Welcome to the EGGhead Forum - a great place to visit and packed with tips and EGGspert advice! You can also join the conversation and get more information and amazing kamado recipes by following Big Green Egg to Experience our World of Flavor™ at:
Facebook  |  Twitter  |  Instagram  |  Pinterest  |  Youtube  |  Vimeo
Share your photos by tagging us and using the hashtag #BigGreenEgg.

Want to see how the EGG is made? Click to Watch

Time Estimate - Leg of Lamb

Options
MikeP624
MikeP624 Posts: 292
edited May 2012 in EggHead Forum

I am cooking a 5.75lb bone-in leg of lamb.  I was thinking i would do a quick sear and then cook it at 375 - indirect heat.  I want to pull it off at an internal temp of about 130ish.  Does anyone have a time estimate?

I know you cook to temp, just want to make sure i start it close to the right time.

· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • stike
    stike Posts: 15,597
    Options
    might not want to sear.  it's surrounded by a fine layer of fat, and fat doesn't sear, it burns.  lamb fat especially is no good when it burns.

    i do it at 400 or so for easter.  it can take an hour to an hour and a half to hit 130-135.  not exact, but you will want to rest it anyway, and that gives you a little make-up time as far as the schedule goes

    you might notice some slippery membranes and loose fat tags on the thing.  trim those off, if you want to clean it up a bit.  there's some thicker fat on it too.  you might wanna pare it down to a thinner more even layer, but not get rid of it entirely
    ed egli avea del cul fatto trombetta -Dante
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MikeP624
    MikeP624 Posts: 292
    Options

    Okay, thanks.  I will skip the sear and increast the heat to 400.  Do cook the leg  direct, indirect, raised? 

    The butcher trimmed it up a bit for me, but still left some fat so it should be good to go as is.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • stike
    stike Posts: 15,597
    Options
    try it at your 375.  i only went 400 because i had two hams resting, and wanted to do a hurry-up.  the higher heat also blasts a bit more heat, so even though i had a rare center, i still had a lot of more done meat for the general populace (who prefers sacreligiously overdone lamb).

    if you like rarer meat, stay lower, longer.  heck, i do my prime rib at 250.  still get a great crust, and the eveness is much better (more rare across the whole cross section)
    ed egli avea del cul fatto trombetta -Dante
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • tazcrash
    tazcrash Posts: 1,852
    Options
    When i did it for Easter I did it indirect with a pan raised on the plate setter(to avoid burning).
    Bx - > NJ ->TX!!! 
    All to get cheaper brisket! 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • stike
    stike Posts: 15,597
    Options
    yeah. lotta dripping fat. good point.

    ed egli avea del cul fatto trombetta -Dante
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MikeP624
    MikeP624 Posts: 292
    Options

    Thanks for the advice.  Lamb turned out great.  Ended up going indirect at just a tad under 400 degrees till i got an internal temp of 135.

    Only issue was that the midde was a bit under done.  But i think that had to do with the placement of my thermometer.  I think i put it to far away from the bone.  But there was plenty of properly cooked (medium to medium rare) meat for dinner.  I just sliced off the good parts, and reasoned and thru it back on.  Used the part i had to throw back on for gyros the next day.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • tazcrash
    tazcrash Posts: 1,852
    Options
    Very cool.
    I know I keep reading not to let the thermometer touch the bone, but if its too far away, I get the same results you did. Under cooked.
    The family dog appreciates it though. ;)
    Bx - > NJ ->TX!!! 
    All to get cheaper brisket! 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Categories