CT’s Best Pork Ever Chops with a Twist

Mattman3969

SV’d some chops that I hit heavily with S&P and added fresh Rosemary and Thyme at 135 for 1 1/2hrs.   Seared on the mini while basting with a honey/course mustard glaze.   


And plate with a fresh salad 


Taste and moistness was unreal.  I made the original version sans the SV and it was awesome.  This held its own against that version. 

dmchicago

I’d hit that. 

55Kevy

Love SV'd chops - so moist and tender.  Awsome looking plate.

bubbajack

Just ordered one of those SV thingy's.......

JohnnyTarheel

Nice brother!!

pgprescott

Yep

The Cen-Tex Smoker

mEGG_My_Day

Nicely done - looks delicious!! 

Mattman3969

The Cen-Tex Smoker said:

Glad you approve!   I love the original style but didn’t miss the brine stage with the SV 

Theophan

I have done SV only a few times, and haven't yet been pleased.  According to all of the tables I studied, it doesn't look to me as though 135° for 1 1/2 hours would get 1" thick pork chops cooked completely.  I wound up cooking some for 140° for that long, and if they'd been 2" thick, it said they should cook for 2h at 140°.  No surprise that mine didn't seem super juicy or tender!

Can you refer me to a source that will help me really trust that 135° for only an hour and a half is really safe?  I would like to get better results, but I really want it to be safe.

Mattman3969

https://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2016/04/sous-vide-pork-chops-recipe.html

SciAggie

I will be using your idea soon. I have a thick pork chop in the freezer that needs this cooking method. 

Mattman3969

can’t wait to see what you come up with @SciAggie

bgebrent

Edible. So edible. One of best uses of SV. 

Carolina Q

Ok, yesterday we got that gorgeous chimichurri chicken... today, this lovely chop. What's up for tomorrow?

bgebrent

Carolina Q said:

Ok, yesterday we got that gorgeous chimichurri chicken... today, this lovely chop. What's up for tomorrow?

Fried chicken?

bgebrent

Egg on brothers. 

HeavyG

Theophan said:

I have done SV only a few times, and haven't yet been pleased.  According to all of the tables I studied, it doesn't look to me as though 135° for 1 1/2 hours would get 1" thick pork chops cooked completely.  I wound up cooking some for 140° for that long, and if they'd been 2" thick, it said they should cook for 2h at 140°.  No surprise that mine didn't seem super juicy or tender!

Can you refer me to a source that will help me really trust that 135° for only an hour and a half is really safe?  I would like to get better results, but I really want it to be safe.

This table will give you info regarding thickness and safety:

https://www.douglasbaldwin.com/sous-vide.html#Table_5.1

As to what is the best time and temp beyond the question of safety only you can answer what appeals to you.

fishlessman

Theophan said:

I have done SV only a few times, and haven't yet been pleased.  According to all of the tables I studied, it doesn't look to me as though 135° for 1 1/2 hours would get 1" thick pork chops cooked completely.  I wound up cooking some for 140° for that long, and if they'd been 2" thick, it said they should cook for 2h at 140°.  No surprise that mine didn't seem super juicy or tender!

Can you refer me to a source that will help me really trust that 135° for only an hour and a half is really safe?  I would like to get better results, but I really want it to be safe.

food safety allows meat to be under 140 for up to 4 hours, that includes room temp. it will get to 137 after the sear if you sear it from the sousvide to grill, 137 is safe for a pork chop

CPARKTX

Bravo!

Theophan

HeavyG said:

This table will give you info regarding thickness and safety:

https://www.douglasbaldwin.com/sous-vide.html#Table_5.1

As to what is the best time and temp beyond the question of safety only you can answer what appeals to you.

fishlessman said:

food safety allows meat to be under 140 for up to 4 hours, that includes room temp. it will get to 137 after the sear if you sear it from the sousvide to grill, 137 is safe for a pork chop

Thanks, @HeavyG.  That table was actually the one I have used -- it seems like that guy really knows what he's doing.  But... the reason for my question was that @Mattman3969 sous vided it at 135° for 1.5 hours, but that table says it would have to be in the bath at that temp for 2h if they were an inch thick.  I can't tell from the picture, but they look nice and thick.

And @fishlessman, you probably know more about it than I, but what I find is that for normal cooking, pork should be 145° with a 3-minute rest to be safe, and with sous vide, again the table says at 135° a 1" chop needs 2h to be safe.   I bet it's juicier at the lower temperature, and that's what I want, but I'm an old guy, and food poisoning can kill people like me, and it ain't a nice way to go...

I'll try it again, one of these days, but I was hoping for a really tender, really moist pork chop, and I measured the thickness and followed that table, but it really wasn't any more tender or moist than most pork chops I cook the usual ways.  I was so disappointed I've never tried it again.

Mattman3969

@Theophan - you should try the original version that included the brine. 

thetrim

Great job.  You killed it.  Well, the butcher killed it, but you did a great job on that cook.