K
kcquer
Guest
I take a look at the names of those that have posted that they don't use water (in this thread and others) and I consider their knowledge and experience. I firmly believe that if there was any tangible impovement in the finished product using water, more than a couple of those cooks would say water was better and would never cook with out it. I have cookers with and without water, and I have used the BSKD with and without water, a water pan may simplify fire control, and based on that, I recommend using water to beginners.
I also make try to make sure that they don't have the mistaken idea that it makes the meat moister, as it seems once you get that idea in your head that it's impossible to change no matter how wrong it is or what evidence is presented to the contrary.
I also make try to make sure that they don't have the mistaken idea that it makes the meat moister, as it seems once you get that idea in your head that it's impossible to change no matter how wrong it is or what evidence is presented to the contrary.
K
kcquer
Guest
We should merge all the water/sand threads together and have the real Never Ending Story thread:wink: :mrgreen:
B
bbqinNC
Guest
Whether the water pan adds anything to the cook or not, I use Apple juice in mine just because it smells so good when it is cooking (boiling).
R
racer_81
Guest
Of course I cannot stay on the sidelines on this one.
Water is mostly hydrogen.
Sand is mostly silicon.
Pamela Anderson's hooters are mostly silicon.
Hydrogen -> Hindenberg disaster.
You gotta prefer hooters over zeppelin wreckage.
Stable, non-boiling, inert (yet flexible enough to put the fun in funbags) sand. It's the American way to go.
Water is mostly hydrogen.
Sand is mostly silicon.
Pamela Anderson's hooters are mostly silicon.
Hydrogen -> Hindenberg disaster.
You gotta prefer hooters over zeppelin wreckage.
Stable, non-boiling, inert (yet flexible enough to put the fun in funbags) sand. It's the American way to go.
Liquid water can only be heated to 212 degrees. If more heat is applied the water will convert to water vapor but will remain at about 212 degrees. If the vapor gets below 212 it can condense back to a liquid. In a Bandera most of the vapor probably goes right out the chimney. The temperature of steam (not vapor but steam) can be above 212 but that requires the water and vapor to be in a confined space, like inside a pressure cooker. Most pressure cookers will only hold a pressure of 15 pounds and that allows the steam to get to 250 degrees.
Water takes a long time to heat up and will hold its temperature longer than sand. Sand heats up quick and cools off fast. Quick heating and cooling is not what you want in your BBQ pit because it causes large temperature fluctuations. In a BBQ pit water will hold its temperature longer and not allow the large fluctuations. It also cannot get hotter than 212 which also helps prevent large fluctuations in temperature. When the meat juice drips into the water it contains both oil (fat) and water, but it is mostly water. The dripping water is always at 212 or lower because it is still a liquid. If the meats water gets over 212 degrees it will turn to vapor and head straight for the chimney and the meat will dry out. This is what happens to the meat that turns to a nice crust when it is cooked in a BBQ pit. The water that drips off of the meat will mix with the water in the pan and will still have a boiling temp of 212. The oil that falls in the pan does not mix well with water so I doubt that it has much effect on the waters boiling point. You just wind up with a pan that contains two different liquids that have different boiling points.
I have cooked with and without water in a pan and have not notice too much difference in the moisture content of the meat. I do see the temperature staying more constant when I use a water pan. I even use a water pan in my horizontal NBBD near the opening of the fire box and it helps to keep the temperature constant. I have put fruit, fruit juice, onions and spices in the pan and have not noticed much difference in the taste of the meat, so now I just leave the pan filled with water. If anybody gets good results with sand then that is fine. They have developed their process and if their meat is good then who cares what they used in the pan. Back in '85 I spent three weeks living in a tent on the Sahara, and I am here to tell you that I preferred water to sand back then and I still think that way today. :tongue:
Water takes a long time to heat up and will hold its temperature longer than sand. Sand heats up quick and cools off fast. Quick heating and cooling is not what you want in your BBQ pit because it causes large temperature fluctuations. In a BBQ pit water will hold its temperature longer and not allow the large fluctuations. It also cannot get hotter than 212 which also helps prevent large fluctuations in temperature. When the meat juice drips into the water it contains both oil (fat) and water, but it is mostly water. The dripping water is always at 212 or lower because it is still a liquid. If the meats water gets over 212 degrees it will turn to vapor and head straight for the chimney and the meat will dry out. This is what happens to the meat that turns to a nice crust when it is cooked in a BBQ pit. The water that drips off of the meat will mix with the water in the pan and will still have a boiling temp of 212. The oil that falls in the pan does not mix well with water so I doubt that it has much effect on the waters boiling point. You just wind up with a pan that contains two different liquids that have different boiling points.
I have cooked with and without water in a pan and have not notice too much difference in the moisture content of the meat. I do see the temperature staying more constant when I use a water pan. I even use a water pan in my horizontal NBBD near the opening of the fire box and it helps to keep the temperature constant. I have put fruit, fruit juice, onions and spices in the pan and have not noticed much difference in the taste of the meat, so now I just leave the pan filled with water. If anybody gets good results with sand then that is fine. They have developed their process and if their meat is good then who cares what they used in the pan. Back in '85 I spent three weeks living in a tent on the Sahara, and I am here to tell you that I preferred water to sand back then and I still think that way today. :tongue:
FatDaddy
is Blowin Smoke!
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Location
- Wichita...
Water????
:mrgreen:Water????? i usually go through at least a case of beer during a cook..:mrgreen:
:mrgreen:Water????? i usually go through at least a case of beer during a cook..:mrgreen:
Dammit, I really like Racer's explanation!
And I agree (for the 18 millionth time) with KC - look at the names associated with sand or nada - I've got to respect those opinions. I've smoked with water or nada and had the same end result. Someday I'll try sand but that means I've got to go get some. All the stuff around home has been visited by the cats.
And I agree (for the 18 millionth time) with KC - look at the names associated with sand or nada - I've got to respect those opinions. I've smoked with water or nada and had the same end result. Someday I'll try sand but that means I've got to go get some. All the stuff around home has been visited by the cats.
Q
Q_Egg
Guest
ckkphoto .... your comment got my attention .... ceramic cokers are 'sand' albeit very compressed, so are firebricks. Both add thermal mass which seems to be a benefit for long cooks.
Therefore, I don't see this as an "either/or" question. For long cooks I always want the thermal mass. The question of a pan with various fluids is a separate issue.
Intersting though, that wth all the thermal mass of the ceramic cooker, and surely all of the heavy-duty steel cookers, there does seem to be some effect from adding additional mass below the product.
Therefore, I don't see this as an "either/or" question. For long cooks I always want the thermal mass. The question of a pan with various fluids is a separate issue.
Intersting though, that wth all the thermal mass of the ceramic cooker, and surely all of the heavy-duty steel cookers, there does seem to be some effect from adding additional mass below the product.
C
ckkphoto
Guest
Wayne said:
Mostly right, however the SALT and RUBS can have a considerable effect on the boiling point of the water in the water pan, as any solute added would. Sugar water (saturated) boils at approx 300 deg.
Q
Q_Egg
Guest
Mark said:
I'm Ok with this! ... multiple glowing sources in the chamber .....gimme a source link.
Hope they have free shipping!
