Do you cook chicken to 165 or 160/180?

KiterTodd

There is conflicting advice in chicken recipes as you may have noticed...

Some say;
"Cook until juices run clear when thigh is pierced with a fork or an instant-read thermometer inserted into thickest part of thigh registers 165ºF"

Many places on this forum and in the Naked Whiz spatch recipe (for example) it says;
"Do the juices run clear? Does an instant-read thermometer read 160° in the breast and 180° in the thigh?"

The chicken packaging and all other safety websites say cook to a minimum temp of 165 degrees.

???

I have been using the 160/180 recommendation, but sometimes my breast cooks longer than I'd like waiting for the 180 on the thighs. I want a safe chicken, but I want that bugger as juicy as possible!

theyolksonyou

155-160 breast. On a whole bird, legs to the back to get the dark meat higher. Also can ice the breast so the thighs have more time. 

shtgunal3

165/180

SmokeyPitt

My understanding is that is safe at 160 for the entire bird, but taking it to 180 in the thigh is prefered by most because if texture.  There is more fat in the dark meat so the texture is better cooked higher.  I agree though I dont want to overcook the breast in the process so if it is reading 160-165 I take it off. With spatch legs back the thighs are usually cooking faster so I can hit the 160/180 mark...but not always. 

Eggaroo

^^^ what he said.

Darby_Crenshaw

'Safe' at 140 actually. I don't know of any chicken harboring bacteria which live beyond temps that the same bacteria in beef or pork can

Beyond that it is a texture thing. For example lots of people prefer wings and thighs taken much higher. 

Breasts are probably still too pink at 140 for the vast majority of us. 

If you cook breast until it hits 165, it will rise to 170 or so, right? Just like a roast beef would. 

One of the best things about a BGE is the amount of moisture it retains. That can actually be a problem with chicken skin if you like it crispy. So yeah, by the time it is 165 in the breast, the wings and drums and thighs tend to be higher. 

Which means it is a number that sorta gives you 'done enough' dark meat and 'not too overdone' white. 

And frankly, just like grandma's 180 pork and (even until maybe 10 ywars ago) 150-ish beef, recommended to us by cookbooks and tv chefs and friends, the high numbers assume stupid people are cooking. 

 Meaning, part of the reason the 'official' temps recommendations are so high is that they take into account you'll use a thermometers incorrectly (stuck in not-necessarily-the thickest part of the meat. Or that it is not calibrated (rolling around in a kitchen drawer all year), or that you will otherwise mishandle the food. 

Those pop up thermometers in the breast? They are made by one small company, for years. They're designed to pop at 185. One. Eighty. Five. 

Because they are selling a product by the MILLIONS that is telling everyone their chicken is perfectly safe. 

When yoi rake into account the sheet numbers of half wits cooking chicken and feeding it to possibly compromised people (grandma, people who are ill, toddlers), they cover their proverbial butt. 

Same for recommending 165 in the breast. 

So. You won't die if you eat it at 140. You probably will find it too mushy or soft though. 
 
Is this too long? Ah well

as for me, i cook a while roaster UN-trussed. Untrussed, the legs and wings are in free space and cook faster. They get higher in temp than the breast does. So when the breast is 150-155 (white and cooked thru but moist), the legs are drier and crispy, maybe 185plus. Frankly, in an alcohol addled state, we've had 'ruined' chicken that was 175 in the breast and 200+ in the dark meat. 

Still great. Just very dry the next day. 

All of which means, your chicken will be safe when it looks 'done', so use temps as a guide to how YOU like it. To the texture YOU prefer. 

Because it's technically overcooked anyway. It's a texture thing, not safety. 

TL/DR: Your chicken is probably better overcooked. It's less about saefty than preference.

jtcBoynton

The temperature of your chicken is not a matter of safe/unsafe - but rather more safe / less safe.  The USDA guidelines are based on pasteurization levels which is a measure of temperature, time, and the desired kill rate taken together.  Their numbers for poultry are based on an "instant" kill timing (almost).  If you change the time to be longer, you can cook to a lower temp and get the exact same level of safety.  Chicken cooked to 160 and held for a half minute gets the same pasteurization as cooked to 165 but not held.  Sous vide cooking uses this concept.  If you are willing to use more complicated pasteurization tables, you can cook items to lower temps with the same safety level as the USDA guidelines. [if you want to really get into the weeds, chicken and turkey vary slightly and there are variations depending on fat content of the meat]

Also remember that the USDA numbers are designed to address safety concerns, not culinary concerns.  Many cooks are willing to take on added risk in order to get better food.  The 180º for dark meat is for culinary purposes not safety.  The 160º for white meat is also for culinary purposes and is below the USDA safety guidelines - because the holding time for safety purposes at 160º is so short, I guess most will get the holding time without actually planning for it.

KiterTodd

@Darby_Crenshaw and @jtcBoynton , thanks much for the additional detail and science behinds what's going on.

Sounds like I can do 160-165 in the breasts and if the thighs aren't up to 180 I'm okay.  I do tend to throw the dark meat towards the rear, but it's not always possible with multiple birds. 

And those pop-ups mom relies on every year...  185?  Wow.  Still, the old girl makes a good bird. 

I have a couple birds marinating in the fridge now.  Looking forward to tonight's cook...

Darby_Crenshaw

thing about the pop-ups is we almost always eat right away.  even without resting.  so the fleeting remaining moisture is enough to get a pass.  but the next day, that bird is dry.

i also cut my turkey breast differently than many.  the picturesque traditional big thin slices are what we are used to.  but they dry quickly and only one person gets skin. 

instead, after the turkey rests for maybe a half hour, forty-five, i slice down (with a filet knife) one side of the keel bone, under the entire breast along the rib cage, and along the wishbone, and take the whole thing off as one giant breast.

then i slice cross-wise, into thick steaks of breast, each with a strip of skin.

this helps retain some moisture i think, especially next-day

Wardster

I'm a fan of the dark meat.  So, chicken or turkey, I only monitor the breast.  Seems most people prefer that cut, or think they do, and judge the cook by that.  I'll perfect that for them, 155ish, and take whatever temp the dark meat is at and be happy.

KiterTodd

Wardster said:

I'm a fan of the dark meat.  So, chicken or turkey, I only monitor the breast.  Seems most people prefer that cut, or think they do, and judge the cook by that.  I'll perfect that for them, 155ish, and take whatever temp the dark meat is at and be happy.

Good to know.  So you pull when the breast is at temp, and the dark is always edible. 

lkapigian

I like my breasts @ 98.6