Average cook time for one slab of baby backribs

[Mo-Dave]

I have rarely done baby back ribs, usually do spares, but I happen to have a slab and did not want to freeze it. I will cook these at 250 on my pelt smoker. If memory serves me, baby backs cook a little quicker than spares.
Dave

 

[Smokiemon]

Takes me 4.5 hours. 2 Hours Unwrapped 2 Hours Wrapped Then sauce and put back the last 30 min.

 

[Q_Done_Right]

Mine take about 4 hours (unwrapped) at 250ish degrees give or take 15 minutes. Every rack is different.:wink:

 

[SmittyJonz]

4 hrs

 

[BillN]

I run 275 to 300 and the last B-Backs finished in 3 hours 15 minutes cooked nakid.
Cooked to just starting to fall off the bone. One rack was natural the other two were enhanced all cooked the same.

 

[Bigbears BBQ]

4 hours at 240 unwrapped

 

[dadsr4]

Subtract an hour from you're spare's time is what I was advised when I asked a similar question. It worked out well. I test using a toothpick, if it goes in and out easily, they are done. You can always cook longer, if needed.

 

[Biloxidman]

I run 275 to 300 and the last B-Backs finished in 3 hours 15 minutes cooked nakid.
Cooked to just starting to fall off the bone. One rack was natural the other two were enhanced all cooked the same.

+1 on the temp and time

 

[Norm]

Same here on my big weber, it want's to run around 300°. I don't wrap but sauce about a half hour before they're done.

 

[smoke ninja]

Baby back are getting hard to find. I mostly see loin backs (yes they are technically the same) and they are huge. Ribs do sell for more than pork chops.

Being so big im finding they are only about a half hour less than trimmed spares

 

[Mo-Dave]

Update

It took close to 4.5 hours, then wrapped in foil for about an hour after bring them inside the house, but the truth is I just don't dare for baby backs, and have never understood why people go so ga ga over them. There is just something about the texture, or perhaps its the curve of the bone that can make it difficult to eat, not sure why, but I know I just prefer spares. Anyone else feel the same way?
Dave

 

[Frank Mahovlich]

Seems like 2, maybe 2.5 hours at the very most would work for me cooking at 280.

4+ hours, especially if foiling, at 280, & I'd have some seriously over-cooked ribs on my hands.

 

[jasonjax]

Baby back are getting hard to find. I mostly see loin backs (yes they are technically the same) and they are huge. Ribs do sell for more than pork chops.

Being so big im finding they are only about a half hour less than trimmed spares

+1 My experience lately as well. Assuming St. Louis style spares.

 

[BillN]

I do like baby backs but don't like the price. Once a year Albertsons in Tucson puts them on sale for $6.99 a pound and it is a buy one rack get three racks free so that is when I buy baby backs, otherwise I cringe at the price.

 

[effinUker]

It took close to 4.5 hours, then wrapped in foil for about an hour after bring them inside the house, but the truth is I just don't dare for baby backs, and have never understood why people go so ga ga over them. There is just something about the texture, or perhaps its the curve of the bone that can make it difficult to eat, not sure why, but I know I just prefer spares. Anyone else feel the same way?
Dave

I'd rather cook & eat spares too, and I like to leave the tips on.

 

[dadsr4]

I'd rather cook & eat spares too, and I like to leave the tips on.

Same here. To me, they are like chicken breast, pork tenderloin, or tofu, tasteless unless you coat them with something. They also tend to be dryer.

 

[PnkPanther]

Ill cook baby backs little hotter since they're leaner and usually done in 2 hours and turned out good. I've ran 350 and done in 90 minutes and happy with results