225* where did it come from?

[smoke ninja]

Many reference sources list it as the temp. Im sure when most of of started thats the range we thought it had to be done. I remember on my second butt i thought i was cheating by going 275 for a bit.

We all know good bbq doesnt have to be cooked under 250. Yes it can be but its not limited to under 250*. So i dare to ask who came up with this when did it happen that it became the common knowledge temp. Whatever it is i suspect its the same guy who said to soak wood.

[LarryO1947]

225* came from the stone ages...lol. It's a new era!!!!

[Richard1233]

Lol probably the same guy! I used to soak wood, now I never do and wouldn't think to for any reason really and I also used to smoke everything around 225 until I accidentally let it get to 260 265 once for a pork butt and it tasted just as good and finished faster. Now I cook a lot at 250-300.

[WildeMan]

Boy I'm glad someone started a thread on this, I've been wondering the same thing for a long time but never thought to do a thread. I'd assume that it has alot to do with some of the earlier recipes for "modern" barbecue as I would call it, probably about the same time as the early internet was really taking off, and then it just started to snowball and become gospel from there. I bet some of the people that have been involved with older sites like the virtual weber bullet, which go back to the mid 90's, could chime in on this.

[Bob C Cue]

That is a great question. If I had to guess I would say smoke ninja.

[DetTigersFan]

I have no idea... Thankfully I never started out doing it. Rocking my WSM at 280 right now with a super clean fire.

[SGH]

This just a guess as we will probably really never know when it was first used and by whom. With that said, it was probably hundreds of years ago when folks were cooking on makeshift improvised cookers. Due to the lack of quality materials and poor design, my guess is that is was much easier to hold a lower temp than it was to hold a high temp. Obviously cooking at the low temp was successful so the technique just kept getting shared and passed down from generation to generation. As time progressed and the quality and design of smokers improved, people probably started experimenting with higher temps out of curiosity which turned out to work well also. Again, the above is just speculation on my part and may be off by miles. But it sounds reasonable.

[smoke ninja]

this question came up in another thread but i felt it deserved its own.

Let me catch you fellas up.


If i ever find the guy who came up with 225 is the base temp for bbq I'm gonna gut punch him.

I gotta theory about this, that is came from sausage makers / cookers.......the German / Swiss / Polish people who settled Texas & all around that area.......

Just thinking about how that type of smoking would be carried out & maybe it developed from that model......

if so, there's a lot of gut punches in your future !!!!

Maybe your right.

I suspect it's a modern idea. Let's face it bbq originally never involved gadgetry like thermos. I've heard the move from pit to steel was propagated by German and Czech immigrants. I would guess the birth of thermometers and the idea of 225 came after that. A thermometer wouldn't be practical or necessary in an open pit where you can see the meat and the fire. Plus I don't think many folks had mavericks in the early 20th century.

Of course the is all a bunch of irresponsible speculation on my part.

[Smoke Dawg]

I was going to ask why you ask this question again.

It is all a balance and personal preference.

Wood smoke house. Kettle, side box, cabinet smoker, Wood, Coals, Pellets, direct, indirect, Hot smaoke, cold smaoke, Meat choice, sausage, peperoni, Cheese,.

Just so many combonations.

I cook anywhere from < 80° to >1000°. It just depends what and on what.

[JonP]

I don't know, but I know a guy who brags about cooking pork butts for 18hrs at that temp. It's toxic. The bark tastes like diesel fuel and meat is mush. His ego is out of control

[1buckie]

Yeah, I put this:

"I gotta theory about this, that is came from sausage makers / cookers.......the German / Swiss / Polish people who settled Texas & all around that area.......

Just thinking about how that type of smoking would be carried out & maybe it developed from that model......"


up in the other thread......have thought about this a lot when seeing people move to higher temps & it does seem like the old country smokehouses & curing meat would be at sometimes very low temp for days even......

sausage type deals, a shorter time like hours at still a pretty low temp.....not much of those processes have changed very much......

And a lot of what goes on on say, a WSM, a small stickburner, a vault cooker, etc. nowdays is just the logical extension of that.....

A nice smoked flavor, but having not that much to do with the "preservative" qualities of the process, but why I like to see what people do making their own sausages, jerky, various cured items, all kinds of brining, curing, marinating, injecting and of course rubs & dry brine.....all that stuff is fascinating & seems a large part of it has it's roots in the traditional smoked meat & fish setups from Norway, Germany & those places..........these people brought their methods & traditions with them when they migrated here......
I personally believe it's a longer story than just what's been on the InterToob for a few years........
there's a wonderful little book called simply "Salt" that details the ongoing relationship with humans & the mineral & talks a lot about the way it increased the ability of people to store, cure & yes, smoke food.....

A heckuva lot of the cooks seen here include those two items, if you think about it....

Book:

Salt: A World History: Mark Kurlansky: 9780142001615: Amazon.com: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41o2X6mtArL.@@AMEPARAM@@41o2X6mtArL

[DetTigersFan]

I don't know, but I know a guy who brags about cooking pork butts for 18hrs at that temp. It's toxic. The bark tastes like diesel fuel and meat is mush. His ego is out of control

LOL That's pretty funny.

[Skip]

boiling point. Its the temperature that will help sustain boiling point to produce steam in the meat to soften it. Its the lowest theoretical temperature you can use to sustain the release of steam while not allowing the steam to dampen the temperature. What should always be accounted for is the +/- in all thermometer calibrations.

[bam]

It was the guy that first put a thermometer on his cooker.

[smoke ninja]

I was going to ask why you ask this question again.

It is all a balance and personal preference.

Wood smoke house. Kettle, side box, cabinet smoker, Wood, Coals, Pellets, direct, indirect, Hot smaoke, cold smaoke, Meat choice, sausage, peperoni, Cheese,.

Just so many combonations.

I cook anywhere from < 80° to >1000°. It just depends what and on what.

Just felt like it deserved its own thread

I know its personal preference and cooking style but most books and net refrences list 225-250 as bbq temps and some even say if you dont youll have tough dry Q. It had to start somewhere. Myths in cooking are long standing.

[1buckie]

boiling point. Its the temperature that will help sustain boiling point to produce steam in the meat to soften it. Its the lowest theoretical temperature you can use to sustain the release of steam while not allowing the steam to dampen the temperature. What should always be accounted for is the +/- in all thermometer calibrations.

That's another thought I've had too....good point.....

How I explain to someone wanting to do a pork butt on a Weber kettle for the first time is not just the general setup, but that you want to have the ongoing cooking temperature "lead" or be just a bit above the ending temp to continue what Skip describes above.....then, at least 225, but moving it along higher is not such a bad idea either......

[Fwismoker]

I invented it...and my sincerest apologizes. At the time it seemed like the right thing...I mean who doesn't like low and slow right??

Well time went on and it caught on like wild fire, then one day i failed to keep a close eye on my pit and before I knew it the whole cook averaged about 275-300 and what do ya know it actually came out better with better texture! People looked up to me and I couldn't very well admit I was wrong after preaching 225 or bust for the best Q!

Living a lie all these years has been difficult but now with the help of smoke ninja I feel like a weight has been lifted.... oh and don't get me started on 3-2-1 ribs! :oops:

[thirdeye]

Here's what's funny.... in the 60's when I was learning the in's and out's of barbecue (which meant feeding the burn barrel, fetching beers, then shoveling coals from the barrel to a pit) no body had thermometers for the pit or the meat. My Grandpa taught us to wave a hand across the grate, and then to watch for the fats to rise to the surface and watch the color.

In fact the first cookers I had with a thermometer on them were my Big Green Eggs... and that was about 10 years ago. So that means for 25 or 30 years I really had no idea what the pit temp I was cooking at was. A wild guess would be at least 250°, but I suspect hotter. The Eggheads were the ones that got me into temperature management, forced draft fans, Thermoworks and all that trendy stuff.

One of my Smokey Hale books always quotes low barbecue temps... like 200°, or 215° for pretty much everything. I think the only thing I make a point to cook low is my shoulders and prime rib, which I smoke at 225-240°. Most everything else is in the 250°-275° range.

[dadsr4]

225 degree cooking take longer, you don't have to keep a constant eye on the cook, which allows time to drink more beer.

[qman]

Listen guys, I don't want to scare you, but: The 225 temp was invented by our Grand Poobah Himself, and is sacred and holy. Mandated as the only right and proper true BBQ temp.
Beware of the blue helmet!:doh::roll:

[dadsr4]

Also, hot and fast works well for smaller pieces of meat. Whole carcases take lower heat over longer periods to stabilize at the desired temp.

[el_matt]

I always thought Bludawg came up with the 225° holy grail, just to screw with us!

Matt

[1buckie]

I always thought Bludawg came up with the 225° holy grail, just to screw with us!

Matt


That's good rumour....I'll go with that !!!!

[smoke ninja]

I can see where water smokers like the wsm had something to do with it. With a water pan they settle in at about 250.

[qman]

OK, seriously.
My experience is similar to thirdeye's.
I do not know about the Texas history except what I have read.
I learned bbq in the south, working open pits. I started out working the burn barrel (except ours was an outdoor fireplace, purpose built for burning down wood). Fetching beer, spreading hot coals, etc.
No thermometers around then either.
As a matter of fact, I am celebrating my 60 year of bbq-ing this month. The first time I pit-bitched a cook all night.
I think the old-timers back then always cooked at a higher temp than 225. As thirdeye said, strictly done by feel and the look of the fire, the meat, etc.
I never used a thermometer till about 20 years ago, and I have never actually cooked at 225 more than once or twice, just to try it out.
I tend to agree that it might have been from the Texas sausage maker tradition;, coupled with the introduction of the offset steel cookers.
Smoking my part of the south was done in smokehouses, for days or weeks, always cured meats, and always in the cold months.

[mikemci]

PitmasterT.......he invented everything in the BBQ universe.

[Bob C Cue]

225 degree cooking take longer, you don't have to keep a constant eye on the cook, which allows time to drink more beer.

May need to rethink 275°.

[Win nut]

I think it has to do with reaching the magical 140° IT in 4 hrs. Lower cook temp imparts more smoke into the meat, the 4 hrs comes from killing bacteria..... or something like that!! :-)

[Bludawg]

I think it has more to do with a misunderstanding concerning smoking on A Weber Kettle.
BuBBa: You bar be Quein today BillyBob??
BillyBob: I sure is BuBBa, Cookin us some Ribs Cuz.
BuBBa: What You cookin 'em on?
BillyBob: Weber 225
BuBBA Well alright then I was right, I tole the BIL of mine you cook ribs on a Weber @225 & he said I wuz Plum crazy

[1buckie]

Could be, Mr. Dawg........:roll:
I've only managed to crack thru the magical glass ceiling of 225 on a few occasions with that dang kettle.....:heh:

[el_matt]

I think it has more to do with a misunderstanding concerning smoking on A Weber Kettle.
BuBBa: You bar be Quein today BillyBob??
BillyBob: I sure is BuBBa, Cookin us some Ribs Cuz.
BuBBa: What You cookin 'em on?
BillyBob: Weber 225
BuBBA Well alright then I was right, I tole the BIL of mine you cook ribs on a Weber @225 & he said I wuz Plum crazy

I told y'all Bludawg was responsible, at least one of his relatives.

Matt

[Joe Black]

I truly believe that Bludawg is as correct as any other theories out there. The first cook school that I attended issued handouts that claimed 225* as the holy grail. So, everyone of us in attendance spread this information without ever knowing where it actually originated. During my first cook at home after this school, the temp on my WSM was fluctuating between 215* and 235*. After a couple of hours of this abomination of fluctuation, I chewed through a 9# bag of RO, curled up in a fetal position and was admitted to a psyche facility. After years of therapy, I read an article that indicated higher temps and also wider fluctuations. I thought that it was some kind of conspiracy to end all forms of BBQ as we know it. I discussed this with my therapist who finally had me try some of these clandestine temps and with his help I was able to attempt them. After several sessions, I am now able to try the temps on my own. I have even met some others who have tried this procedure without much emotional damage and also with some good BBQ. I encourage all of you to get some professional help and try to start cooking with other temps, higher temps, and even some temp fluctuations. I promise you will feel better and those around you will understand you better. Good luck, I sincerely hope this helps someone, Joe

[Bob C Cue]

I truly believe that Bludawg is as correct as any other theories out there. The first cook school that I attended issued handouts that claimed 225* as the holy grail. So, everyone of us in attendance spread this information without ever knowing where it actually originated. During my first cook at home after this school, the temp on my WSM was fluctuating between 215* and 235*. After a couple of hours of this abomination of fluctuation, I chewed through a 9# bag of RO, curled up in a fetal position and was admitted to a psyche facility. After years of therapy, I read an article that indicated higher temps and also wider fluctuations. I thought that it was some kind of conspiracy to end all forms of BBQ as we know it. I discussed this with my therapist who finally had me try some of these clandestine temps and with his help I was able to attempt them. After several sessions, I am now able to try the temps on my own. I have even met some others who have tried this procedure without much emotional damage and also with some good BBQ. I encourage all of you to get some professional help and try to start cooking with other temps, higher temps, and even some temp fluctuations. I promise you will feel better and those around you will understand you better. Good luck, I sincerely hope this helps someone, Joe

True story everyone.

[thirdeye]

I truly believe that Bludawg is as correct as any other theories out there. The first cook school that I attended issued handouts that claimed 225* as the holy grail. So, everyone of us in attendance spread this information without ever knowing where it actually originated. During my first cook at home after this school, the temp on my WSM was fluctuating between 215* and 235*. After a couple of hours of this abomination of fluctuation, I chewed through a 9# bag of RO, curled up in a fetal position and was admitted to a psyche facility. After years of therapy, I read an article that indicated higher temps and also wider fluctuations. I thought that it was some kind of conspiracy to end all forms of BBQ as we know it. I discussed this with my therapist who finally had me try some of these clandestine temps and with his help I was able to attempt them. After several sessions, I am now able to try the temps on my own. I have even met some others who have tried this procedure without much emotional damage and also with some good BBQ. I encourage all of you to get some professional help and try to start cooking with other temps, higher temps, and even some temp fluctuations. I promise you will feel better and those around you will understand you better. Good luck, I sincerely hope this helps someone, Joe

Another theory that was preached by one of my Grandpa's neighbors is the notion that barbecue temps need to be just above the boiling temp for water... this way the fats surfaced (no one used terms like rendering in those days) at a rate slow enough they did not bring too much moisture to the surface with them. Then all the men would would say "low and slow" a couple of times, then go back to listening to a baseball game on the AM radio.

[El Ropo]

I had to leave a couple bbq forums because well regarded members would give me a hard time about suggesting higher cooking temps. I'm sure they are still warming everything to death.

[Brew-Bq]

Pretty sure it was Myron Mixon or Pitmaster T. Both of those guys will flip out if you suggest going over 225.

[Bludawg]

I had to leave a couple bbq forums because well regarded members would give me a hard time about suggesting higher cooking temps. I'm sure they are still warming everything to death.
^^^ I can testify to this fact^^^^:thumb: It got Beary UGLY!!! :laugh:

[grantw]

One of the most popular Bbq sites preaches 225 , he has his own forum now to further warp people. Lol, I never had much turn out amazing at those temps, it turns out but takes forever and basically keeps a nice smouldering fire none of my cookers settle in amazingly at 225 unless choked out

[Smoke Dawg]

I will take a guess that this 225* you speak of is in reality 225°..... If so then it makes sense now!


































































There is a simple little trick that will work at all temperatures;

Hold the Alt key down and hit 248

It will give you °

Works on microsoft - not sure it works on any other platform?

Carry on!

[1buckie]

Smoke Dawg, thanks......I used to be able to use that little trick, but now it just refreshes the whole page......not sure what happened to make it different?

[smoke ninja]

225°

There, that better.

[Smoke Dawg]

It is the only one I remember well.



http://www.wikihow.com/Type-Symbols-Using-the-ALT-Key

[Sausage Warrior]

220 is an ideal temp and those cooking higher do so because they don't want to fight their smoker (perfect sense) but I'm not buying the fact that a brisket cooked at 300 is as tender as one cooked at 220. It may still be great and possible the flavor could be better (depending on techniques) but the lower temp cook insures "butta."

[Fwismoker]

220 is an ideal temp and those cooking higher do so because they don't want to fight their smoker (perfect sense) but I'm not buying the fact that a brisket cooked at 300 is as tender as one cooked at 220. It may still be great and possible the flavor could be better (depending on techniques) but the lower temp cook insures "butta."
I really love this place....good stuff

[smoke ninja]

220 is an ideal temp and those cooking higher do so because they don't want to fight their smoker (perfect sense) but I'm not buying the fact that a brisket cooked at 300 is as tender as one cooked at 220. It may still be great and possible the flavor could be better (depending on techniques) but the lower temp cook insures "butta."

I may have to disagree. While 300 is the max of my comfort range it has more to do with edges burning up and risk of meat drying out. Higher temps have a shorter window of perfection and too fast some fat may not be rendered I'll say that. I've never had a problem with tenderness on high heat cooks. 220 may help with giving a larger window but I'm not sure it insures anything else.

I will admit I like to finish Q at lower temps. my hot & slow method starts at 275 plus and finishes low. Many hot and fast cooks say a long rest or hold is important. I definitely believe it's how you finish is more important than how you get there.

The point of this thread isn't so much to debate which way is better but questioning why so much misinformation is available on low temps being the only way. There is much less reference material for h & f than low and slow. It's safe to say that monitoring temps is a relatively new concept in Q and it had to come from somewhere

[Smoke Dawg]

Low and Hot!

111011


Without the flash!

111012

[Bludawg]

Over heard in a conversation near the Pit at our community center a few weeks ago during a Fund raiser for the VFD between the pitman and some young feller visiting from the Austin area;
Young blood "How do you know when those briskets are done?Don't ya use a thermometer?
Pitman, " Nope they aint sick."
Young blood, " How do ya know how hot your cooking?"
Pitman, "Just hot enough that I can't lay my hand on the cooker."
Poor kid walked away mumbling to hisself. We had a Good laugh:mrgreen:

[Jorge]

On many cookers 250 is about 2 beers between stoking the fire.

[grantw]

I think it came from the instructions on a food dehydrator...

[El Ropo]

220 is an ideal temp and those cooking higher do so because they don't want to fight their smoker (perfect sense) but I'm not buying the fact that a brisket cooked at 300 is as tender as one cooked at 220. It may still be great and possible the flavor could be better (depending on techniques) but the lower temp cook insures "butta."

And this is the exact type of (mis) info being passed around like gospel on many bbq forums.. it's simply not true.

Many of the top brisket joints in Texas cook their brisket using temps north of 300 F. When I think of tender, juicy, properly cooked brisket, I think of 275-325 F cook temps.

[Sausage Warrior]

Mis-information is lazy guys with poor cookers that can't keep temps in the low 200s and convincing themselves and others that their briskets are as tender as those cooked properly at low temps.

I respect the fact you are from Texas but all that really means is you get the best beef. I couldn't buy prime beef here for love or money so make use of slow low cooks to maximize what I have to work with.

[Bludawg]

Mis-information is lazy guys with poor cookers that can't keep temps in the low 200s and convincing themselves and others that their briskets are as tender as those cooked properly at low temps.

I respect the fact you are from Texas but all that really means is you get the best beef. I couldn't buy prime beef here for love or money so make use of slow low cooks to maximize what I have to work with.
All I cook is Select grade Beef H&F I aint lazy 16-17 hrs a day on my ranch, I work smarter not harder. I have no problem making proper Moist juicy brisket at 300-350. A closed mind is a terrible waste.
http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae164/Bludawg51/DSCF0087.jpg
http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae164/Bludawg51/DSCF0089.jpg

[bam]

Coming from using a burn barrel made it hot enuf. Was that 200 or 350 hot enuf. Now I'm using temp gauge 275 and a little higher for chicken and turkey.

[Jason TQ]

Mis-information is lazy guys with poor cookers that can't keep temps in the low 200s and convincing themselves and others that their briskets are as tender as those cooked properly at low temps.

I respect the fact you are from Texas but all that really means is you get the best beef. I couldn't buy prime beef here for love or money so make use of slow low cooks to maximize what I have to work with.

Can't tell if you are serious or baiting/trolling. If it's the former then I disagree, though I know none here will change you mind so I won't argue any further than my next sentence. I've had amazing brisket at all temps and even got crazy this year and did one at 400 that was done in 4hrs and just as good as any cooked at 225.

Now I should also say in general that there is nothing wrong with 225. I still use it occasionally and if someone likes that temp then rock it. There seems to be a few different types of hot guys around here. The ones that do it, like it, promote it, share ideas on it with other brethren in a way that is genuine and helpful. Then there are those that passively/aggresively (or openly) bash lower temps and act like to cool kids doing the new thing (though hot isn't super new) and look down on others cooking at "inferior temps" and don't treat them as a part of this BBQ family. For those the primary reason they like cooking hot is to tell others why hot is better and why some are "cooking in the past", then secondly comes sharing actual hot knowledge for the sake of what they consider helping.

But maybe I'm the only one that sees this new trend forming on the Brethren forum and I'm on a soapbox :crazy:.

[smoke ninja]

Mis-information is lazy guys with poor cookers that can't keep temps in the low 200s and convincing themselves and others that their briskets are as tender as those cooked properly at low temps.

I respect the fact you are from Texas but all that really means is you get the best beef. I couldn't buy prime beef here for love or money so make use of slow low cooks to maximize what I have to work with.

I Aint lazy either. And I definitely Aint from Texas. I go with what works.


Looks plenty tender to me

http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l520/smokeninjabbq/brisket/2015-01-07%2020.11.28_zpsrq35cdjk.jpg (http://s1121.photobucket.com/user/smokeninjabbq/media/brisket/2015-01-07%2020.11.28_zpsrq35cdjk.jpg.html)

Sweet delicious bark.

http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l520/smokeninjabbq/20140706_214449_zpsracgwl7u.jpg (http://s1121.photobucket.com/user/smokeninjabbq/media/20140706_214449_zpsracgwl7u.jpg.html)

Ribs look tender and juicy to me

http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l520/smokeninjabbq/2015-04-12%2022.47.09_zpsnqomsifo.jpg (http://s1121.photobucket.com/user/smokeninjabbq/media/2015-04-12%2022.47.09_zpsnqomsifo.jpg.html)

All due to the magic of 275°+

[1buckie]

Can't tell if you are serious or baiting/trolling. If it's the former then I disagree, though I know none here will change you mind so I won't argue any further than my next sentence. I've had amazing brisket at all temps and even got crazy this year and did one at 400 that was done in 4hrs and just as good as any cooked at 225.

Now I should also say in general that there is nothing wrong with 225. I still use it occasionally and if someone likes that temp then rock it. There seems to be a few different types of hot guys around here. The ones that do it, like it, promote it, share ideas on it with other brethren in a way that is genuine and helpful. Then there are those that passively/aggresively (or openly) bash lower temps and act like to cool kids doing the new thing (though hot isn't super new) and look down on others cooking at "inferior temps" and don't treat them as a part of this BBQ family. For those the primary reason they like cooking hot is to tell others why hot is better and why some are "cooking in the past", then secondly comes sharing actual hot knowledge for the sake of what they consider helping.

But maybe I'm the only one that sees this new trend forming on the Brethren forum and I'm on a soapbox :crazy:.

I seen a guy wrap one in about 8~10 layers of foil & put it IN a raging fireplace.....came out great.....:-D

I should track that guy down & ask him what gives.....:crazy:

[smoke ninja]

Can't tell if you are serious or baiting/trolling. If it's the former then I disagree, though I know none here will change you mind so I won't argue any further than my next sentence. I've had amazing brisket at all temps and even got crazy this year and did one at 400 that was done in 4hrs and just as good as any cooked at 225.

Now I should also say in general that there is nothing wrong with 225. I still use it occasionally and if someone likes that temp then rock it. There seems to be a few different types of hot guys around here. The ones that do it, like it, promote it, share ideas on it with other brethren in a way that is genuine and helpful. Then there are those that passively/aggresively (or openly) bash lower temps and act like to cool kids doing the new thing (though hot isn't super new) and look down on others cooking at "inferior temps" and don't treat them as a part of this BBQ family. For those the primary reason they like cooking hot is to tell others why hot is better and why some are "cooking in the past", then secondly comes sharing actual hot knowledge for the sake of what they consider helping.

But maybe I'm the only one that sees this new trend forming on the Brethren forum and I'm on a soapbox :crazy:.


I'm definitely not trying to be one of the H&F cool kids here. I figured this may turn into a hot and vs low and slow but that wasn't the point.

Here's a post from today from by newer brethren that illustrates my point.

how yall think the ribs will turn out if cooked around 300-325? jus as tender as they would at 250 or no?

http://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/showthread.php?t=209979

Now tender ribs can be achieved several ways but he has been led to believe 300° ribs won't be as good.


P.S. can we be friends yet?:wink:

[ButtBurner]

I made it up

no, seriously

[Veets]

It's all very interesting to me.

I've done ribs low and slow for 6 hours and they were great. I recently tried a slab of spares at 300-325 and they were done in 3 hours. They were great.

I tried them hotter because it was getting late but my rib tooth was tingling and an experiment was in order. Frankly, it opened my eyes.

I kinda liked them better. But I wouldn't throw my nose up at either method.

Personally, with limited experience, I think that the temperature affects the bark and how it is adhered to the meat more than anything else. Whether it melts into or stays as a slippery layer on the meat.

Although with higher temps, more resting to settle the meat down is probably needed.

I guess, long story short, is that there must be a difference. I'm sure there is...but what exactly it is seems to be somewhat mysterious and maybe superficial?

Perhaps carried over from old time long cooks of large whole animals that may need a lower temp to ensure even doneness all around? Which may not be necessary for smaller cuts?

The internal loveliness is pretty much the same (or is it?), just different methods of getting there.

But there must be some difference, whether it is discernable or not. Which begs the question of whether or not it even matters if the result is delicious and tender.

I tend to smoke low and slow when I want a nice day of laid back relaxation.

[lankster35]

For what it's worth...I'm 53 and started learning when I was about 25 and believe I am still learning. When I moved to TX in the 80's and my TX neighbor started showing me how he cooked it was generally steady at 250dg and that is how I still try to do it today. My pit likes 250 Plus so many times I'm at 265 or so and that is where I cook.

I believe everyone should cook at whatever works for them and turns out great BBQ. I don't wrap anything either and that is only because I tried it both ways and like to just leave the pit closed and smoke until done. I also think all the new thermometers play a big part in this discussion since way back when the only temp gauge was on the door of the pit and we know how different that can be vs. on the grate so who knows what people really cooked at - probably hotter than they thought.

Anyway - good conversation and the only right way is what works for you!

[Sausage Warrior]

All I cook is Select grade Beef H&F I aint lazy 16-17 hrs a day on my ranch, I work smarter not harder. I have no problem making proper Moist juicy brisket at 300-350. A closed mind is a terrible waste.
http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae164/Bludawg51/DSCF0087.jpg
http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae164/Bludawg51/DSCF0089.jpg

That sure looks moist and juicy BlueDog and I'm sure you work hard and are a great cook - your photo lacks to indicate how TENDER your brisket is and that is what I'm contending s l o w l o w cooking does.

[Fwismoker]

If someone that is stuck on 225 so be it...maybe their eyes will be opened later at some point.

I just don't want a smoldering fire...I'll take virtually invisible smoke all day long.

[Sausage Warrior]

Can't tell if you are serious or baiting/trolling. If it's the former then I disagree, though I know none here will change you mind so I won't argue any further than my next sentence. I've had amazing brisket at all temps and even got crazy this year and did one at 400 that was done in 4hrs and just as good as any cooked at 225.

Now I should also say in general that there is nothing wrong with 225. I still use it occasionally and if someone likes that temp then rock it. There seems to be a few different types of hot guys around here. The ones that do it, like it, promote it, share ideas on it with other brethren in a way that is genuine and helpful. Then there are those that passively/aggresively (or openly) bash lower temps and act like to cool kids doing the new thing (though hot isn't super new) and look down on others cooking at "inferior temps" and don't treat them as a part of this BBQ family. For those the primary reason they like cooking hot is to tell others why hot is better and why some are "cooking in the past", then secondly comes sharing actual hot knowledge for the sake of what they consider helping.

But maybe I'm the only one that sees this new trend forming on the Brethren forum and I'm on a soapbox :crazy:.

Seriously no baiting or trolling here. I have been cooking bbq since many of you haven't been able to eat solid food. Long before me it was figured out that lower temps help assure tender cooks. How can anyone in their right mind dispute this? If you cook great BBQ in excess of 300 degrees good for you but this argument can be very detrimental to many folks who don't have your quality of meat or technique. LOW TEMPS ARE GOOD INSURANCE YOUR MEAT IS GOING TO BE TENDER - PERIOD.

When, I'm challenged (rather rudely) I will rebut with logic and if that challenges your value system and angers you because there's no logic you can offer other than "you cook a damn good brisket at 400 degrees" then you lose the argument.

[Hog1990]

There is a simple little trick that will work at all temperatures;

Hold the Alt key down and hit 248

It will give you °

Works on microsoft - not sure it works on any other platform?

Carry on!

Option+k on a mac.......

[AlwaysSmokey]

Well, this thread got me to do an experiment. So,... pay attention for a moment.

I had 2 racks of of ribs, some sausage, and about 12 drum sticks. I scooped up some hot coals and proceeded to get my fire box up to snuff. Once the fire was happy, about an hour later it was time. I had tapped paper over the temp. gauge to cook by feel only. I let my wife look, so she would be able to tell me later where I was. My fat grimy smokey fingers liked 275. She said I had a little swing up to 310 for a bit, but maintained pretty nicely. I simply ran a small clean fire, and would touch my smoker on each side. They even smell different when they get too hot. I just thought it was fun to strip away all preconcieved notions and just watch my fire and meats. Liberating really. The food was right on point. The chicken cooked quickly on my f.b. side, and the ribs took a little less than 3hours and were just as good as always. The sausage was good too. Anyways I thought it relevant, and perhaps useful to other brethren. Before you bury your head into one way or the other,.. maybe see if you can pull off a blind cook. You might find it to be in your nature to run a little hotter, or cooler...

Anyways, about 225,......... I'm not saying it was aliens,.............. But it was aliens.

Be good brothers. It's all for the love of Q

[1buckie]

Well, this thread got me to do an experiment. So,... pay attention for a moment.

I had 2 racks of of ribs, some sausage, and about 12 drum sticks. I scooped up some hot coals and proceeded to get my fire box up to snuff. Once the fire was happy, about an hour later it was time. I had tapped paper over the temp. gauge to cook by feel only. I let my wife look, so she would be able to tell me later where I was. My fat grimy smokey fingers liked 275. She said I had a little swing up to 310 for a bit, but maintained pretty nicely. I simply ran a small clean fire, and would touch my smoker on each side. They even smell different when they get too hot. I just thought it was fun to strip away all preconcieved notions and just watch my fire and meats. Liberating really. The food was right on point. The chicken cooked quickly on my f.b. side, and the ribs took a little less than 3hours and were just as good as always. The sausage was good too. Anyways I thought it relevant, and perhaps useful to other brethren. Before you bury your head into one way or the other,.. maybe see if you can pull off a blind cook. You might find it to be in your nature to run a little hotter, or cooler...

Anyways, about 225,......... I'm not saying it was aliens,.............. But it was aliens.

Be good brothers. It's all for the love of Q

Used to cook like that all the time until I got on the InterToob....everybody wants to know what temp......usually I'm somewhere in the ballpark,...maybe the dugout, maybe the bullpen, maybe the concession stand?

See Here:

http://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/showthread.php?t=192745

[Jason TQ]

Seriously no baiting or trolling here. I have been cooking bbq since many of you haven't been able to eat solid food. Long before me it was figured out that lower temps help assure tender cooks. How can anyone in their right mind dispute this? If you cook great BBQ in excess of 300 degrees good for you but this argument can be very detrimental to many folks who don't have your quality of meat or technique. LOW TEMPS ARE GOOD INSURANCE YOUR MEAT IS GOING TO BE TENDER - PERIOD.

When, I'm challenged (rather rudely) I will rebut with logic and if that challenges your value system and angers you because there's no logic you can offer other than "you cook a damn good brisket at 400 degrees" then you lose the argument.

I can't help if you think was being rude so I'll let that be...........Also just because you have been doing something longer than those eating solid food doesn't make you an expert. If anything that statement is purely for the sake of buffing your chest out and causing a stir vs attempting to have a real conversation about bbq.

Can you explain or provide in detail the logic/scientific facts/studies on how 225 (low) is better than hotter temps?? Simply saying "How can anyone in their right mind dispute this?" is a very very shallow statement with no backing other than "hearsay".

Where is your proof other than saying "Long before me it was figured out that lower temps help assure tender cooks." Who figured this out and what science backs it up? You seem very passionate about these lower temps and I'm guessing you will have little trouble quickly providing the science backing your statements as I'm sure those that like cooking low would also like the hard facts/proof.

Looking forward to your "logic" since you have provided zero up until this point. Without the facts you maybe be just as detrimental as those who say you can cook good bbq at higher temps......

[USMC]

225 degree cooking take longer, you don't have to keep a constant eye on the cook, which allows time to drink more beer.

Beat me to it. I like beer and I'm assuming the guy that came up with 225 did too. Once I eat and I'm full, no room for beer. I like to get as many in as possible before time to eat.

That being said, if the parents or a preacher(if I ever were to invite one of those guys over) were coming over, I'd probably smoke at a higher temp as to prevent total inebriation.

[smoke ninja]

Mis-information is lazy guys with poor cookers that can't keep temps in the low 200s and convincing themselves and others that their briskets are as tender as those cooked properly at low temps.

I respect the fact you are from Texas but all that really means is you get the best beef. I couldn't buy prime beef here for love or money so make use of slow low cooks to maximize what I have to work with.

Seriously no baiting or trolling here. I have been cooking bbq since many of you haven't been able to eat solid food. Long before me it was figured out that lower temps help assure tender cooks. How can anyone in their right mind dispute this? If you cook great BBQ in excess of 300 degrees good for you but this argument can be very detrimental to many folks who don't have your quality of meat or technique. LOW TEMPS ARE GOOD INSURANCE YOUR MEAT IS GOING TO BE TENDER - PERIOD.

When, I'm challenged (rather rudely) I will rebut with logic and if that challenges your value system and angers you because there's no logic you can offer other than "you cook a damn good brisket at 400 degrees" then you lose the argument.



As a younger fellla ive dealt with the mentality of old timers who think their experience is worth something on its own. Well just because youve been doing it forever dont mean you have been doing it right or better. Ive surpassed plenty of experienced fellas stuck in their ways. You claim to rebut with logic when challenged and boast of known facts but offer nothing to back up your statements.

i was trying to keep this from being a hot and fast (+270) vs low and slow (-250) debate, to recognize the merits of both but to discuss why so much written material claims low and slow to be the best and proper method. Your thinking that hot fast results in less tender or low and slow results in more tender meat is what im refering to. I challenge your notion that long before you it was determined that low equals better. As thirdeye said it was burn barrels and hot coals shoveled in to pits, not offset stick burners. Thermos weren't used, temps didn't matter. Some would say hot and fast predates low and slow even if the pitmasters didnt know it. You say low temps assure tender meat, i say they assure longer cooks. That both methods can result in good food. I would even say lower temps can be harder to master due super long stalls and the difficulties in maintaining such low temps for so long. Ill ask you to prove beyond saying from your own experience how low temps assure meat more tender.

Please dont take this as an attack but as a healthy, friendly discussion by people who are passionate about what we do.

[Sausage Warrior]

Lots of bravado behind the keyboard. I wish this was a debate but a few arrogant people who refuse to let common sense dictate have pushed this into personal attacks. Congratulations on your great high temp cooks guys. It's still very obvious that many folks don't have control of their cooks or their passions.

[smoke ninja]

Lots of bravado behind the keyboard. I wish this was a debate but a few arrogant people who refuse to let common sense dictate have pushed this into personal attacks. Congratulations on your great high temp cooks guys. It's still very obvious that many folks don't have control of their cooks or their passions.

What does that even mean? Calling me junior proves nothing. Edit it or not it proves you feel you have nothing else to learn and that you know more simply due to age. Who cant control a cooker? Stop ducking the questions. How does low assure better more tender meat?

[smoke ninja]

And what personal attacks?

[Jason TQ]

Lots of bravado behind the keyboard. I wish this was a debate but a few arrogant people who refuse to let common sense dictate have pushed this into personal attacks. Congratulations on your great high temp cooks guys. It's still very obvious that many folks don't have control of their cooks or their passions.

Oh dear. Sausage Warrior obviously there is no having a discussion with you because you have so quickly taken the overplayed internet argument route where you call people names (ie arrogant) and format the first attack on character when no one is doing that. Which pretty much means you don't have fact to back up the "ideas/theories" you claim to be so true. So you take the only logical step and quickly pretend you are being mistreating and run away because you are in the minority and can't handle so many disagreeing with you. So instead of answering some simple questions, none of which were an attack from me or others that I saw, you run and hide. What you are doing is nothing new.....

I'm still open for discussion if you would like to discuss the facts/science based upon what you have claimed. Ending a sentence with the word "PERIOD" isn't proving any science or fact just as an FYI. But I don't think you have any, thus you last post. I only simply asked for you to share your knowledge of the subject with actual information and not things you just simply know.

Can you do that or are you just going to hide behind the scapegoat of being mistreated?

[PNW Smoker]

Hey everyone,

Long time since I visited, and this is my first post since coming back around.

I have a Traeger, so I have a different perspective on temps that I thought I'd toss out there. (on a side note, while I like the convenience of the T, hindsight being what it is, I'd probably spend my money differently had I known what I now know about the Texas Grill)

I like a good bark, strong smoke ring, and a good bold smoke flavor. I find that VERY difficult to get from a Traeger. In fact the first time I did a butt, I followed their directions and I didn't much like it at all.

In order to get the smoke flavor I like (and so far I've satisfied everyone I've fed, which includes a pretty big annual event at my place), I run the T on "smoke" setting for about six hours or so (I'm not looking at my notes right now). It runs around 190'ish on this setting. After six'ish hours I turn it up to 250 or 275 to finish in off.

I do this for brisket too.

I just bought a Weber kettle (and Amazon tells me it is currently sitting on my doorstep waiting for me today). When I retire, I won't be taking the T with me, so I plan on getting proficient with the kettle.

anyway, my .02.... which really has nothing to do with the OP I suppose, but this thread derailed a bit a few pages ago :)

- Brad

[Joezx14]

Ok so I am a noob and not part of either camp and really just want to be schooled on LnS vs HnF.

Iv been doing my spare ribs between 225-250 and did them for 5 to 6 hours with 3 2 1 method. They come out pretty good but I am open to trying out new stuff especially if it will cook the food faster.

So the reason everyone says LnS is because, over time the fat slowly renders out without over cooking the muscle fibers right? What happens when it is HnF and the results are the tender meat as LnS?

Also, I am seeing more and more people saying they don't foil their meats, I think I need to try that out too. It would make the cook a lot easier and cleaner for me. Just was afraid I won't get the same tender results without foil.

[Veets]

Ok so I am a noob and not part of either camp and really just want to be schooled on LnS vs HnF.

Iv been doing my spare ribs between 225-250 and did them for 5 to 6 hours with 3 2 1 method. They come out pretty good but I am open to trying out new stuff especially if it will cook the food faster.

So the reason everyone says LnS is because, over time the fat slowly renders out without over cooking the muscle fibers right? What happens when it is HnF and the results are the tender meat as LnS?

Also, I am seeing more and more people saying they don't foil their meats, I think I need to try that out too. It would make the cook a lot easier and cleaner for me. Just was afraid I won't get the same tender results without foil.

The low and slow may or may not allow more fat to render yielding a different product, i'm not sure if that's universal given how each hunk of meat probably has different amounts and thicknesses of internal fat. The exterior you can control through trimming.

But, if you think you have a hunk that has more internal fat than normal, going lower may help since if it sits at 170 for a longer time before being done I suppose that extra fat will render out. Just a guess on my part.

Going a little hotter will still give you tenderness. Just watch how the bark sets up and if it gets to the point where you think it's getting too hard, then try just draping foil over the ribs rather than completely wrapping.

I've recently started going a bit hotter on my ribs in the kettle and I think I like it. At least for ribs.

Try it, experiment with your cooks too.

[Jorge]

Mis-information is lazy guys with poor cookers that can't keep temps in the low 200s and convincing themselves and others that their briskets are as tender as those cooked properly at low temps.

I respect the fact you are from Texas but all that really means is you get the best beef. I couldn't buy prime beef here for love or money so make use of slow low cooks to maximize what I have to work with.

I'd say that could be taken as flamebait, as well as some of the other stuff.

If somebody puts a plate of brisket in front of me, I don't care what temp they cooked at. I care about it being good. I've cooked low and slow, as well as hot and fast and had successes and failures at both. There is no wrong way, or a way that's more right if the results are quality BBQ.

There are a lot of people that have made a good living cooking BBQ, and I'm pretty sure that the overwhelming majority of them will tell you that you still don't know it all. Sometimes we can be right, without somebody else having to be wrong.

[lankster35]

My second post on this topic. I am a 250ish cooker and don't wrap and as I said before the only reason is because I think I do better not wrapped.....with that said there is nothing wrong with wrapping when you are running short on time and the company is coming or getting hungry.

My wife and I had a debate a long time ago........She said just put it on the smoker for 4 or 5 hours, wrap it in foil and stick it in the oven.......My heart sank........I said that was cheating and she said who cares it still tastes great.......I did that once for her and now the oven is only for other items and not BBQ. Everyone has what works for them and I have great results not wrapping and cooking at 250-265 even if it takes a long time. I am an admitted pyromaniac and don't mind tending the fire for 12 hours.

[AlwaysSmokey]

Yeah, gotta stay open. I remember being stuck on 225. I remember arguing about it. Live and learn. As soon as I quit fighting the pit life got better. I still like lower temps. Usually around 250. It's bbq. Not a time traveling delorian. Lots of room for carving out your own style. And, such is the life when cooking with fire, always something a little different. Everybody hug it out and have a beer.
............except of course for the pellet poopers, you guys are still burning in hell. :-)

[1buckie]

Yeah, gotta stay open. I remember being stuck on 225. I remember arguing about it. Live and learn. As soon as I quit fighting the pit life got better. I still like lower temps. Usually around 250. It's bbq. Not a time traveling delorian. Lots of room for carving out your own style. And, such is the life when cooking with fire, always something a little different. Everybody hug it out and have a beer.
............except of course for the pellet poopers, you guys are still burning in hell. :-)


And me.....I don't drink.....had to stop so there would be enough beer for everybody else.......

Also,

I've run tri-tip for 14 hours at 190~210 on a kettle.......good thing I'm not putting that info in a tri-tip thread, eh?

[Fwismoker]

I sure know I've evolved, 225 used to be the holy grail of temps to me...3-2-1 and all that. Next was 275 for most things now I'm @300 on butts and 275-300 on ribs cooked one way and a new method I'll share later doing 400-600 on ribs. The point being its OK to learn and evolve on bbq. Be open to new concepts and experiment.... who knows you might like it!

[Mrfish]

I guess I have come full circle. Started low and slow, then hot and fast for a few years, now playing with low and slow again. Kinda nice knowing I can do both.

[smoke ninja]

Well looks like were completely off the rails and the question of why is 225 promoted as the only way may go unanswered. Was it blue dawg, the chicken king, the poobah, ButtBurner or did it come from old misled sausage makers? Just like who is sparticus all these men have stepped forward or been named as possible culprits. I can see how one would defend such low temps so vigorously. years of sleepless nights and late dinners then only to find out it could have been just as good by simply cooking a little hotter. well whoever it was he knows who he is and what hes done. Living with the shame is punishment enough.

[Sausage Warrior]

BBQ BRETHREN? BBQ Heyna more like it. What a bunch of whining ninnies cry baby teat clinging jerks. Excuse me if I disagree with you because you can't keep pit temps but that's neither my problem or (apparently) yours. You can take your little social club of lusting after each other's equipment (since you obviously are too pork filled to lust each other's wives) and stuff it. Stuff your Shirley loving stick burning, simple minded red neck mentality. There are way too many blind fools here.

Cancel my subscription to the resurrection, send my credentials to the house of detention - SHOVE IT YOU BURNT BBQ WEINERS

[Ron_L]

Mod Note:

All right. THAT's IT! The name calling and personal attacks stop now!

Discuss the merits of low and slow vs. hot and fast all you want, but why some people feel the need to belittle others because they have a different opinion is beyond me! The choice of cook temperature is not an indication of someone's ability to tend a fire or their intelligence. IT IS PERSONAL PREFERENCE! PERIOD. Keep an open mind and learn from each other, not bash each other.

This thread will be scrubbed of unnecessary posts and posts meant only to stir the pot. Any further personal attacks, name calling, etc. could result in disciplinary action. KEEP IT CIVIL!

[AlwaysSmokey]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbecue_in_Texas

While having no clear answer, I found an old read on the history of Texas bbq. I tend to agree with the " it was the sausage makers" idea. Since their isn't a clear cut answer as to when I was left to make judgment calls based on the time line. However, one other thought was,.. what about the guys burying whole hogs? I would think the low and slow thought train would definitely be affected by those types of methods. Since,. that is exactly what happens in that process. Just some fuel for the thought process. Thoughts?

[Brew n Que]

Back to the original subject. My theory is that 225 was the original low and slow temp just because someone once decided to actually measure the temperature of their cooker, and that is what they found. Basically, they were the first to measure, they spread around what they personally did, and it spread from there. I have no scientific or historic basis for this theory, just how it could have happened.

That said, I am on the fence about the best temp. My best brisket so far was cooked around 250, but I have made great brisket at 225 all the way up to 275+. I also think it depends on the characteristics of your smoker. I would rather cook at 225 on a smoker that gets really good airflow and draft, than 275 on a cooker that flows very slowly.

[smoke ninja]

BBQ BRETHREN? BBQ Heyna more like it. What a bunch of whining ninnies cry baby teat clinging jerks. Excuse me if I disagree with you because you can't keep pit temps but that's neither my problem or (apparently) yours. You can take your little social club of lusting after each other's equipment (since you obviously are too pork filled to lust each other's wives) and stuff it. Stuff your Shirley loving stick burning, simple minded red neck mentality. There are way too many blind fools here.

Cancel my subscription to the resurrection, send my credentials to the house of detention - SHOVE IT YOU BURNT BBQ WEINERS


http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l520/smokeninjabbq/49840009_zpscghu4o1i.jpg (http://s1121.photobucket.com/user/smokeninjabbq/media/49840009_zpscghu4o1i.jpg.html)

[thirdeye]

Back to the original subject. My theory is that 225 was the original low and slow temp just because someone once decided to actually measure the temperature of their cooker, and that is what they found. Basically, they were the first to measure, they spread around what they personally did, and it spread from there. I have no scientific or historic basis for this theory, just how it could have happened.

That said, I am on the fence about the best temp. My best brisket so far was cooked around 250, but I have made great brisket at 225 all the way up to 275+. I also think it depends on the characteristics of your smoker. I would rather cook at 225 on a smoker that gets really good airflow and draft, than 275 on a cooker that flows very slowly.

Sounds like a reasonable theory. Along those lines, many of us grew up in a household with a Betty Crocker cookbook on a shelf, and those books seem to consider 325° an ideal oven temp for many things... folks read the book, then adapt 325° as well. 50 years later, a young housewife want's to cook a pot roast.... she uses 325°.

[BBQchef33]

Mis-information is lazy guys with poor cookers that can't keep temps in the low 200s and convincing themselves and others that their briskets are as tender as those cooked properly at low temps.

I respect the fact you are from Texas but all that really means is you get the best beef. I couldn't buy prime beef here for love or money so make use of slow low cooks to maximize what I have to work with.

Around here we pride ourselves on the montra "there is NO ONE WAY"...

And that includes yours.

I got an array of pits to choose from... And how I cook depends on how hungry I am and how long I have.. Or am I cooking for a lazy day of cold brews and enjoying feeding the fire and sitting around or do I need dinner ready in 5 hours..

We live in both schools here.. Old AND new, not old vs new.

[BBQchef33]

BBQ BRETHREN? BBQ Heyna more like it. What a bunch of whining ninnies cry baby teat clinging jerks. Excuse me if I disagree with you because you can't keep pit temps but that's neither my problem or (apparently) yours. You can take your little social club of lusting after each other's equipment (since you obviously are too pork filled to lust each other's wives) and stuff it. Stuff your Shirley loving stick burning, simple minded red neck mentality. There are way too many blind fools here.

Cancel my subscription to the resurrection, send my credentials to the house of detention - SHOVE IT YOU BURNT BBQ WEINERS


Well.........I civilly responded above before reading the rest of the thread, and also missed what seems to be alot of scrubbing... but Im taking this one post here REAL PERSONAL.. :mad2: you obviously have missed what this forum about and where/why it started. Surprising coming from someone whos been here for a while.

so, i'll do what i usually do and step away form the keyboard for a few hours before I respond the way I'd like to. :mad2:

[Sausage Warrior]

JUST CANCEL MY SUBSCRIPTION - i WON'T BE POSTING ANYMORE. I've better things to do than be sanctioned by the Pope himself.

[Fwismoker]

OK seriously now... Fats and connective tissue break down at certain temperatures whether it takes 6 hours or 60 minutes to reach that temp and so long at that temp to fully break down. Cooking hotter obviously gets you to that point quicker simple as that...the only difference is what will the outside look like.

[smoke ninja]

Im so over disappointed ric flair and the hulkster got scrubbed. thanks for nothing sausage. Way to show your true colors.

If your so done here dont forget to log out.

Btw, classy PM

[Jason TQ]

BBQ BRETHREN? BBQ Heyna more like it. What a bunch of whining ninnies cry baby teat clinging jerks. Excuse me if I disagree with you because you can't keep pit temps but that's neither my problem or (apparently) yours. You can take your little social club of lusting after each other's equipment (since you obviously are too pork filled to lust each other's wives) and stuff it. Stuff your Shirley loving stick burning, simple minded red neck mentality. There are way too many blind fools here.

Cancel my subscription to the resurrection, send my credentials to the house of detention - SHOVE IT YOU BURNT BBQ WEINERS

Wow. This is all I could think about reading this post....
http://i1083.photobucket.com/albums/j395/fnbish69/e31_zpszykrrdin.jpg (http://s1083.photobucket.com/user/fnbish69/media/e31_zpszykrrdin.jpg.html)

You just proved about every point folks here were trying to make. People were trying to have a conversation asking you to discuss further your points, then you tried to make it seems as though you were being attacked and you started the name calling and this post only furthers the point that you have no intention about having and adult dialogue about bbq. No on attacked you or called you names. They simply and politely asked for you to back up what you were saying.

You are set in your ways and obviously don't have control over your emotions and when faced with a few people questioning your statements on an internet forum you simply cry wolf and start the name calling in a very over the top manner. If the tiny bit that has been said here gets you this riled up I don't know what something more serious would do.

Clearly there is no reasoning with you, so good luck and hope you turn the page and stick around to have some discussions on bbq.

[AlwaysSmokey]

LOL,.. are we still trying to save this train?... or..... has it exploded ? :behindsofa:

I'll give it one more feeble attempt....

Cooking at 225 was perhaps adopted adaptations of barbacoa, island style whole hog, and classic open fire spit style cooks on the range. Maybe? :pop2:

[dadsr4]

- i WON'T BE POSTING ANYMORE. .
Applause - YouTube

[RolandJT]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbecue_in_Texas

While having no clear answer, I found an old read on the history of Texas bbq. I tend to agree with the " it was the sausage makers" idea. Since their isn't a clear cut answer as to when I was left to make judgment calls based on the time line. However, one other thought was,.. what about the guys burying whole hogs? I would think the low and slow thought train would definitely be affected by those types of methods. Since,. that is exactly what happens in that process. Just some fuel for the thought process. Thoughts?

I participated in old school dig a pit, burn wood in the bottom to coals, and put hogs on makeshift grates, cover with thick pieces of metal thing when growing up. It took about 12-18 hours, so it must have been L&S.

[1buckie]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbecue_in_Texas

While having no clear answer, I found an old read on the history of Texas bbq. I tend to agree with the " it was the sausage makers" idea. Since their isn't a clear cut answer as to when I was left to make judgment calls based on the time line. However, one other thought was,.. what about the guys burying whole hogs? I would think the low and slow thought train would definitely be affected by those types of methods. Since,. that is exactly what happens in that process. Just some fuel for the thought process. Thoughts?

Thanks for that.......I've never really read anything about "The Sausage People", just that I would watch some German & Swiss guys a few doors down from where I lived & worked in the early 80's.....man, those guys were CRAFTSMEN at doing that stuff.......had big overhead hooked racks on a track......loaded stuff on & rolled it right into the smoke room.....fascinating to watch.....
The place closed down after something like 68 years in biz.....really too bad, it was GREAT stuff......

Anyway, there was a big thread here some months back that kinda wandered into the temp territory somehow & I got to thinking about how those sausages were made, that many, many German immigrants settled all thru Texas, Oklahoma & all across the southern areas there & thought it might be somehow connected.......


The other thing about buried hogs probably has something to do with it too......people used to do all kinds of cooking like that, but the USDA or health depts. decided (I guess) that food should not be cooked in the dirt......
As a guess, that type thing may have come from the smoking / preserving traditions of the Caribbean peoples, or even the Africans who came as slaves to Virginia and on South.....maybe so?

[AlwaysSmokey]

I am thinking the same things. :thumb:

[smoke ninja]

Wow nice save fellas. This is the kinda discussion i was aiming for in the op, not the low vs high debate. I am hearby canceling my gut punch referendum, all is forgiven. Keep up the good posts.

[1buckie]

I am thinking the same things. :thumb:

Wow nice save fellas. This is the kinda discussion i was aiming for in the op, not the low vs high debate. I am hearby canceling my gut punch referendum, all is forgiven. Keep up the good posts.


Yeah, imagine that......people from Texas & California getting along & attempting to answer the QUESTION that's been clouded by history & millions of cookups......:clap:

[Porcine Aviator]

Could it be this simple?:

When the original Ham and Sausage guys hung their meat, they were using fairly large size spaces to accommodate the amount of food that was loaded. Because of the size of the room and the BTU heat sink created by the meat, it would be difficult to raise the temperature of the facility to very high temperatures. So maybe it was serendipitous, and they found that the lower temps worked out for them?

[1buckie]

Yeah, that's another aspect......curing with smoke is way older than anything most of us are doing with a Home Depot offset or any of the normal cookers that would be used.....

[AlwaysSmokey]

Yup,... I think we're on to something here ....

So,.. are we saying the magic number 225 was just circumstance?

EDIT: I think I got it fellas. Or at least an aspect of it.

...........FAT. It's all about the fat. and,.. the funny thing is,.. we all already knew it.. if it was a snake it would have bit us.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-evolution-of-american-barbecue-13770775/?no-ist

[Fwismoker]

If it would help I could drive to Toledo , visit with SW and do some scientific experimentation with some ribs, brisky or butts. We could get identical cuts of meat, drink some beers and cook up some Q !

Nothing like some Saturday afternoon research and develolment! What say you sausage warrior? )))

[smoke ninja]

Yup,... I think we're on to something here ....

So,.. are we saying the magic number 225 was just circumstance?

EDIT: I think I got it fellas. Or at least an aspect of it.

...........FAT. It's all about the fat. and,.. the funny thing is,.. we all already knew it.. if it was a snake it would have bit us.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-evolution-of-american-barbecue-13770775/?no-ist

So according to the article Carolina Q is the birthplace and one true American style with pork being the traditional cut. Sorry Texas

[smoke ninja]

If it would help I could drive to Toledo , visit with SW and do some scientific experimentation with some ribs, brisky or butts. We could get identical cuts of meat, drink some beers and cook up some Q !

Nothing like some Saturday afternoon research and develolment! What say you sausage warrior? )))


Great idea keith, I can be there in 90 minutes

[AlwaysSmokey]

So according to the article Carolina Q is the birthplace and one true American style with pork being the traditional cut. Sorry Texas

Meh,... no biggy. and,.. pork is so farking good!... you know that's where bacon comes from right ?!! :shocked:
Everyone is caught up on brisket now, so Texas is in the spot light. In 10 years it could be Florida with the whole world caught up on gator. :laugh:
who knows,... things just catch fire and burn for awhile. I am eagerly waiting for Q to fall out of the spot light,... lower brisket prices(yeah right) and plenty of good smoker steals on craig's list. But I am enjoying it while it lasts.

[smoke ninja]

https://youtu.be/vJ68ovUkw58

[dadsr4]

https://youtu.be/vJ68ovUkw58
That's more "hot and fast".

[Mrfish]

Sausage War Part1 - YouTube

[Bludawg]

LOL,.. are we still trying to save this train?... or..... has it exploded ? :behindsofa:

I'll give it one more feeble attempt....

Cooking at 225 was perhaps adopted adaptations of barbacoa, island style whole hog, and classic open fire spit style cooks on the range. Maybe? :pop2: Old school South Texas - Mexican Barbacoa still alive & well and a Favorite bachelor party treat served up by Real cowboys before getting castorat.... married off. Take a Cows Cabeza Skin it, remove ears, tongue, and eyeballs. Season with Salt & Pepper a whole bunch of Cilantro, 2 heads of garlic and a few onions wrap in damp burlap horse feed sacks. Dig a pit about 3 ' deep line the bottom with rocks & fill it with mesquite burn down to coals put afoot of dirt back in put the Cabeza in the pit and cover it with dirt. Sand around pit pass the tequila and apply beer as needed until the sun comes up dig up the cabeza pull out your knife & dig in. And get to the church on time or else.

[Shagdog]

Personally I don't think the temp plays much of a roll in your finished product at all. I treat temp just like any other tool in my BBQ arsenal. I'll cook at whatever temp helps me time the food service best. The hotter you go, the faster it's done. I don't feel there's any magic temp that makes perfect BBQ, and I also don't obsess about temps at all anymore. I think my BBQ has gotten better for it, honestly. It's supposed to be fun, and staring at my maverick all day obsessing over 10 degree swings just doesn't suit me. I've cooked many things at 225. I've also done the same things at 300 and higher. I doubt I could tell one from the other in a line up. Anyways...

My theory on 225 is this - Its easy. Cook book writers want to sell cookbooks. They want people to say, "I made pulled pork last weekend! I used joe blow's recipe. It was amazing!" Then that friend wants to make amazing pulled pork so they go out and buy Joe Blow's cookbook too. It's hard to fark up a big cut cooked at 225. The end results are reliable and the end window is HUGE. If people who never cracked a grill before tried a 300 degree brisket, maybe 4 or 5 out of 10 would succeed. At 225 that success rate goes up a lot, probably 8-9 out 10 will succeed. Most instructions are written for the lowest common denominator - the person who has never done this and is not familiar with the procedures. Cooking at Higher temps are just skills we develop as we strive to learn more of the science and art behind what we love doing.

[yakdung]

Germans central Texas.

[AlwaysSmokey]

I like that theory too shagdog.

The numbers were conjured to please the masses.

[Bludawg]

I think Shaggy is on to something here

[Fwismoker]

I think Shaggy is on to something here
Rhaggy...scooby treat?

[1buckie]

Personally I don't think the temp plays much of a roll in your finished product at all. I treat temp just like any other tool in my BBQ arsenal. I'll cook at whatever temp helps me time the food service best. The hotter you go, the faster it's done. I don't feel there's any magic temp that makes perfect BBQ, and I also don't obsess about temps at all anymore. I think my BBQ has gotten better for it, honestly. It's supposed to be fun, and staring at my maverick all day obsessing over 10 degree swings just doesn't suit me. I've cooked many things at 225. I've also done the same things at 300 and higher. I doubt I could tell one from the other in a line up. Anyways...

My theory on 225 is this - Its easy. Cook book writers want to sell cookbooks. They want people to say, "I made pulled pork last weekend! I used joe blow's recipe. It was amazing!" Then that friend wants to make amazing pulled pork so they go out and buy Joe Blow's cookbook too. It's hard to fark up a big cut cooked at 225. The end results are reliable and the end window is HUGE. If people who never cracked a grill before tried a 300 degree brisket, maybe 4 or 5 out of 10 would succeed. At 225 that success rate goes up a lot, probably 8-9 out 10 will succeed. Most instructions are written for the lowest common denominator - the person who has never done this and is not familiar with the procedures. Cooking at Higher temps are just skills we develop as we strive to learn more of the science and art behind what we love doing.

I like that theory too shagdog.

The numbers were conjured to please the masses.

I think Shaggy is on to something here


You guys read cookbooks?

[pjtexas1]

Shag sure has been dropping the knowledge since he got his Shirley.:eusa_clap His theory makes sense to me. 225 is easier to pull off than 350.

[Shagdog]

I wasn't going to say anything, but since I got my Shirley, I've been killin' the Sunday crossword.. In Pen.

[1buckie]

Cookin' without a cookbook too, I suppose?

[smoke ninja]

So if shaggy is on to something and 225 is better dones that mean the warrior was right?

http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l520/smokeninjabbq/download%205_zpsd4ozszom.jpg (http://s1121.photobucket.com/user/smokeninjabbq/media/download%205_zpsd4ozszom.jpg.html)

Naaa

[Fwismoker]

I wasn't going to say anything, but since I got my Shirley, I've been killin' the Sunday crossword.. In Pen.
That's funny right there. Lmao

[Fwismoker]

So if shaggy is on to something and 225 is better dones that mean the warrior was right?

http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l520/smokeninjabbq/download%205_zpsd4ozszom.jpg (http://s1121.photobucket.com/user/smokeninjabbq/media/download%205_zpsd4ozszom.jpg.html)

Naaa
It means warrior admits he's in the bottom 25% of true bbq pitmasters. Kinda sad actually. :sad:

[AlwaysSmokey]

Well, hasn't this just been a rollercoaster of emotions. LOL

[frognot]

300 is the new 225

[Boshizzle]

Interesting discussion and, it seems, is almost like discussing politics or religion. :) Here is my take on the whole 225 degree thing.

Before the invention of the thermometer and enclosed barbecue smoker, there was no specified temperature for cooking barbecue. Barbecue cooks learned through experience how to build a bed of coals with the right temperature to cook large cuts of meat or whole carcasses through without burning the outside before the inside was done.

As late as 1941 magazine articles about cooking barbecue instructed the readers to use the "count to eight" method for determining the proper temperature of the coals.

Sometime around the turn of the twentieth century, oven thermometers were available.

In 1901 an author wrote in American Kitchen Magazine "The writer's experience with an oven thermometer may prove of service to others if placed on record, since there is nothing of practical value is anywhere to be found on the subject. My thermometer was attached to the oven door, the register being outside, the bulb passing about three inches into the oven and extending about an inch and a half beyond the door. The thermometer was placed in position by removing the title place and boring a hole through the title plate behind it - a very simple operation." At this time it appears, oven thermometers were a do it yourself addition to ovens.

In 1917 a newspaper article tells us, "The toughest cuts of meat are the cheapest, but they are just as nutritious as the expensive cuts. By long, slow cooking they can be made very tender and palatable."

So, it seems that the "low and slow" mantra was borrowed from cookbooks instructing people how to cook in kitchen ovens. In 1941 an author compared barbecuing times for chicken, leg of lamb and roasts to "the same as that given in any good cook book for roasting in a moderate oven."

What I take from all this is, the 225 degree thing started after people began barbecuing with enclosed cookers probably no earlier than the 1950s and learned it first from common instructions on how to roast meats in an enclosed kitchen oven.

The 225 degree guidance was also probably suggested because the author/teacher wanted to make sure that his/her readers/students didn't scorch the outside of their foods giving them the best chance at success especially as they started out. It's kind of like the philosophy behind the 3-2-1 rib method. It's easy and it works and doesn't require a lot of experience to accomplish.

That's my story and I'm stickin' with it. :)

[Tom Sellecks Mustache]

When I first got started with smoking, it was starting to warm up here already. 225 is almost impossible to get here in AZ for more than half the year, so I started with 275 as my baseline low temp, letting it creep up to as high as 325 before taking any sort of action.

[Fwismoker]

It's the same cocept as the water cookers like the WSM. Sure you can turn out better food without the waterpan but Weber wanted the largest possible # of people to succeed (sell more units) so they wanted to make it dang near idiot proof.

[Krabby Patties]

So Im gathering that if thermometers in the oven didnt make it big until the 1920-1950s, then my grandmother just threw roast in the oven willie-nillie for my dad to eat.

[1buckie]

Good stuff, Dr. Bo.......I wonder at what point things began to change to, say, turkey, roasted at 325f?

I think that's about how I remember things being done even in the late 50's?

[Boshizzle]

Here is some more that might help shed some light on the subject -

From 1915
"Thermometers for Household Use Heretofore oven thermometers have been on the whole unreliable, although of some value as
“indicators.” This is because they were made of sheet metal, inset in the oven-door, and depended only upon the expansion and contraction of this metal to move the idicating needle. A really accurate oven thermometer has been tested this month.
It is a mercury bulb and is intended to be fastended to the oven rack within the oven. This thermometer, calibrated accuratley with the chemical thermometer used for checking it, can be safely relied upon as a guide to oven temperature..."

1915
The results of careful study of the best oven temperatures for baking all sorts of foods are summarized as follows: Slow, 250* t0 350*F, custards, merinques; moderate, 350* to 400* F, bread, gingerbread, plain cake, cookies; hot or 'quick,' 400* to 450* F, Parkerhouse rolls, popovers, etc.; very hot, 450* to 550* F, biscuits and pastry."

1917
"When we are privileged to have electric ovens with glass doors and an accurate thermometer, baking will be an easy and accurate process."

1918
There is no excuse nowadays for a soggy, burned, or too-dry loaf of bread. An oven thermometer to regulate the temperature during baking will insure success.

1919
"The Oven Thermometer has come to be so great a convenience to the housewife that it is looked upon as an essential portion of the equipment of any cooking apparatus which may be purchased for the home."

1919
"Lack of agreement as to what constitutes slow, medium, and hot as applied to oven heat is shown in tests of oven made in which chemical thermometers were placed, the operator guessing by the sensation method as to actual heat. Medium by this method was shown to be anywhere between 145* and 420*F, and hot to be anywhere between 145* and 582*F. Therefore it would appear that without other guide than the one supplied by nature, one person would bake with the oven at a temperature of
145* F and another (to use the extreme case) 420* F, both guessing they had a moderate oven."

1920
"The hit-or-miss baking of cake has been solved by the use of an oven thermometer."

1920
"There need never be any 'if' about it. Your cakes and everything else you bake always taste perfect when the oven has had the right temperature. And today you can make sure that your oven does have the right temperature - every time! By the Taylor Oven Thermometer." The Taylor oven thermometer cost $2.00 in 1920.

A 1944 edition of Life Magazine gives this "Handy Hint for All Meat Cookery." Any of it sound familiar?

"Low temperature meat cooking minimizes shrinkage; gives you the most servings and flavor. Here are some basic rules:

1.) Use low (325*F.) oven for roasting all meats and poultry (350*F. for fresh pork.) Do not sear roasts first.
2.) A roast is self-basting if placed fat side up in roasting pan.
3.) Meats cooked in water should be simmered, not boiled.
4.) Lower broiling heat gives more evenly-cooked, juicier steaks and chops."

[AlwaysSmokey]

So it's been 100 years in the making (temps). anything before was "best judgement"

So I think we can safely say that 225 came from the addition of thermometers to the ovens of the day. As a sort of safe number to ensure people had success with bigger or leaner cuts of meat. 100 or more years ago. agreed?

[Mrfish]

Dutch ovens date back to the 17th century, so structured low and slow was way back then. The Fahrenheit scale was developed 1725.

[mahenryak]

Dutch ovens date back to the 17th century, so structured low and slow was way back then. The Fahrenheit scale was developed 1725.

And Kamado cookers might date back 3000 years...

[jham0077]

I think Skip is on to something. Maybe 225 is the lowest temp that fat renders, yet not much steam will be released therefore keeping moisture in the piece of meat. And way back when, not everything was genetically bred for tenderness. Nowadays genetics plays such a big part in our food production. Animals are bred for carcass weight, bone structure, tenderness, marbling, growth rate, etc, etc.. Even "enhanced for flavor/tenderness". Hell, it may be impossible to cook a bad piece of meat nowadays.


And for the deep end rant.... Seriously?? I don't have alot of equipment to showoff, toys to use, don't post alot of pics. I come here for 1) ADVICE on how not to screw up an expensive slab of meat 2) Semi-intellectual, slap-stick style, and sometimes crude, humor and discussion. I don't even ask alot of questions. Most of the time I can sneak in, search, and sneak out.

And I can control my drum just fine thank you.

[AlwaysSmokey]

But in the context of the original question,.. as it relates to present bbq and the specific temp. I think we got it. i.e. cook your brisket at 225 low and slow... @Mr fish and mahenryak

However,...... I agree with both of you regarding those methods as they relate to the topic. Good point.

[Boshizzle]

As I understand the OP's original question, he was discussing how the practice of using barbecue temperatures in the known and measured 225* F range came about rather than low temperature cooking in general. Did I miss the intent of the question? If so, I will have to pull a Miss Emily Litella on this one. :)

[AlwaysSmokey]

Hell,.. at this point,.. I'm not sure I really remember....LOL

I think we have answered both in this thread.... : )

[mahenryak]

As I understand the OP's original question, he was discussing how the practice of using barbecue temperatures in the known and measured 225* F range came about rather than low temperature cooking in general. Did I miss the intent of the question? If so, I will have to pull a Miss Emily Litella on this one. :)

I think you have the OP's original intent. That was kind of my point, but it wasn't well communicated. If we want to start talking about slow cooking in general then we can go way, way back in time...

[smoke ninja]

As I understand the OP's original question, he was discussing how the practice of using barbecue temperatures in the known and measured 225* F range came about rather than low temperature cooking in general. Did I miss the intent of the question? If so, I will have to pull a Miss Emily Litella on this one. :)

Yea that's basically it. Cooking at specific known temps seems relatively new to bbq and judging from your post the world of cooking in general.

Temperature measurement being so new I figured the origins could be deducted.

[Brew-Bq]

Temperature measurement being so new I figured the origins could be deducted.

Wait, you're saying I can deduct my BBQ from my taxes?!:-P