Thermoworks Smoke vs Maverick 732

HeavyG

Here's a video comparing the new Thermoworks Smoke remote read thermo to the Maverick 732:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv7lgoUa75w

blasting

Good video - looking forward to it.  Maniac is one of my favorite youtube cooks.

SmokeyPitt

Man that looks nice.  I noticed they are also coming out with a wi-fi gateway and an app.  

http://www.thermoworks.com/Smoke?utm_source=Nl-2016Oct01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Feature&utm_content=inbox&utm_campaign=Oct2016-Introducing-Smoke-cs

If that is reasonably priced it would be a nice addition.  Great that they are using wi-fi instead of bluetooth.  BT range is spotty at best for this type of application. 

HendersonTRKing

Pricey but looks worth it considering the well documented flaws in the maverick (PITA to program, poor build quality -- the battery door screws strip easily, for instance) and the igrill2 (Bluetooth drops off unexpectedly, doesn't pair reliably). May try it. Or ask for it as a gift. 

smokeyw

It has been my personal experience that Thermoworks quality is far superior to Maverick. I have had 4 Mavericks over time and they have actually been pretty unreliable. I switched to Thermoworks about 5 years ago and now have about 10 items they make. I have been completely satisfied with the quality but did have to sacrifice having a remote monitor. Now they have that too!

HeavyG

SmokeyPitt said:

Man that looks nice.  I noticed they are also coming out with a wi-fi gateway and an app.  

http://www.thermoworks.com/Smoke?utm_source=Nl-2016Oct01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Feature&utm_content=inbox&utm_campaign=Oct2016-Introducing-Smoke-cs

If that is reasonably priced it would be a nice addition.  Great that they are using wi-fi instead of bluetooth.  BT range is spotty at best for this type of application. 

The Smoke does not use WiFI. The Smoke transmitter uses the same frequency (2.4ghz) as Wifi and Bluetooth but they are apparently using their own proprietary protocol to transmit to the receivers.

To connect to Wifi they will be selling a separate gateway next spring for $80. That gateway will pair with the Smoke transmitter and the gateway unit is what will connect to your WiFi router.

One thing I didn't like about the video is the way they tested the range. They just conducted a simple clearfield, line of sight test. Both units had similar range.

I think it would have been more useful if they had just taken both receivers to the front yard or opposite side of the house to see how well each unit can "punch thru" a typical house.

DynaGlide

I must be the odd man out I love my et732. I don't bother programming it I use it for temp monitoring and it's always dead on 

abpgwolf

I really like the ThermaQ, and was thinking they would lower the price after the Smoke was introduced. But, it's still priced at $139. When you add 2 probes, the price is still over $200. 

BilZol

I'm really odd I guess. The IGrill2 works flawlessly for me and doesn't take up any space at my grill or in my pocket. The 'Smoke' looks like one of those Radio Shack weather stations to me. 

HeavyG

abpgwolf said:

I really like the ThermaQ, and was thinking they would lower the price after the Smoke was introduced. But, it's still priced at $139. When you add 2 probes, the price is still over $200. 

They may still drop the price. However, keep in mind that the ThermaQ (like its predecessor my trusty old TW-8060) uses the better (albeit more expensive) type K probes.

Dondgc

DynaGlide said:

I must be the odd man out I love my et732. I don't bother programming it I use it for temp monitoring and it's always dead on 

I agree.  I don't necessarily love my ET 732, but it works fine.  I don't see a lot of functionality to be gained with the new Thermoworks model. 

The wi-fi adapter is interesting, but as someone else pointed out, that puts you in the range of $200 for a device that only monitors temps.

If I didn't have a 732 this new device would certainly be on my short list to consider, though.

tarheelmatt

I like the looks of that!  

SmokeyPitt

BilZol said:

I'm really odd I guess. The IGrill2 works flawlessly for me and doesn't take up any space at my grill or in my pocket. The 'Smoke' looks like one of those Radio Shack weather stations to me. 

I like the IGrill2, but I have issues with the range.  It doesn't work from my office, which is less than 40 feet from my egg.  The fireplace is right in the line of site so that might be the problem.  

Also the alarms don't really work well for me on my iphone. The phone has to be awake and the app has to be running in the foreground to get an alert.  If my phone is asleep or if I switch to a different app I get no notification at all when an alarm condition occurs. 

BilZol

SmokeyPitt said:

BilZol said:

I'm really odd I guess. The IGrill2 works flawlessly for me and doesn't take up any space at my grill or in my pocket. The 'Smoke' looks like one of those Radio Shack weather stations to me. 

I like the IGrill2, but I have issues with the range.  It doesn't work from my office, which is less than 40 feet from my egg.  The fireplace is right in the line of site so that might be the problem.  

Also the alarms don't really work well for me on my iphone. The phone has to be awake and the app has to be running in the foreground to get an alert.  If my phone is asleep or if I switch to a different app I get no notification at all when an alarm condition occurs. 

Can't help with the LOS problem, but when I installed my app for the iGrill it must have defaulted to the foreground. Mine alerts me whether it's asleep or not. That could be a settings issue. I had an S7 for a month and it didn't behave well. I went and got a i7 this weekend because I hated the S7 so much. It was a costly experiment. 

tikigriller

SmokeyPitt said:

BilZol said:

I'm really odd I guess. The IGrill2 works flawlessly for me and doesn't take up any space at my grill or in my pocket. The 'Smoke' looks like one of those Radio Shack weather stations to me. 

I like the IGrill2, but I have issues with the range.  It doesn't work from my office, which is less than 40 feet from my egg.  The fireplace is right in the line of site so that might be the problem.  

Also the alarms don't really work well for me on my iphone. The phone has to be awake and the app has to be running in the foreground to get an alert.  If my phone is asleep or if I switch to a different app I get no notification at all when an alarm condition occurs. 

Check your notification settings on the iPhone.  Min e alerts me no matter if the phone is awake or asleep.  Should have every toggle switched to on for Show in Notification Center, sounds and Show on Lock Screen.

Angela

Considering that the Maverick we had always had connection issues between the base and remote we quit using it. I love my Thermoworks ChefAlarm and Thermapen so I'm seriously considering the Smoke. Plus I don't really want a product that is app dependent with my phone. 

ElkhornHusker

Be nice to have something to monitor grate temp or multiple pieces of meat.  

HeavyG

ElkhornHusker said:

Be nice to have something to monitor grate temp or multiple pieces of meat.  

One thing where I think Thermoworks really blew it with their new "Smoke" was just having two probe ports. They should have had at least 4 probe ports so folks could have a grate temp and a few meat probes.

YukonRon

HeavyG said:

ElkhornHusker said:

Be nice to have something to monitor grate temp or multiple pieces of meat.  

One thing where I think Thermoworks really blew it with their new "Smoke" was just having two probe ports. They should have had at least 4 probe ports so folks could have a grate temp and a few meat probes.

Absolutely agree.

Focker

Could care less about meat probes, never use them on any of mine I have had through the years, even the Guru.  More of a PITA than anything.  When I get close, the Pen comes out.  Stick, and pull as they finish.  But, I don't do brisket, ribs don't need it, so that leaves shoulder for the Q cooks.

Would be more interested in running two pit probes simultaneously with the Smoke.  

Botch

HeavyG said:
The Smoke does not use WiFI. The Smoke transmitter uses the same frequency (2.4ghz) as Wifi and Bluetooth but they are apparently using their own proprietary protocol to transmit to the receivers.

One thing I didn't like about the video is the way they tested the range. They just conducted a simple clearfield, line of sight test. Both units had similar range.

I've got some experience with wireless units from my musician days, both transmitters (fiddle) and receivers (in-ear monitors), both VHF and UHV.  The critical difference seemed to be the receiving antenna (two antennas set at 90-degrees to each other worked much better).  Line-of-sight range was a factor, walls/obstructions didn't seem to be, so much.
But, these units work at 2.4 GHz, may be a whole different ball game, I don't know (I'm an ME by training, that radio stuff flies over my head).  

HeavyG

Botch said:

HeavyG said:
The Smoke does not use WiFI. The Smoke transmitter uses the same frequency (2.4ghz) as Wifi and Bluetooth but they are apparently using their own proprietary protocol to transmit to the receivers.

One thing I didn't like about the video is the way they tested the range. They just conducted a simple clearfield, line of sight test. Both units had similar range.

I've got some experience with wireless units from my musician days, both transmitters (fiddle) and receivers (in-ear monitors), both VHF and UHV.  The critical difference seemed to be the receiving antenna (two antennas set at 90-degrees to each other worked much better).  Line-of-sight range was a factor, walls/obstructions didn't seem to be, so much.
But, these units work at 2.4 GHz, may be a whole different ball game, I don't know (I'm an ME by training, that radio stuff flies over my head).  

The antennas in most 2.4ghz devices is only about 30mm long. You could have (and perhaps some do) multiple antennas in various configurations in something like a thermometer receiver. That might help a bit.

The real problem tho is the frequency itself. The higher the frequency the less it is able to penetrate walls. No 2.4ghz device is going to have the ability to penetrate a wall(s) as well as something at a lower frequency. 

Botch

HeavyG said:
The real problem tho is the frequency itself. The higher the frequency the less it is able to penetrate walls. No 2.4ghz device is going to have the ability to penetrate a wall(s) as well as something at a lower frequency. 

Thanks, I should've remembered that from a previous job; losing too many brain cells!  

bboulier

Very interesting.  Thanks for posting.

Grillnugget

Might be a silly question here, but is it possible to use a thermoworks probe in the Maverick? I really like some of the thermoworks configurations/options but I'm not giving up my Maverick till it dies. 

BigEggDaddy

I'm excited for the Smoke to come out. I have several of their products and they never do me wrong! I pre-ordered one, can't wait to try it.