Low and slow...the myth.

[grillmonkey]

 
Squib 85 minutes with Simply Marvelous (super sugary) and cooked the last 15 minutes with a sugary homemade apple cider vinegar bbq glaze.  They were probe tender at 1 hour or so but i had to sauce and cook that on a little. 

It's pretty much inconceivable for people to think you can get smoke ring, tasty juicy non burnt ribs in that time frame.  Ribs that are award winning good.    Ribs just aren't L&S anymore!

This is shaking up the low and slow establishment down to its core.

 

[sqwib]

 
Actually it renders about as much as slow ribs i think.... All i know is they are tender and juicy.     An hour and half including prep time for meat and smoker for imho award winning ribs ...you just can't beat that with a stick! 

    Temps are hard to explain (I will later) but they average maybe 450-500* but times it's well over 600* 

I have slightly less rendering with the Hot and Fast

Low and slow

20100731223.jpg

• sqwib
• Aug 25, 2014

Fast and Hot

20120721180.JPG

• sqwib
• Aug 25, 2014

 

[stickyfingers]

Interesting posts to say the least!!

 

[sqwib]

 
Actually it renders about as much as slow ribs i think.... All i know is they are tender and juicy.     An hour and half including prep time for meat and smoker for imho award winning ribs ...you just can't beat that with a stick! 

    Temps are hard to explain (I will later) but they average maybe 450-500* but times it's well over 600* 

Wow, 600° I maxed out my Fast and Hot at 500° but stay at 450° for 70 minutes

first 50 minutes with rub/mop and last twenty minutes glazing

You can probably cut your cooking time another 10 minutes with them temps.

 

[fwismoker]

 
Wow, 600° I maxed out my Fast and Hot at 500° but stay at 450° for 70 minutes

first 50 minutes with rub/mop and last twenty minutes glazing

You can probably cut your cooking time another 10 minutes with them temps.

Oh the temps had to exceed 600* at times without question but I'm not worried about finishing times just the best possible quality ribs.  It used to be that the longer something slow smoked the better it had to be and i used to follow that philosophy...now it's just about putting out the best possible product regardless of time. 

 

[sqwib]

 
Oh the temps had to exceed 600* at times without question but I'm not worried about finishing times just the best possible quality ribs.  It used to be that the longer something slow smoked the better it had to be and i used to follow that philosophy...now it's just about putting out the best possible product regardless of time. 

I totally agree I love my ribs Hot and Fast, I also love the 5-6 hours of ME TIME I get when doing them low and slow.

Although I agree on the quality over time, I am gonna play with my 70 minute ribs and see if I can get them to 60 minutes without loss of quality, I think I am pushing it if I run my pit at 500°+

My last high heat cook I left the wood under the pit and lets just say it wasn't pretty.

High heat on an offset requires a lot of attention and forethought, grease fires, radiant heat, clearance, kids and dogs to name a few.

Here are a few pics, tell me whats going on in these pictures.

20120721114.JPG

• sqwib
• Aug 27, 2014

20120721078.JPG

• sqwib
• Aug 27, 2014

I think that someone that has done ribs high heat can answer this.

 

[dcarch]

Again, keeping in mind that once 212F is reached, no amount of heat can get it any higher, you can go to 1000F air temperature and it will make no difference.

Go boil a pot of water and measure the temperature. Once the water starts to boil, it make no difference how high or low the fire is, it will always be 212F.

dcarch

 

[sqwib]

 
Again, keeping in mind that once 212F is reached, no amount of heat can get it any higher, you can go to 1000F air temperature and it will make no difference.

Go boil a pot of water and measure the temperature. Once the water starts to boil, it make no difference how high or low the fire is, it will always be 212F.

dcarch

I know... you said that before but can you please use it in context, what does this apply to, fast and hot ribs vs. Low and Slow? I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Can you be a little more specific on this?

 

[dcarch]

 
I know... you said that before but can you please use it in context, what does this apply to, fast and hot ribs vs. Low and Slow? I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Can you be a little more specific on this?

In the context on this topic:

Once the 212F has been reached, the specific thermal conductivity constant of the meat (and fat, and bones) takes over. The speed of heat travel will always be the same to get the IT up. In other words, the high or low will have no impact on slow or fast relative to IT.

However, the high or low will have a big difference on the meat's surface. The heat will determine how fast the moisture will be burned away and how fast and how much caramelization will take place, and how much meat will turn to carbon.

The other aspect:

Just because the thermometer reads over 212F, it does not mean the meat's surface temperature is at 212F. This has to do with the very low specific heat of air, and the high latent heat contain of water. Evaporation can carry away a lot more heat than air can supply. That said, there is another factor enters into the consideration. If the interior of you smoker/grill is designed in such a way that the interior surfaces of the  smoker/grill gets very hot very fast, like in a well insulated ones, than a lot of cooking of the meat can be by done by infrared. In this case, the temperature measured by the termometer can be 0F, and the meat can still be cooked or burned.

dcarch

 

[fwismoker]

I can share an example on chicken from last night.  My 5 lb bird was injected heavily with creole butter and i cooked it about 500-600*.   The total cooking time was 90 minutes because it was just boiling inside, this thing must have been boiling from about 10 minutes after putting it on. lol.   If i would have spatchcocked that same bird  and cooked at 350 with no injection it would have probably have took the same amount of time.

Ribs are a different animal because you're dealing with connective tissue breaking down for the moisture...there are different rates of evaporative cooling in something like ribs vs chicken. 

 

[fwismoker]

 
I totally agree I love my ribs Hot and Fast, I also love the 5-6 hours of ME TIME I get when doing them low and slow.

Although I agree on the quality over time, I am gonna play with my 70 minute ribs and see if I can get them to 60 minutes without loss of quality, I think I am pushing it if I run my pit at 500°+

My last high heat cook I left the wood under the pit and lets just say it wasn't pretty.

High heat on an offset requires a lot of attention and forethought, grease fires, radiant heat, clearance, kids and dogs to name a few.

Here are a few pics, tell me whats going on in these pictures.

20120721114.JPG

• sqwib
• Aug 27, 2014

20120721078.JPG

• sqwib
• Aug 27, 2014

I think that someone that has done ribs high heat can answer this.

Mine is a totally different style of cooking then yours.  I see no smoke or very little smoke because its cooking directly over fire. There aren't flare ups of any kind from grease  with my high heat cooks. 

 

[sqwib]

 
In the context on this topic:

Once the 212F has been reached, the specific thermal conductivity constant of the meat (and fat, and bones) takes over. The speed of heat travel will always be the same to get the IT up. In other words, the high or low will have no impact on slow or fast relative to IT.

So if I understand you correctly you are saying if I cook my ribs at 212° or 500° the internal temps will take the same amount of time to reach the same temperature? This is something I can't get my head around and wont try to either.

Regardless of if this is true or not, I don't think it applies to the conversation about the ribs being done in 70 minutes as opposed to 6 hours, The simple fact is you can cook Ribs in a little over an hour or 6 hours with great results regardless of the science, so the statement is a moot point in this case, nonetheless interesting though!

However, the high or low will have a big difference on the meat's surface. The heat will determine how fast the moisture will be burned away and how fast and how much caramelization will take place, and how much meat will turn to carbon.

The other aspect:

Just because the thermometer reads over 212F, it does not mean the meat's surface temperature is at 212F. This has to do with the very low specific heat of air, and the high latent heat contain of water. Evaporation can carry away a lot more heat than air can supply. That said, there is another factor enters into the consideration. If the interior of you smoker/grill is designed in such a way that the interior surfaces of the  smoker/grill gets very hot very fast, like in a well insulated ones, than a lot of cooking of the meat can be by done by infrared. In this case, the temperature measured by the termometer can be 0F, and the meat can still be cooked or burned.

dcarch

 

[sqwib]

 
Mine is a totally different style of cooking then yours.  I see no smoke or very little smoke because its cooking directly over fire. There aren't flare ups of any kind from grease  with my high heat cooks. 

There is NO smoke in those two pics Nada, Zip!

 

[fwismoker]

 
There is NO smoke in those two pics Nada, Zip!

Grease smoke?  Steam?   LOL, a combination of grease, steam, burning flesh, burning sticks?        I have no idea, my cooker i use has no lid. lol       All i know is that sucker get's hot for an RF offset!

Since the pic with the lid closed isn't smoking much and the pic with the lid open has something i'll guess it's moisture flashing.

 

[grillmonkey]

SQWIB,

If you understood all that, please explain it to me in English. The grammar of all that made the science hard to understand.

 

[sqwib]

 
Grease smoke?  Steam?   LOL, a combination of grease, steam, burning flesh, burning sticks?        I have no idea, my cooker i use has no lid. lol       All i know is that sucker get's hot for an RF offset!

It's Steam if you look close at the first pic in post #66 you can see it looks heavy and is dropping in areas, this cook had no smoke the entire run.

20120721111.JPG

• sqwib
• Aug 27, 2014

20120721087.JPG

• sqwib
• Aug 27, 2014

Yeah the thing was popping and hissing all over the place.

 

[fwismoker]

The science makes my head hurt. lol    All i know for sure is the results i get at different temps for different meats cooked on different styles of cookers= experience.   You can't go wrong with experience if you're dense like me and can't wrap your head around all of the science!   

      I know enough of the science to be dangerous and that's ok with me. 

 

[dcarch]

"----Regardless of if this is true or not, I don't think it applies to the conversation about the ribs being done in 70 minutes as opposed to 6 hours, The simple fact is you can cook Ribs in a little over an hour or 6 hours with great results  regardless of the science, so the statement is a moot point in this case, nonetheless interesting though!----"

Sorry if I have gone off topic.

I thought the thread is about "Low and slow...the myth." and BTW, I have not said one is better than the other.

dcarch

 

[sqwib]

 
"----Regardless of if this is true or not, I don't think it applies to the conversation about the ribs being done in 70 minutes as opposed to 6 hours, The simple fact is you can cook Ribs in a little over an hour or 6 hours with great results  regardless of the science, so the statement is a moot point in this case, nonetheless interesting though!----"

Sorry if I have gone off topic.

I thought the thread is about "Low and slow...the myth." and BTW, I have not said one is better than the other.

dcarch

No need to be sorry and hopefully you did not get your feathers ruffled, this has been an interesting topic, I however am sorry if I wasn't clear, I was simply stating that I felt your post did not apply to the specific conversation about the ribs and I also was not saying one is better than the other.

I also felt I was getting off topic as well but everything posted so far has been on topic as far as I can tell.

My whole point to my posts have been there is more than one way to skin a cat and I am sure a lot of folks are screaming Blaspheme!

But since you brought it up please elaborate on the statement.

Again, keeping in mind that once 212F is reached, no amount of heat can get it any higher, you can go to 1000F air temperature and it will make no difference.

Go boil a pot of water and measure the temperature. Once the water starts to boil, it make no difference how high or low the fire is, it will always be 212F.

I am sure this is confusing folks it sure is confusing me and needs more explanation, I understand the concept but do not know how to apply it to our general discussion, and don't see any relevance, sorry never went to college.lol

How does this apply to, lets say 2 pork butts the same weight, mass, size etc... lets call them identical twins.

Twin#1 is cooked at 325°

Twin#2 is cooked at 225°

From your above statement you are saying that the internal temp will never get above 212 (I am assuming as long as moisture is present) ok we got that but how does it apply to the twins, my understanding is that the IT will get up to temp much quicker on twin#1 than twin#2 so what is the relevance?

I want to emphasize that I am not being facetious just curious

 

[fwismoker]

IMO much of this science is a moot point when it comes to BBQ.  We think we know what's going on in the meat but do we really?   When we get into conversations such as the crutch, collagen and connective tissue break down, going nekkid with hotter surface temps it gets muddy and there is lots of speculation.