasn't cooked at 140.

Not Celsius.

I gain NOTHING arguing with her, so I won't try. Bottom line, I am anxious to try her seasonings on my next pork butt, and make me some Cubanos.

Just try it.
140F works great.
Use a thermometer to make sure 140F
Different opinions are nothing but from their "thinking", I doubt any of they really did 140F

[SmokinAussie]

Watch this gents.

Heston Blumenthal's - Kitchen Chemistry - Beef - Part 1 of 2 - YouTube

Then follow on to part 2.

You get the science worked out, and this lady's method is perfectly OK, AND she's talking Farenheit.

One thing about this "danger zone" rubbish is that you have to consider a vector. Bacteria is on the OUTSIDE of a cut of meat. Not inside it. Once you wash and season that meat and put it in an oven of ANY kind, you are placing it in a sterile environment. There's no bacteria in an oven to make a pork shoulder go rotten in 24 hours.

I would think that her oven might be a little inaccurate, but not enough to make that much difference.

Have a look at the science. That lady knows her chemistry, even if she doesn't know why.

Cheers!

Bill

[creekwalker]

Heston didn't do the right experiment with the tough beef cuts. If, instead of 5 hours, he had gone closer to 48 hours at 135F in the water bath it would have come out tender like regular roast beef. (Depending, I think, on the quality of the beef, you might get the same result in as little as 24 hours.) But otherwise an interesting video.

[Q Junkie]

The real issue here is, who the hell wants to cook something for 27 hours that you can get the same results or better in +/- 8 hrs.

Blu... am I right?

Captain Obvious

[Theboz1419]

Originally Posted by Q Junkie

The real issue here is, who the hell wants to cook something for 27 hours that you can get the same results or better in +/- 8 hrs.

Blu... am I right?

Captain Obvious

I usually do 24 to 26 hours, longest has been 28 hours for pulled pork on the UDS but at 225 to 230.

[Q Junkie]

Why Boz, Why?
Btw I need to talk to you about a temp controller.
Seriously though, is it that much better or a time issue?

[Theboz1419]

Originally Posted by Q Junkie

Why Boz, Why?
Btw I need to talk to you about a temp controller.
Seriously though, is it that much better or a time issue?

I have no idea if its better or not, lol. I have never tried anybody's pulled pork or other smoked meats other then mine, not counting the stuff I buy at the store(rare). But, the people that do eat my pulled pork or smoked food, all seem to like it.


As for the controller, send me a Pm, Ill either try to answer all your questions or direct ya to whom can.

[Q Junkie]

Originally Posted by Theboz1419

I have no idea if its better or not, lol. I have never tried anybody's pulled pork or other smoked meats other then mine, not counting the stuff I buy at the store(rare). But, the people that do eat my pulled pork or smoked food, all seem to like it.


As for the controller, send me a Pm, Ill either try to answer all your questions or direct ya to whom can.

Thanks Bro, I will shoot you a PM when I can digest the info. It is too late to talk tech.

[woodpelletsmoker]

Originally Posted by Q Junkie

The real issue here is, who the hell wants to cook something for 27 hours that you can get the same results or better in +/- 8 hrs.

Blu... am I right?

Captain Obvious

"the same results or better in +/- 8 hrs."
Your conclusion is wrong.
The true result is the other way round, the 27 hours @ 140F is BETTER than +/- 8 hrs @225F

[Q Junkie]

Originally Posted by woodpelletsmoker

"the same results or better in +/- 8 hrs."
Your conclusion is wrong.
The true result is the other way round, the 27 hours @ 140F is BETTER than +/- 8 hrs @225F

I guess I will have to give it a go and see if it is that much better. That is a Full Pull, time wise so until I give it a try I can not say what is "better".
BTW, I was not thinking that 225* for 8 hrs would be "Better". Faster requires hotter.

[SmokinAussie]

Well, the main thing is that we know that lady was not bull****ting and also, we know a little bit more about how and why. And don't forget about the bacterial vector stuff. I've seen too many briskets and such thrown out on this forum because someones fire got below 140F and they panicked, thinking they were gonna kill the entire family... Posted a question on the forum, and were told by everyone to throw it out and grill chops instead.

THINK about the science.

Cheerio!

Billikins

[creekwalker]

Originally Posted by SmokinAussie

Well, the main thing is that we know that lady was not bull****ting and also, we know a little bit more about how and why. And don't forget about the bacterial vector stuff. I've seen too many briskets and such thrown out on this forum because someones fire got below 140F and they panicked, thinking they were gonna kill the entire family... Posted a question on the forum, and were told by everyone to throw it out and grill chops instead.

THINK about the science.

Cheerio!

Billikins

Ditto!