Not as bad as it looks

sarivers · March 2013

I tried using the 3-2-1 method to cook ribs tonight. They looked good after 3 hours. I foiled them then looked at them in 2 hours and this was what I found, cooked so much I couldn't get them out of the foil wirhout them falling apart. I put them back on for about 15 minutes to get some of the moister out. They actually tasted pretty good. I cooked them at about 230° the entire time. Anyone else had this experience with the 3-2-1 method?

milesbrown4 · March 2013

I like them to fall apart, but haven't used 3-2-1. I set them on 225 degrees and leave them until I can pull the nearest rib off with my fingers. Usually IT is about 180 or higher. I don't foil or flip - maybe wrong but I am just lazy. But like they say, its the "wood that makes it good." It doesn't matter how they look if they taste good, right? good cook!

Dyal_SC · March 2013

Yeah, I've found that's too long of a cooking time for ribs as well. Just my opinion though. I usually go with 2 hours naked, 50 minutes foiled, and 30 minutes unfoiled to finish.....at around a 275 deg f dome temp. I pay more attention to the pullback rather than the time. Sometimes it takes longer.

Dyal_SC · March 2013

Your ribs still look terrific tho...

Aviator · March 2013

@Sarivers, I do a lot of ribs and do it almost always 3-2- looks good.

When was the last time you calibrated your dome therm? The biggie!

I am being or trying to troubleshoot and be helpful, not spiteful. That was your original question.

By the 3 hour mark from start you should have a great looking bark. What did you use as liquid when you foiled?

Were the ribs cryo pack or fresh?

sarivers · March 2013

I calibrated the dome thermometer about 2 weeks ago. They looked real good after 3 hours. I was a little worried that they had not cooked enough. I foiled them in 1/4 cup of apple juice, about 1/3 stick of margarine and a little honey. I kept the temp at about 230 consistently.

sarivers · March 2013

Dyal_SC said:

Yeah, I've found that's too long of a cooking time for ribs as well. Just my opinion though. I usually go with 2 hours naked, 50 minutes foiled, and 30 minutes unfoiled to finish.....at around a 275 deg f dome temp. I pay more attention to the pullback rather than the time. Sometimes it takes longer.

I'm going to dial it back a little too the next time I cook ribs. Your time frames seem pretty reasonable. My family loves them.

MrCookingNurse · March 2013

Dyal_SC said:

Yeah, I've found that's too long of a cooking time for ribs as well. Just my opinion though. I usually go with 2 hours naked, 50 minutes foiled, and 30 minutes unfoiled to finish.....at around a 275 deg f dome temp. I pay more attention to the pullback rather than the time. Sometimes it takes longer.

i did this with 230ish dome and closer to 3 hours naked. killed a rack of baby backs

the two hours in the foil has alway proven too much to me, taste is the key but im cooking ribs, not pulled pork, so they do need to somewhat stay on the bone. just my opinion

Aviator · March 2013

I don't know about margarine, never used it. I use apple cider and apple juice 50/5 about a 1/2 cup total. Yes I do 2 hours but when I open the foil there is no liquid left.

J_Que · March 2013

I agree 3-2-1 with baby backs is over kill. I normally do them naked for around 3 hours give or take @ 250ish.

Skiddymarker · March 2013

I've had the 3-2-1 come out on the gasser, never the egg. The egg is a touch too hot for that, can't find it but in a recent post the topic came up that 3-2-1 usually becomes more of a 2-1-1, which was probably more what you were looking for.

It also depends on the amount of meat, and the temp when they hit the grid.

sarivers · March 2013

MrCookingNurse said:

Dyal_SC said:

Yeah, I've found that's too long of a cooking time for ribs as well. Just my opinion though. I usually go with 2 hours naked, 50 minutes foiled, and 30 minutes unfoiled to finish.....at around a 275 deg f dome temp. I pay more attention to the pullback rather than the time. Sometimes it takes longer.

i did this with 230ish dome and closer to 3 hours naked. killed a rack of baby backs

the two hours in the foil has alway proven too much to me, taste is the key but im cooking ribs, not pulled pork, so they do need to somewhat stay on the bone. just my opinion

One of these or a combination will be what I try the next time. I like the convenience of not having to foil them. Yesterday at 3 hours at 230

gdenby · March 2013

If those were BB's, the foil method is more like 2-1-1. Also, the margarine would have sped up the cook a little. Oil transmits heat very well.

I used to foil often, but stopped doing that years ago. While the method guarantees a tender rib, and one that usually finishes rather sticky sweet, its not necessary for tender ribs.

I just lay the ribs in, and after 4 -5 hours, depending on if they are BB's or spares, peek to see how they are doing. Usually brush w. a little oil at that point, and another light dust of rub.

Over the past few months, I've bumped my dome temp to 275F. Drops about half an hour off the cook for ribs.

Bham_egger · March 2013

I personally don't like the foil method. To me, it takes all the "bite" out of the ribs. I like tender, that "bites" off the bone cleanly. I lay the ribs at 225 dome temp, smoke about 1/2 the cook, when I can pick them up with the tongs and they bend at almost 90 degrees, they're done. Sometimes it's 4 hours, sometimes 5, or more. Sauce for about 30 min. This method utilizes the KISS principle, and almost always turns out great.

Also, how many "famous" rib joints foil their ribs? None that I've seen. Just my 2 cents.

sarivers · March 2013

They were babyback ribs. That's my favorite. What is the purpose of foiling them, to make them tender? I agree with Bham_egger about foiling. I've never foiled them in the past on the gas grill and it was very good without foiling I suspect that they will be wonderful on the BGE without foiling. I'm thinking the next time I will go about 3 to 4 hours at around 250 f.

Eggcelsior · March 2013

sarivers said:
They were babyback ribs. That's my favorite. What is the purpose of foiling them, to make them tender? I agree with Bham_egger about foiling. I've never foiled them in the past on the gas grill and it was very good without foiling I suspect that they will be wonderful on the BGE without foiling. I'm thinking the next time I will go about 3 to 4 hours at around 250 f.

Foiling causes the meat to braise in it's own juices and/or whatever you add to it. It helps push meat through the stall and aids in tenderness.

Hopefully you weren't asking a rhetorical question...

SmokinDAWG82 · March 2013

I cooked a rack of BB and a rack of STL this weekend 4 hrs at 275ish and both came out great and tender. No foil involved except covering my platesetter.

sarivers · March 2013

Cooked St. Louis ribs tonight. 290° for 4 hours. They were jucie but could have been on for another 30 minutes to an hour. Better than my last try. No foil except for my drip pan.

WiltOnTilt · March 2013

I like to foil because it has worked well for me over the years but i haven't tried without foil very often. I go 3-2-1 for spares and 3 - 1.5 - .5 for baby backs

jeroldharter · March 2013

3-2-1 is for spare ribs. I use 2-1-1 for baby backs at 235.

deekortiz3 · March 2013

I've used 3-2-1 on Spare Ribs before. Ribs go on cold, egg dome at 225. Three hours uncovered, two hours foiled (Meat side down), around one hour uncovered. Removing from foil between 2 and 1 you need to be very careful because they will fall apart on you.

The last hour really becomes a wait and see. I go ahead and start checking with a toothpick around 30 minutes into the last hour. When they are really close brush with some sauce and let that sit on the egg for a few more minutes to finish up.

When I have time I'll use 3-2-1 but obviously you can crank up the temperature and speed up those times a bit.

Not as bad as it looks

Comments

Categories