The destruction of Cast Iron and all things Unholy - TOFTT

Troykahack

kbq c-60 seems to be a neat idea.  only a few videos out there

blasting

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

I wonder if you couldn't light something like an A-Maze-N-Smoker in the ash bin under the fire grate and allow the smoke from that to come up through your lump. 

That's a very interesting idea, right along the same premise.  I think I might have to try that as well.  One thing, whenever I cold smoke, the smoke is always white - do you think it would get clear or blue if heated up?

blasting

I've got some obligations, so I decided to wrap in foil to get things moving.  

Here is what is left of the wood.  At first I thought it was just blackened, but in fact it's basically lump - very light and carbonized.  

Biggreenpharmacist

dougcrann said:

I don't quite understand this whole process, not a big science guy. I understand that the smoke ring is just a chemical reaction. So if this is way off base please forgive me. On the 15th we cooked a brisket in my stick burner, it is a home built Reverse Flow. Used cherry wood...temperature was 250*-280*. Rub was salt, pepper, onion & garlic powders with a bit of Chipotle. Had a beautiful smoke ring. Yesterday we cooked a brisket in our XL. same exact rub. Had Mesquite lump. Temperature was anot Auber controlled 275*. Brisket had a beautiful smoke ring, easily rivaling the RF. Ernestina just made me a brisket omelet, had a very smokey aroma/taste. I don't quite understand how you folks don't get enough "smokey goodness". Or is the ring not a good indicator of how much smoke the meat picked up? 
Apologies for the length...and the mini hi-jack...

I always get a good smokering when using cherry wood. 

The Cen-Tex Smoker

blasting said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

I wonder if you couldn't light something like an A-Maze-N-Smoker in the ash bin under the fire grate and allow the smoke from that to come up through your lump. 

That's a very interesting idea, right along the same premise.  I think I might have to try that as well.  One thing, whenever I cold smoke, the smoke is always white - do you think it would get clear or blue if heated up?

thats what I'm thinking...

CtTOPGUN

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

I wonder if you couldn't light something like an A-Maze-N-Smoker in the ash bin under the fire grate and allow the smoke from that to come up through your lump. 

 That is what I suggested last thread. Personally, the Egg gives me enough smoke flavors to satisfy my tastes. But more is easily added.

  Jim

Focker

Raichlen had a really good bit today on pyrolysis, carbonyls, and phenols, which is from MC.
Project Smoke Episode 102: Shoulders and Bellies
https://books.google.com/books?id=tY-4CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=project+smoke+pyrolysis&source=bl&ots=ZcWHpeEmMc&sig=f9oAfiGujY6fiyNQOCf04h0cTqw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAusX17PDMAhVSE1IKHeuiAO4Q6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=project smoke pyrolysis&f=false

Actually used an egg, with "conveggtor", to q a belly too.  The pastrami he did, actually looked pretty darn good, for Raichlen.

IMO this CI method gets into the "sweet spot".  I could pick it up, it is much milder, but pleasant no doubt.   
Another plus, it's good to know 100% of the wood put in, gets used.  

Tried the Pro-Q above the fire.  Could not keep it lit due to limited oxygen running through the egg.  I was running 225 dome.  Need to try 275 dome to open the draft door a little more.  Not sure, even that, would be enough oxygen.  

SmokeyPitt

blasting said:

I've got some obligations, so I decided to wrap in foil to get things moving.  

Here is what is left of the wood.  At first I thought it was just blackened, but in fact it's basically lump - very light and carbonized.  

It looks like much of it is still unburned, no? 

blasting

SmokeyPitt said:  It looks like much of it is still unburned, no? 

It looks like that in the pic, but no, it is completely carbonized.  Nothing left of substance at all - light as a feather.

Mosca

Instead of using cast iron, just use throw-away aluminum loaf pans. Works just as well.

SmokeyPitt

blasting said:

SmokeyPitt said:  It looks like much of it is still unburned, no? 

It looks like that in the pic, but no, it is completely carbonized.  Nothing left of substance at all - light as a feather.

Cool- thanks for all the information.  It looks like it was a successful experiment.  

The Cen-Tex Smoker

CtTOPGUN said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

I wonder if you couldn't light something like an A-Maze-N-Smoker in the ash bin under the fire grate and allow the smoke from that to come up through your lump. 

 That is what I suggested last thread. Personally, the Egg gives me enough smoke flavors to satisfy my tastes. But more is easily added.

  Jim

Great minds think alike

It gives plenty of smoke but it I'm more concerned with the quality of the smoke. smoldering wood over a low fire is not ideal for great q. It's serviceable and I've hit some home runs no doubt. Still- always chasing that thin blue smoke and that true offset flavor. you cant get that with smoldering chunks over a charcoal fire.

Photo Egg

Mosca said:

Instead of using cast iron, just use throw-away aluminum loaf pans. Works just as well.

Have you buried a throw away aluminum loaf pan "in" the burning lump with  success? 

Mosca

Photo Egg said:

Mosca said:

Instead of using cast iron, just use throw-away aluminum loaf pans. Works just as well.

Have you buried a throw away aluminum loaf pan "in" the burning lump with  success? 

Yes, a few times. It gets pretty ragged, but I wasn't planning on using it again. I should have a few photos somewhere, I'll find and post them. I did it specifically to find out if it worked as well as using the cast iron.

DoubleEgger

This would be me if you had used Griswold...

stompbox

So, did you submit your warranty claim to Lodge yet?

Mosca

When I did the experiment and took the photos (Dec 20th last year), I didn't have a loaf pan so I took a Weber water/drippings pan and mutilated it. One shot of the pan being made, one shot of what it looked like, a couple shots of the smoke. The smoke varied from a thin wisp to no visible smoke at all.

Mosca

This shot is from a different attempt, two weeks earlier. I put the packet right on top of the lump. The whole idea is that the smoke gets pulled down into the fire and the bad hydrocarbons burn off, so the idea isn't to bury it in the lump but to put it on top to create the draw. When the cook is done, the foil is pretty ragged, the wood chunks are ash. Whatever, the food was great and I didn't have to rip up any cast iron.

Mosca

I couldn't say it works as well as the cast iron, because I didn't try the cast iron. But I can say that it works, and I'm not sure how using a different metal container for the chunks of wood would make much difference, if any.

blasting

Ok, so it's done, cooled a little, and chunked/ pulled.  Delicious btw - this was ready for lunch so that was an unusual treat.  

In terms of this experiment though, I wish I had a definitive answer, but I'm not the sort to talk myself into a result.  I really thought it would be a big win or a big fail, but in fact, this butt was pretty much consistent with all the butts I do.  Maybe after a few hours of my taste buds settling down I'll have more of an answer - I've been around the egg all morning.

For now, please hold off on destroying your cast iron, as it doesn't appear to make a difference at this point.

I enjoy doing these types of experiments, and would like to thank everyone for your interest.

blind99

awesome writeup, thanks for sharing your experiment. 

@The Cen-Tex Smoker you need one. At some point someone will design a unit that controls dry bulb and wet bulb temperature independent of the smoke supply. It'll make great Q but might not be much fun. 

Carolina Q

I didn't understand the concept of this from the beginning. Want more smoke, add more wood. I throw a few chunks of smoke wood on the burning lump, it smokes and I come back when the meat's done. Plenty of smoky aroma and taste. That's all you did except you trashed a pan to do it. No? I'm not trying to be a smart a$$, I just don't get it. It's fun to experiment though, regardless of the outcome. I'm still playing with my rotisserie. And enjoying the process even if I don't have it figured out yet.

The good news is, when you want to restore the pan's function, just tap the holes and screw some of these in.

For a new handle for the lid...

Not sure if this would handle the weight of CI, but maybe one of these camping pot grippers would work to replace the skillet handle...

Mosca

Carolina Q said:

I didn't understand the concept of this from the beginning. Want more smoke, add more wood.

It's supposed to be cleaner smoke, not more smoke. I would have to agree that it is an incremental improvement, not a sea change. The aluminum pan method is easier. But if all you did was stir the wood into the lump, I doubt your guests would think something was missing.

blasting

@Carolina Q  I didn't do it to trash a pan, get more smoke, or to criticize the typical way of doing things.  There is a lot of mention of this idea out there on the web.  The premise of this idea is that it gives a more pure smoke flavor, such as you would find with a stick burner.  I set out to mythbust the theory.

Carolina Q

blasting said:

@Carolina Q  I didn't do it to trash a pan, get more smoke, or to criticize the typical way of doing things.  There is a lot of mention of this idea out there on the web.  The premise of this idea is that it gives a more pure smoke flavor, such as you would find with a stick burner.  I set out to mythbust the theory.

I haven't seen any mention of this until your post, but then, they don't let me out much. To me, smoke is smoke. Wood smoke coming from inside a container sitting on top of some burning lump is no different than wood smoke coming from a few chunks mixed in with the lump. It's still just smoke.

But it's still fun to experiment, eh?

jtcBoynton

Smoke is smoke - not really.  Smoke is made up of many different compounds.  Several variables will determine the composition of the smoke.  Burn temperature is an important variable.  Different burn temps will result in different smoke profiles (thus different tastes).   The differences may, or may not be noticeable to any individual, but they are there.

Focker

Quite a bit of tar on my aluminum lid.  Rolling smoke(invisible) tonight on the small with the woo and firebricks.  220 dome, cherry chips, Deutsche Kuche brats from Aldi.

Toxarch

Spaightlabs said:

A bong filters out impurities by running the smoke through a column of water (or so I am told).  There has to be a way you could also sacrifice an RTIC cooler (Yeti's are too nice to sacrifice and RTIC is the Lodge equivalent in the cooler world... ) and port the smoke through water kept cold in the RTIC (not as cold as a Yeti, but probably cold enough) and then back into the egg.

Activated charcoal is also used as a filter for air and liquids. The lump we burn is activated charcoal, isn't it? So wouldn't passing the smoke through the charcoal used in egg, filter out the bad stuff and we end up with clean smoke? I'm wondering if someone's idea of putting a smoke box in the ash area might do the same thing as a water bong.

Toxarch

blasting said:

I've got some obligations, so I decided to wrap in foil to get things moving.  

Here is what is left of the wood.  At first I thought it was just blackened, but in fact it's basically lump - very light and carbonized.  

I'm curious if those would light on fire or if there isn't enough hydrogen atoms left in it to burn.

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

CtTOPGUN said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

I wonder if you couldn't light something like an A-Maze-N-Smoker in the ash bin under the fire grate and allow the smoke from that to come up through your lump. 

 That is what I suggested last thread. Personally, the Egg gives me enough smoke flavors to satisfy my tastes. But more is easily added.

  Jim

Great minds think alike

It gives plenty of smoke but it I'm more concerned with the quality of the smoke. smoldering wood over a low fire is not ideal for great q. It's serviceable and I've hit some home runs no doubt. Still- always chasing that thin blue smoke and that true offset flavor. you cant get that with smoldering chunks over a charcoal fire.

Isn't smoldering wood over hot coals the way every stick burner works? That's what most competitive BBQ cooks use.

smokeyw

Toxarch said:

blasting said:

I've got some obligations, so I decided to wrap in foil to get things moving.  

Here is what is left of the wood.  At first I thought it was just blackened, but in fact it's basically lump - very light and carbonized.  

I'm curious if those would light on fire or if there isn't enough hydrogen atoms left in it to burn.

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

CtTOPGUN said:

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

I wonder if you couldn't light something like an A-Maze-N-Smoker in the ash bin under the fire grate and allow the smoke from that to come up through your lump. 

 That is what I suggested last thread. Personally, the Egg gives me enough smoke flavors to satisfy my tastes. But more is easily added.

  Jim

Great minds think alike

It gives plenty of smoke but it I'm more concerned with the quality of the smoke. smoldering wood over a low fire is not ideal for great q. It's serviceable and I've hit some home runs no doubt. Still- always chasing that thin blue smoke and that true offset flavor. you cant get that with smoldering chunks over a charcoal fire.

Isn't smoldering wood over hot coals the way every stick burner works? That's what most competitive BBQ cooks use.

Actually, some cooks with offset stick burners use smoldering wood. However, one very famous pitmaster I know (4 world championships) builds a very small and hot fire in his offset. He never closes the door and you usually don't even see any smoke. He or his one team member sit in front of the door on the firebox continuously maintaining the fire.