PDA

View Full Version : Pork loins vs. Pork butts


dae06
03-26-2012, 01:34 PM
I've read to take loins off of the heat at 140 degrees and Pork Shoulders (butt) off at 195-205 degrees. Why is there such a difference in the temperature to take these off at?

The reason I ask was that my neighbors wife said her husband was smoking a Port butt and was going to take it off at 165 degrees. I thought that was low so I showed him some posts from this forum. This was when he told me he was doing loins, not butts. So when searching for the correct loin temp, we found anywhere from 140 to 165 degrees. I couldn't tell him why the big difference. I realize the meat is quite different, but don't know the real reason.

Can anyone explain?

bigabyte
03-26-2012, 01:38 PM
Think of it like prime rib vs brisket. Brisket is also cooked to higher temps near 200 degrees, while folks might want their prime rib done at 140 (most want it even lower than that actually, but 140 is the pork minimum).

sfbbqguy
03-26-2012, 01:39 PM
There are likely folks on this forum that know better than I but if I had to wager a guess...

lots more connective tissue to break down in the butt so it has to be taken to a higher temp. You could eat it at 165 but it would likely be tougher than getting it all the way done.

Very little connective tissue in loin so it'll be tender and ready to go at 140ish.

deguerre
03-26-2012, 01:40 PM
I think a better analogy would be a prime rib compared to a chuck, since the butt is shoulder...but, brisket will work.:mrgreen:

Wampus
03-26-2012, 01:41 PM
Loins are a very lean cut of meat (like steak for beef). They are also pretty tender. Taking loins to higher temps will only result in drying them out and making them tough due to the lack of marbled fat (hence: lean).

Butts not only have a lot of fat throughout them, but are also a very tough and sinewy cut of meat. They are technically "done" at 160 degrees, but will still be very tough. Bringing the internal temp to over 190 will result in a much more desirable, tender product because the connective tissue breaks down and melts away, leaving the rest of the meat tender and juicy. The loins don't have that ability since they are very lean in nature and don't have that connective tissue. It's all one big muscle. Butts have several different muscles in that one roast, all connected by cartilege, fat and sinew, which requires the longer cook time and higher temps.

Lake Dogs
03-26-2012, 01:42 PM
the difference; fat content. loin is nearly fat free; whereas butts are nearly 1/3 fat. key to tender butt is to render all the fat.

at 165 a loin becomes dry.

dae06
03-26-2012, 01:44 PM
This all makes sense to me.

Thanks to all of you.:thumb:

LM600
03-26-2012, 01:45 PM
Loins are denser so conduct heat more, also loins do not have the fat and connective tissue that needs to break down.

Sure, you can cook a loin to 190°F but it will just flake apart...think a car windscreen that get's smashed.

bigabyte
03-26-2012, 01:46 PM
Actually, it is a myth that loins cooking past 165 are guaranteed to be dry. Anyone here remember the "like a brisket" experiments? If you cook a pork loin like a pork but, until it is probe tender in the roughly 200 degree range, it will be tender and juicy. From what I can tell, this is true of all meats, even lean meats. In my opinion though, loins cooked this way are not as good as loins cooked to 140. Pretty much the ideal way to cook the meat is what folks are doing...briskets and butts until they are tender in the roughly 200 degreeish range, and leaner roasts likepork loin or prime rib are best in the rare to medium range.

QDoc
03-26-2012, 01:48 PM
Cooked a small loin, 1 1/4 lb this weekend took it of at 150. Was moist and tasty not dry at all. Girl friend said 160... she didn't know the difference. Just didn't want it pink.

bigabyte
03-26-2012, 01:51 PM
Here is a roadmap thread to enlighten all about the myths of cooking tough meats like brisket/pork butt to rare/medium temps, and the myths of cooking tender, leaner meats to higher temps...

http://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/showthread.php?t=124163

landarc
03-26-2012, 02:07 PM
Although I was an active participant in the "cook it like a brisket" tests, and I agree that you can make a loin tender and juicy, even if it is cooked like a brisket (which is to say, until over 195F and probe tender) I still do not think you are taking advantage of the best methodology for creating a delicious cut of meat. My take.

Pork Butt
The shoulder of the hog gets a significant amount of work, thus the meat is redder, denser and higher in connective tissue. It also has significant amounts of fat and moisture (water). Although it might actually taste better at lower temperatures, due to the amount of connective tissue, it does not develop and accpetable texture for chewing. The longer, slower cook process allows for a much improved texture, while the rendering process allows for a good mouthfeel and moist sensation as a result of the collagen and other proteins denaturing during cooking. Most of the moisture (water) has been evaporated from the meat though.

Pork Loin
The pork loin, which is from the upper side of the hog, does not have quite the same amount of use, consequently has less connective tissue and a less dense texture. When this cut is cooked to between 140F and 160F finished internal temperature, there remains some moisture (water) as well as other fluids. The lower temperature allows for more flavor to be retained, as those elements of flavor that are water soluble have not been evaporated from the meat. The texture, due to the nature of the muscle tissue remains acceptable to the palate and gives the sensation of tenderness and fine texture.

Thus, you can cook a tenderloin or sirloin to a temperature of 200F and have a tender, moist piece of meat, but, it does not taste as good as when it is done to a lower temperature. I believe this is true of all meat cuts, such as tri-tip versus brisket, or chciken breasts versus thighs.

bigabyte
03-26-2012, 02:12 PM
Thus, you can cook a tenderloin or sirloin to a temperature of 200F and have a tender, moist piece of meat, but, it does not taste as good as when it is done to a lower temperature. I believe this is true of all meat cuts, such as tri-tip versus brisket, or chciken breasts versus thighs.
I believe you are correct. That brisket that I cooked to 120 degrees internal far and away had the most beefy flavor of any brisket I have ever cooked. My 16 year old son asked if we would be doing that again soon.:doh: I still prefer them cooked the regular way though.:thumb:

landarc
03-26-2012, 02:21 PM
Chris, I believe your son makes those statements just to bug you. Then again, I know a lot of Asian-type folks who prefer brisket meat rare. :twitch:

thirdeye
03-27-2012, 09:42 AM
You can look at many cuts of meat in two categories, working muscles and non-working muscles. A shoulder, a brisket, a shank are working muscles.... a loin and a tenderloin are non-working muscles. Non working muscles are generally more tender, but store less fat. Which means it can be cooked to a lower internal temperature. Working muscles need longer cook times and generally higher internal temps to produce moist and tender meat.

Or you can go with the old time theory that the farther the meat is from the hoof, the more tender it is.

Which brings us to the old expression "eatin' high on the hog", meaning the more tender cuts like the loin and tenderloin.