OT - Cook's Illustrated Gas Grill shootout

Botch

I know some of us still have/use our gas grills on occasion.  I'm playing catch-up with my CI subscription, last summer they did a shoot out of gas grills under $500.  
I found it interesting from a design standpoint.  Most of the grills had 3, 4 or 5 burners that ran front-to-back, with large vents in the back of the cooking box.  Only the winner, a Weber Spirit E-310 had burners running side-to-side; this was a huge advantage in that, for smoking, you'd leave the front burner on, place the food in the middle, and the rear vents would pull the heat/smoke over the food, as in a Weber kettle.  The other grills couldn't do this, and in fact the back vents were so large on most of them they couldn't get hot enough, even though they had much higher BTU ratings.  Another thing they noted was, with grills on which the lid opened less than 90 degrees, the heat/smoke would hit the cook in the face, rather than going straight up (something I never would've thought to look for).  
The Char Broil Commercial Series did okay, the rest were Not Recommended (and the KitchenAid came in dead last).  
FWIW.  

Skiddymarker

I always thought the advantage of side to side burners was being able to move food from direct to indirect without changing sides of the grill. Not fun to move a fragile veggie from the left side all the way over to the right side - much easier to just push it to the back. Never thought about smoke benefits. My gasser doesn't get used for smoke that much, usually just what is ever burning off from the last cook. 

Botch

Skiddymarker said:

I always thought the advantage of side to side burners was being able to move food from direct to indirect without changing sides of the grill. 

My tiny Weber Genesis had only two, side-to-side burners, and I always thought that front-to-back would've been better, as the only meat shaped to easily cover a lit burner, then be moved to the "cool" side, was rattlesnake or eel!  

pgprescott

All Weber's have front to back burners and have for about five years or more. People and engineers find moving food side to side to various heat zones is preferable to front to back. They just revamped the entire Genesis line. 

StillH2OEgger

pgprescott said:

All Weber's have front to back burners and have for about five years or more. People and engineers find moving food side to side to various heat zones is preferable to front to back. They just revamped the entire Genesis line. 

But in doing so haven't they also made using a rotisserie much less effective?

pgprescott

StillH2OEgger said:

pgprescott said:

All Weber's have front to back burners and have for about five years or more. People and engineers find moving food side to side to various heat zones is preferable to front to back. They just revamped the entire Genesis line. 

But in doing so haven't they also made using a rotisserie much less effective?

Idk. They also have 4 and 6 burner models now with new style burners which are supposed to be engineered to provide more even heat front to back and side to side. If you step up to Summit, they have a rotisserie burner which is specifically designed for rotisserie cooking it is located left to right all the way across the back of either a 6 or 4 burner grill and is designed to evenly diffuse the heat. It's true rotisserie cooking. 

poster

My genesis 320 has the burners side to side and its frustrating because they put the knobs on the right side table which makes it useless to put anything on. As far as being an advantage/disadvantage over front back burners, i dont notice anything

pgprescott

poster said:

My genesis 320 has the burners side to side and its frustrating because they put the knobs on the right side table which makes it useless to put anything on. As far as being an advantage/disadvantage over front back burners, i dont notice anything

They did some studies and found moving food side to side is easier and more desirable. You can turn the outside burner off and create cooler zone on that side. Also you could leave the middle burner off and cook indirect like on a kettle. Fwiw. 

lousubcap

Showing my age, My old Weber gasser (with a great service and performance  life) was three side-to -side and did quite well.  
The back-story:  I made a comment once that when I was too old for charcoal I would consider a gasser.  I did not get to vote and one Memorial Day the gasser appeared.  The gasser survived frequent relocations and my life schedule better than the kettles.  But lo & behold many years later- the gasser was gifted and I'm waaaaaay deep into charcoal and sticks.  The great circle of Q life.  FWIW-

SaintJohnsEgger

Skiddymarker said:

I always thought the advantage of side to side burners was being able to move food from direct to indirect without changing sides of the grill. Not fun to move a fragile veggie from the left side all the way over to the right side - much easier to just push it to the back. Never thought about smoke benefits. My gasser doesn't get used for smoke that much, usually just what is ever burning off from the last cook. 

My Charbroil has 3 front to back. I often cook with the two outside burners and just move something to the middle for indirect. Or at least I did before the egg arrived. Now the gassers is mostly for quick hotdogs or brats.