Slightly easier rib method

Prof Dan

Had to cook four slabs of ribs today -- big party -- did a double-decker setup. But I decided to cheat on my usual "GFW 3/1/1.5," with three hours at 250 indirect, followed by an hour in foil indirect, followed by 45 min. out of the foil indirect, followed by 45 min direct.[p]Instead, I did it three and a half hours indirect, an hour in foil indirect, and finished with 45 min. direct. It came out as great as it always does, but it was a little less bother.[p]Someday, I will have the guts to just do the whole thing direct, at a very low temp, with no foil. But the GFW method is sure-fire, and I couldn't take the risk of ruining $40 worth of ribs.

Sundown

Prof Dan,[p]On the 4th of July I did 6 racks on my large - direct - in a rib rack big end of bone down. After about 3 hours I laid them out by overlaping them and shuffled them around for another 2 hours. Took them out wrapped them in HD foil and went to the party. They sat in the cooler for about 2 hours and when I unwrapped them they melted in peoples mouths. Even my wife, my most sever critic, said they could have well been some of my best but she wasn't sure . . . she only got one!
I used Wicked Good lump and the dome temp held rock steady at 235º - 240º. People commented on the flavor mostly about the "different" charcoal flavor. Part of the sweet flavor I think was the JJ's. I since found the Wicked Good has a slight sweetness to the smoke. Very pleasant.
Go ahead and go direct I'm not sure at low temps you can mess up ribs!

Smokin' Todd

Prof Dan,[p]I have never tried the 3/1/1/? methods so I can not comment on results, but always keep in mind for future cooks if you want to garuntee yourself not to screw up ribs; just cook them indirect 230*-250* for 4.5-5 hrs. Cant go wrong.[p]ST

Marvin

Smokin' Todd,
That's how we do them!

stike

Prof Dan,
...isn't the foil method simply steaming the ribs during a portion of the cook?[p]seems like we wouldn't think of parboiling ribs, but then we advocate steaming them. what does it add to the process?
i have been thinking the apple juice in foil might add a real nice dimension to the ribs, without their getting carbonized as if the apple juice were in a sauce DURING the cook.[p]is that it?
as for me, i usually just go 5 to 6 hours at 220, no foil or anything. how will the 3/1/1.5 method effect a difference? i'd like to try it if it does, but seems like a lot more fuss.

BluesnBBQ

"Someday, I will have the guts to just do the whole thing direct, at a very low temp, with no foil."[p]That's how I always do it (except for the times when I do them indirect, no foil).

The Naked Whiz

stike,
Yes, the foil basically steams the ribs. The point of doing it is to make them more tender. I've done ribs this way and foiled them for 1 hour and 1.5 hours, and the 1.5 hour ribs were a little too tender, I think. It's the same as wrapping a brisket in foil for part of the cook or butts. It's a cooking method, nothing more. [p]I thought boiling ribs was ok as long as you didn't boil them in liquid smoke.... :-)[p]TNW

Smokin' Todd

Marvin,[p]Simplist way always the best way, IMO.
I respect those who come up with all these methods...3/1/23/2/3/2/45/6 ribs, T-Rex steaks...using blow torches to light up coals, but just not for me.
I mean too much work to do ribs....to long to make steaks, and the slight risk of blowing my arm off just isnt for me.
But dont get me wrong I really enjoy reading about all the methods...just goes to show how much thought and effort people go to make BBQ the best it can be. It's what makes this board so special...sooo many methods and thought.[p]ST[/b]

tach18k

Prof Dan,
I feel I had to jump in here somewhere. about the foil thing, I do aggree that they do boil the ribs and do make them tender, that aside. Understand the reason for low and slow, Water boils at 212, so the perfect L&S would be about 190-210. Your dont want to boil out the retained water from meats, and if they have lost some due to some sort of prolonged aging, make this more the case of low temp.I can maintain this in one of my smokers, a non BGE type. I used to do the foil thing years ago as a novice, but what set me different is the taste. They seem to keep the "fatty" taste when they are foiled. Kinda like leftovers get the third day of reheating. Doing an indirect at 200 for maybe 6 hours would bring in a great tastey rib rack. No sauce till they are just pulled from the smoker, and tossed on a plate

Mike in MN

Smokin' Todd,
I have to say this....that MAPP torch is one heck of an addition to the tried and true methods of lighting a grill. That thing just cooks! It lights the lump "Double Hooey." As in right now. [p]Certainly worth trying. Fast and efficient. Kinda spendy @$40 though.[p]Mike in MN

Smokin' Todd

Mike in MN,[p]I have never had a problem throwing a starter cube in there.[p]ST

Mike in MN

Smokin' Todd,
Never tried one. But, EZ is good. ;>[p]Mike in MN

Unknown

Prof Dan, have you tried indirect all the way...and no foil. Couldn't be easier.

stike

stike,
i don't think boiling ribs is ok, since boiling something is how you make it soup. ...which means fat and flavor go into the water, and the water goes down the drain.[p]steaming is probably ok, since the foil traps it.[p]but i still don't know. adding flavor of the steaming agent (apple juice, etc.) is probably a reason i'd do it, but i don't know why it would make them more tender. how COULD they be more tender than they already are?