Blue smoke vs White smoke

Dean · November 2002

I made my first batch of baby backs yesterday. Slow cooked at 210 degrees for 5 hours. I thought they were pretty good.[p]I started the fire with a small batch of hot coal and then piled on a lot of extra so it started and stayed low the whole time. I did however have a lot of white smoke for 2 to 3 hours. I've just read that this is not the best as it can impart a bitter taste.[p]Well if the above is true I guess the ribs could have been a lot better. Key question: Did I start the fire wrong for low and slow ?[p]All suggestions are welcome. Thanks,[p]Dean

Tim M · November 2002

Dean,[p]Each to his own methods and tastes, but I would not do it that way. 5 hrs is a lot for baby backs. I hope they were done indirectly or they would probably be pretty dry and crispy. Adding lump on top of a fire is not needed to make the fire stay at low temps and it will produce a lot of un-needed smoke - and it would be the least desireable smoke in my opinion. At start up the fresh lump has dust and other fine stuff on it that quickly burns off as the fire gets going and gets stabilized, you can often notice some strange pungent odors at startup where this dust and stuff burns off before the main pieces of pure carbon. Adding fresh lump on a fire and then adding the meat will soak it up in this smoke and could (lump varies) add extra tastes you may not want. My suggestion is to add pleanty of lump for the own cook and limit the oxygen in and out of the cooker to keep the fire at the desired temp. Add wood chips or chunks as desired for flavoring. Get your rib meat temp to 180-190° which should take less than 5 hrs, for baby backs, and cook them at 250-325 indirectly depending on what setup you use.[p]Tim
[ul][li]Tim's place and cookbook[/ul]

Blue smoke vs White smoke

Comments

Categories