Review: Kingsford® Competition vs Stubb's® Briquets (pics galore)

[wyocurt]

Thanks for all your work. I find like this very helpfull. Hope you and the rest of the brethern Hava Great Christmas and Happy New Years.

 

[bam]

John thanks for the review good work. :thumb:

 

[Arlin_MacRae]

Well done, John. Thanks for sharing that here.

 

[Patrick C.]

Guess I'll go argue BBQ on a math forum now... :-D

While the S produced 2.5 times as much ash as the K in the test, you should compare the ash percent rather than the absolute weight of ash. The K briqs are smaller, so with 12 briqs of K you are starting with less charcoal than 12 briqs of S. Even if they had the same composition, 12 heavier briqs will give you more ash than 12 lighter ones.

I've now had 250% of my daily beer allowance, so I'll let someone else reply to Mr. Carter about having more than 100%.

 

[Patrick C.]

Forgot to add, the Stubbs ash seems more likely to blow around in the UDS. No data, but there seems to be more of a dusting of ash than I get with the K Blue. I probably need to lift the lid slower...

 

[cliffcarter]

12 briqs of Comp K weigh 7.5 oz.
12 Stubbs briqs weigh 12 oz
Given yor results-
each Comp K produces .25 oz of ash
each Stubbs produces .385 oz of ash
Therefore the proper ratio to compare the weight of the ash is .25/.385, expressed as a percentage this is 64.9%, in other words the Comp K produces 65% less ash than Stubbs. As a point of order you can not have more than 100% of anything.

OK. You have the numbers, so interpret/express it how you wish,
but I stand by my results and statements.

John

First I would like to say again that what you have done in your analysis benefits us all by giving us an excellent quantitative comparison of these two products and I do applaud your effort and results.
Second the statement I made above is incorrect, it should read
"each Comp K produces ash comparable to 25% of its original weight"
and
"each Stubbs produces ash comparable 38.5% of its original weight"
Thus the conclusion is that Comp K produces 65% as much ash as Stubbs per briquette, or if you prefer Stubbs produces 50% more ash per briquette than CompK.
You posted this yourself in post #36 when you gave us the % of the weight of ash per briquette which led to my foolishness in doing this review and boring everyone with a math lesson.
Your raw data indicates 2.5/1 ratio because you started with the same # of briqs for each but not the same weight.
I do agree with Patrick C that if you are comparing weights you must start with the same weight for each, otherwise you are comparing apples and oranges.
Bottom line is that Stubbs does produce significantly more ash than Comp K, that is obvious.

 

[qnbiker]

Interesting post. Your results are not what I expected; I wonder how accurate they are in predicting real life charcoal performance.

I've never used K Comp and I won't comment on what I don't know. I do, however, use K Blue & Stubbs. Applying the transitive properties (if x > y and y > z, then x > z) of the results of your "comp vs stubbs" and "blue vs comp" tests and adjusting for weight, the conclusion is that K Blue burns longer and produces less ash than Stubbs (math omitted for brevity). Maybe the ash discrepancy is because I'm observing volume instead of weight, but my (non-scientific) experience is Stubbs burns longer and produces much less ash than K Blue.

Again, thanks for the post. It's an interesting test and I may try to duplicate it. Just thought I would put in my 2 cents.

 

[PatioDaddio]

Interesting post. Your results are not what I expected; I wonder how accurate they are in predicting real life charcoal performance.

I've never used K Comp and I won't comment on what I don't know. I do, however, use K Blue & Stubbs. Applying the transitive properties (if x > y and y > z, then x > z) of the results of your "comp vs stubbs" and "blue vs comp" tests and adjusting for weight, the conclusion is that K Blue burns longer and produces less ash than Stubbs (math omitted for brevity). Maybe the ash discrepancy is because I'm observing volume instead of weight, but my (non-scientific) experience is Stubbs burns longer and produces much less ash than K Blue.

Again, thanks for the post. It's an interesting test and I may try to duplicate it. Just thought I would put in my 2 cents.

Sorry, but it was "real-world charcoal performance". As I
mentioned in my reviews, the I used off-the-shelf bags of
each product.

I don't know how much more scientific one could be in an
average home setting. Also, the results are corroborated
by my home and competition results.

John

 

[PatioDaddio]

Interesting post. Your results are not what I expected; I wonder how accurate they are in predicting real life charcoal performance.

I've never used K Comp and I won't comment on what I don't know. I do, however, use K Blue & Stubbs. Applying the transitive properties (if x > y and y > z, then x > z) of the results of your "comp vs stubbs" and "blue vs comp" tests and adjusting for weight, the conclusion is that K Blue burns longer and produces less ash than Stubbs (math omitted for brevity). Maybe the ash discrepancy is because I'm observing volume instead of weight, but my (non-scientific) experience is Stubbs burns longer and produces much less ash than K Blue.

Again, thanks for the post. It's an interesting test and I may try to duplicate it. Just thought I would put in my 2 cents.

Sorry, but it was "real-world charcoal performance". As I
mentioned in my reviews, reviews I used off-the-shelf
bags of each product.

I don't know how much more scientific one could be in an
average home setting. Also, the results are corroborated
by my home and competition results.

John

 

[PatioDaddio]

Sorry for the duplicate posts. I don't know what happened.

John

 

[Big George's BBQ]

Very Nice John Thanks