# Very long cook times for pulled pork



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

Hi guys,

I'm new to the forum and fairly new to smoking in general. So far I have 3 pork shoulders, a whole packer brisket and a pair of turkey's under my belt.

Just so you have a frame of reference, I'm cooking with a WSM 22.5 and monitoring my temps with a Maverick ET 732 and the temperature maintenance is being assisted by a Pitmaster IQ 110.

My "problem", if it even is one, is that I see a lot of people claiming 1 1/2 hours per pound for pork shoulder but none of mine see to adhere to that general rule. In fact I'm generally much closer to 2.5-3 hours per pound. My method of operation is to use the minion method and pour about a gallon or maybe more of boiling water into my WSM water pan. Once the initial billowing has calmed and the pit temp has stabilized at the temp I want to cook at (225) for at least 10 minutes then I will throw my pork shoulders on the upper grate. I place my meat probe and set the pit probe so that it is near the center of the grate but at least a few inches from it so that the meat doesn't throw off the temp reading. After this I toss in a chunk of whatever wood that I want to add and then forget about it for the next 1 1/2 - 2 1/2 hours which then I will add another chunk of wood. Then It's forgotten again for about another 10 hours which is when I need to add more fuel usually. I typically use Royal Oak lump by the way. I then set and forget again only occasionally adding more fuel here and there but I try to make it very quick so that it doesn't disrupt the pit temp too much. I can typically add more fuel in a matter of seconds. The entire cook time I am able to maintain a very steady temperature between 215-240. I cook until around the meat is about 190 but I've already discovered that sometimes the meat is ready before that and sometimes after that temp so I also use the probe tender and/or the bone wiggle test. All of my pork shoulders have been a minimum of 8lbs and maximum of 9.5lbs yet I have yet to have a cook time of less than 24 hours. My last one actually took 28 hours to reach 187.

My brisket also took a fair amount of time longer than the "typical" but unfortunately I don't remember enough details from the cook. My set up process was essentially the same though and I do remember the I kept the water filled with boiled water throughout most of the cook. I want to say it took about 6 hours longer than the "norm".

How unusual is it for a pork shoulder to take this long? Is there something flawed in my process? Thanks for your help guys.

p.s. I forgot to mention that in preparation I leave the fat cap on and also inject the shoulders at least a few hours prior to putting them on the grill... fat side down. With the exception of the brisket (a little too tough for my intentions) everything I've smoked has come out exactly as planned and been absolutely fantastic tasting.


----------



## palladini (Feb 14, 2014)

Anything I smoke in my 30 inch MES, I never use water or any liquid in the water pan.  And the 1.5 hour/Lb works fine fro me.  I smoke at 225 degrees.


----------



## dan - firecraft (Feb 14, 2014)

Same here...at 250 I am getting around 1.5 hrs per lb.


----------



## redneck69 (Feb 14, 2014)

every piece of meat has a mind of it's own while smoking...some will take the 1.5 hours per lb..while others may take longer...the main thing is to make sure you have an accurate temp gauge on your smoker and and a good therm for internal temp on the meat...try and keep a good steady chamber temp...also keep in mind if its cold/windy out your smoker will loose cooking temp real easy.


----------



## sqwib (Feb 14, 2014)

No, this is not the norm, three hours is much too long.

The water in the pan could be affecting the evaporative cooling process of the meat (referred to as the stall), that is when the meat cools itself due to the moisture evaporating. (just a guess)

Many folks will replace the water with sand.

You should be able to get the same as the guys above 1.5 hours

here's a few suggestions to reduce cook time , try some or try them all.

Start the smoker at a higher temp and work down from there.
Do not peek.(no spritsing/basting)
Use a non evaporative thermal mass.
Cut 8 pounders in half
remove bone, (bones are poor conductors of heat)
trim fat.
crank the temp up to 275°
Foil at the stall (evaporative process)
increase temps a bit at the foiling stage
Of course this is all based on your thorough post ruling out thermo inaccuracies


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

I'm getting a feeling my problem is probably mainly due to the water pan. If I use sand is there a specific type that I should be using?


----------



## hambone1950 (Feb 14, 2014)

NiceToMeatYou said:


> I'm getting a feeling my problem is probably mainly due to the water pan. If I use sand is there a specific type that I should be using?


l

Play sand from HD is good. Or the coarser kind that you use on patios. Just so it's clean. Gravel will work too. Lots of times I use a foil wrapped fire brick.


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

I've been very pleased with how moist my meat has turned out each time including the time when I smoked the brisket but it wasn't quite as tender as I was wanting it to be. If I shy away from using water in the pan will I use any of that moisture in the meat or is the water pan only good as a heat sink and stabilizing temps?


----------



## worktogthr (Feb 14, 2014)

I posted a similar question when I was new to this forum.  Heck, I still am, only been smoking since October.  But at low temps like 225, I have learned from experience and my fellow SMFers that you can expect at least 2 hours a pound for pork shoulder (not sure about brisket, I will be tackling that next week for the first time).  I posted that similar question after I had a 7 pounder take almost 19 hours.  So estimating that the whole cook will take 2.5 hours a pound will drive you slightly less insane.  And I hope I am not stealing CliffCarter's response to this post it since he shared this with me, and I will never go back to cooking shoulders at 225.  Try cooking them hotter. On Cliff's advice, I tried mine with temps between 280 and 300 and it took slightly more than an hour a pound with no stall.  As long as you pull at the normal IT, it will be as tender and juicy as anything low and slow.  Also, if you still want to cook at 225 or thereabouts, cut a big shoulder in half and you will significantly cut back your time, plus more delicious bark. Hope this helps!


----------



## Bearcarver (Feb 14, 2014)

Here's my Step by Step on pulled pork butt.

I just checked----My 7 pound Butt took about 11 hours.

http://www.smokingmeatforums.com/t/140055/boston-butt-pulled-pork-step-by-step

Bear


----------



## sqwib (Feb 14, 2014)

NiceToMeatYou said:


> I've been very pleased with how moist my meat has turned out each time including the time when I smoked the brisket but it wasn't quite as tender as I was wanting it to be. If I shy away from using water in the pan will I use any of that moisture in the meat or is the water pan only good as a heat sink and stabilizing temps?


No you will not loose any moisture, water in the water pan will not ADD Moisture.

Water pans with water work as a heat sink but also aid in heat stabilization, the optimal temp for using water in a pan is around 225°, due to the properties of water, however if you were going to run higher than 225° I would suggest a different heat sink.

You may get more temperature fluctuations.

I never used sand and always use water in my GOSM but I don't do Butts on my GOSM Verical Cabinet Water Smoker anymore due to it taking forever to cook.

I always tell folks to use the smoker as it was designed, so if it says use water ...use water, however a cut of meat like a Butt/Picnic, I would say try another type of thermal mass.

I have limited experience with briskets, so I will leave that OPEN for folks that have done Briskets on a Weber.

Now If you were to do pork Loins, I would say stick to the water.


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

Awesome stuff guys. Thank you everyone for your input. I'm going to throw an 8 and 9 pounder in the smoker late tonight for a little get together I'm having tomorrow evening. I'm a firm believer in changing one thing at a time as seeing how it affects the outcome. I'm going to start with going without water in the pan and seeing how it goes. Maybe next time I will go with sand and then trimming some of the fat. I like the idea of cutting the meat in half because as far as I'm concerned more bark = mo betta.

I'll be sure to follow up on Sunday with the results.

Thanks again guys!


----------



## flash (Feb 14, 2014)

I use sand quite a bit, but mainly during colder temps because sand will bring you higher and most consistent temps when using charcoal. Don't be afraid of raising your smokers cooking temp either. 250º will not hurt your pork butt in any way. After wrapping in foil, I even raise it up to 300º.


----------



## mchar69 (Feb 14, 2014)

> Don't be afraid of raising your smokers cooking temp either. 250º will not hurt your pork butt in any way.


Or 275.  I don't have all day to fiddle with something that can be done just as delicious

in half the time. Gotta foil at the proper time.


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

Well, for me it's not a race. I'm not in a hurry to get food onto the plate so I'm fine with the standard low a slow method don't feel the need to crank the heat to shave a few minutes off each pound. Other than my first butt I have always given myself an adequate amount of time to cook, prepare and serve. Call me crazy but I enjoy the entire process even when it's taking an insanely long time. I'm not the worry wart type and have always let the meat do what it's going to do. Rule #2 of smoking is don't panic and rush it, right?

I came here more or less because I was suspicious of the water pan being the culprit for my extra long cook times with no added benefit to the how moist the meat was. From all of the replies it seems as though that's the thing that I am consistently doing different than others with typical cook times. I'll find out soon enough I suppose.

Quick question. On those long cook times I would only add a couple of chunks of wood for adequate smoke flavor. Assuming that deleting the water from the equation brings my cook time into the normal range, should I be adding more wood chunks or stick with the current recipe that I like? I've read that you only absorb the smoke flavor for the first few hours and after that smoke absorption is very minimal.


----------



## Bearcarver (Feb 14, 2014)

NiceToMeatYou said:


> Well, for me it's not a race. I'm not in a hurry to get food onto the plate so I'm fine with the standard low a slow method don't feel the need to crank the heat to shave a few minutes off each pound. Other than my first butt I have always given myself an adequate amount of time to cook, prepare and serve. Call me crazy but I enjoy the entire process even when it's taking an insanely long time. I'm not the worry wart type and have always let the meat do what it's going to do. Rule #2 of smoking is don't panic and rush it, right?
> 
> I came here more or less because I was suspicious of the water pan being the culprit for my extra long cook times with no added benefit to the how moist the meat was. From all of the replies it seems as though that's the thing that I am consistently doing different than others with typical cook times. I'll find out soon enough I suppose.
> 
> Quick question. On those long cook times I would only add a couple of chunks of wood for adequate smoke flavor. Assuming that deleting the water from the equation brings my cook time into the normal range, should I be adding more wood chunks or stick with the current recipe that I like? I've read that you only absorb the smoke flavor for the first few hours and after that smoke absorption is very minimal.


I never put water in my pan.

I give it smoke all the time, except when the food is foiled. Always light to medium smoke.

Never make heavy smoke, no matter what color.

It would be pretty hard to dry up a Butt---It's loaded with fat, inside & out.

Bear


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

Bearcarver, I've been considering putting in for a black bear hunt but I've hesitated because I don't want to harvest an animal without knowing if I would like the taste. I've searched high and low locally to find a source so I could try it for myself. For some reason it's also hard to find anyone that's able to describe the taste on the internet. I always find responses like "I had some bear sausage mixed with pork and beef. Very good stuff" but that's about the extent. Given your fondness of carving bears am I safe to assume that you have also consume one of these lovely animals? If so, can you describe the taste and also does it work well on the smoker?


----------



## Bearcarver (Feb 14, 2014)

NiceToMeatYou said:


> Bearcarver, I've been considering putting in for a black bear hunt but I've hesitated because I don't want to harvest an animal without knowing if I would like the taste. I've searched high and low locally to find a source so I could try it for myself. For some reason it's also hard to find anyone that's able to describe the taste on the internet. I always find responses like "I had some bear sausage mixed with pork and beef. Very good stuff" but that's about the extent. Given your fondness of carving bears am I safe to assume that you have also consume one of these lovely animals? If so, can you describe the taste and also does it work well on the smoker?


Hmmm, The Bears I carved were different than you're thinking about. You can see them here:

Link to my Bears:

http://www.smokingmeatforums.com/t/138637/a-bear-from-log-to-finish-picture-heavy

However I have had Bear meat a few times. I like it very much. It tasted a lot like a course Beef to me, and no tallow sticking to the roof of your mouth like from Deer fat.

I remember we had a Bear roast when I was a kid. My older Sister raved about it (not knowing it was Bear). She told my Dad it was Great, and asked him where he got it. He told her Barringer's Butcher shop. She said it was the best she ever had. Later he told her it was Bear meat. She said, "Well it was still Great!!"

I never had any smoked, but I'm sure it would be awesome, if it was a quick, clean kill, and you get it cooled down in a short time.

Bear


----------



## blackzebra (Feb 14, 2014)

Interestingly, I cooked a 8.0 lb pork butt it took 10. Plus hours to get to 195 ! Than I cooked 2 4,65 pounders and it took 13.50 hours! Goes to show meat is done when it is done!


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

Nice stuff Bearcarver. That's some serious artistic ability.


----------



## chapterthree (Feb 14, 2014)

Bearcarver said:


> I never put water in my pan.


@Bearcarver  is that to say you *never*  put water in your MES 40, like for any of your smokes, or you just never put water in the pan for pork butts?


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 14, 2014)

The temp was running a little to hot for the first couple hours and slowly climbing even with closing down the vents almost completely so I ended up putting 24oz of warm water in the pan and that has stabalized the temp for me for the last hour or so. I think that tells me that I should be using something in the pan to help the smoker along. I have an IT of 109 at the 3 hour mark in my 8 pounder.


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 15, 2014)

Its 7:30am and IT has just reached 160. Woke up about 4am and the IT was 154. Pretty typical outcome for me so far. I have not added any more water since the initial 24oz. All of it should have boiled off by this point so it should be a nonfactor in the stall.


----------



## Bearcarver (Feb 15, 2014)

NiceToMeatYou said:


> Nice stuff Bearcarver. That's some serious artistic ability.


Thank You!

Bear


chapterthree said:


> @Bearcarver  is that to say you *never*  put water in your MES 40, like for any of your smokes, or you just never put water in the pan for pork butts?


I no longer use water in my pan for anything. Nothing ever dries up, and the window in my door is always steamed up inside from start to finish.

Bear


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 15, 2014)

Another update for anyone who may be following along. Its a few minutes until noon and the IT is 174. I still havent added any water since that initial 24oz. There has been absolutely no peeking at all so far. The only times I've opened it up is to add fuel and I do so extremely quickly.

Since I am feeding guests today i may be forced to tent to get over the hump this time around. What is the typical amount of time from tent to done?


----------



## Bearcarver (Feb 15, 2014)

NiceToMeatYou said:


> Another update for anyone who may be following along. Its a few minutes until noon and the IT is 174. I still havent added any water since that initial 24oz. There has been absolutely no peeking at all so far. The only times I've opened it up is to add fuel and I do so extremely quickly.
> 
> Since I am feeding guests today i may be forced to tent to get over the hump this time around. What is the typical amount of time from tent to done?


My 7 pounder went from 165* to 203* in 2 1/2 hours after foiling, but they vary quite a bit.

The big thing is get it done before time to eat, because you can always wrap it in towels & put it in a dry cooler to hold it for hours.

Bear


----------



## foamheart (Feb 15, 2014)

O to 201 IT in only 20 hours!  Low and slow. I keep intending to try one of the fast and hot smokes but I always end up doing the same old thing. With an electric (doesn't need tending), RF thermometer, AMPS, why worry about speed? 20 hours, fool proof, I slept all night, why hurry, its going to get there and no two at the same time.

http://www.smokingmeatforums.com/t/157659/the-butt-foamheart/20#post_1134719

Moist, tastee (needs a bit of salt), the bark is way good.


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 15, 2014)

Thanks Bearcarver. Thats what I was thinking... better to early and have plenty of time to rest than taking it out at serving time and not rest.


----------



## flash (Feb 15, 2014)

mchar69 said:


> Or 275.  I don't have all day to fiddle with something that can be done just as delicious
> 
> in half the time. Gotta foil at the proper time.


LOL, correct. I am retired, so I do want some good time in the smoke to create some bark for the wifey.


----------



## flash (Feb 15, 2014)

NiceToMeatYou said:


> Quick question. On those long cook times I would only add a couple of chunks of wood for adequate smoke flavor. Assuming that deleting the water from the equation brings my cook time into the normal range, should I be adding more wood chunks or stick with the current recipe that I like? I've read that you only absorb the smoke flavor for the first few hours and after that smoke absorption is very minimal.


 I use both water and sand, depending on ambient temps and cannot say the time will vary much when using either/or. I do find myself spritzing a little more when using playbox sand. Remember that water is there as a heat sink, not to provide gobs of moisture, although it does a little. Bears Pan Only is really just a heat sink also. You could also use a Brick, ceramic briquettes or Lava rock.


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 15, 2014)

The twins are done. I pulled them right at 200. So I'm under the 24 hour mark but not by much coming in at exactly 21 hours.  I believe this takes me to about 2hr 15min per pound if im judging by the 9lb and 2hr 45min per pound if I went by the 8lb. I found it odd that they both maintain nearly identical temperatures throughout the entire cook.

I have a couple more hours before my guests arrive so I will report back later if I can note any major difference between this time and my past attempts.


----------



## foamheart (Feb 15, 2014)

WOOT!!! Its a Pulled Pork Saturday! Did everyone get the memo?


----------



## nicetomeatyou (Feb 16, 2014)

So the final verdict is in. The meat didnt take in as much smoke flavor as it has in the past using the same amount of wood and the same fuel. I dont think it had to do with the duration of the cook though. I suspect that the added steam from early in the cook allows or helps the smoke flavor to penetrate better. I also noticed that while it certainly was not dry, the times I used the water in the pan the pork was noticeably more moist. The final thing to note was that I cooked to a higher IT than i've ever had to before yet there was more fat that had not yet rendered. Im sure this accounts for some of the missing moisture. It was a fun experiment but I think I'll be going back to my tried and true methods and endure the longer cook times.


----------



## kwiq4u (Feb 16, 2014)

hey just thought I would add my 2 cents I have smoked more pork butts than anything else but when I run my smoker I use hot water in the pan and I smoked 50 pounds at a time each time. I probed my meat in the center of the rack and smoked till 210 degrees or so about 12 to 14 hours and put in large plastic bags and popped them in a very large cooler and rested for 3 hours and just pulled them apart I just use a sticker for the rub and that's about it along with a mix of wood chips.


----------

