Welcome to the EGGhead Forum - a great place to visit and packed with tips and EGGspert advice! You can also join the conversation and get more information and amazing kamado recipes by following Big Green Egg to Experience our World of Flavor™ at:
Facebook  |  Twitter  |  Instagram  |  Pinterest  |  Youtube  |  Vimeo
Share your photos by tagging us and using the hashtag #BigGreenEgg.

Want to see how the EGG is made? Click to Watch

Pulled Pork for 60. How much Butts?

2»

Comments

  • Little Steven
    Little Steven Posts: 28,817
    Brad,

    Where do you find these? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

    Steve

    Steve 

    Caledon, ON

     

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Celtic Wolf
    Celtic Wolf Posts: 9,773
    Actually my web site uses 40 people as the reference and 1/3 pound per serving. Not sure where you are seeing 30 people and a 1/4 pound.

    However adjusting the formula for 30 people and 1/4 pound servings

    (30*16) / 4 = 120oz

    120 oz /16 = 7.5 pounds of raw product Dividing that by .6 (60/100 or 60%) = 12.5 of Raw product.

    or to be less wordy 30 / 2.4 = 12.5 pounds..

    So lets us do the reverse math on your amount of 18.75 of raw product losing 40% or 18.75 * .6 would equal 11.25 pounds of cooked product or 180 oz / 30 (our guests) = 6oz per serving..



    Unless my calculator is wrong.. You know it could be..
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Crimsongator
    Crimsongator Posts: 5,797
    ssshhh, you should divide by 0.6 if you want to calculate 40% shrink.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Grandpas Grub
    Grandpas Grub Posts: 14,226
     
    I had to use all fingers and toes on this one.

    If I am to come up with CW's numbers, right or wrong I have to follow his cypherin' or nothing will work, might even have to cut a few toes and fingers off to get things to match. Right or wrong 4 steps vs 1 step.

    Heck I don't even know what a MENSA card looks like nor will I ever in my life cook as much pulled pork as CW so I blindly follow his lead. Heck the square root of my IQ is under 10.

    GG
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Grandpas Grub
    Grandpas Grub Posts: 14,226
     
    Back from watching pres. and had better jump in and comment...

    I am going to have to do some searching as to the 30 head count. Maybe my typo.

    I did copy the page back on 3/22/2008 and, back then, it read 40 people with a raw amount of 17 lbs.

    "How much do you need for X number of people?

    What you want is 1/4 to 1/3 pound per person of finished product. You will lose 40% of the raw product after cooking. Using 40 people as a reference You would figure 40 * 5.6 oz (1/3 lb.) / 16 (oz.) = 13.4 lbs. of finished product or 17 lbs. of raw product. Older folks will eat less, younger people eat more. The number of side dished will either increase or decrease this amount. It is always smart to figure an extra 20% into the end result. "

    Page currently reading:

    "How much do you need for X number of people?

    What you want is 1/4 to 1/3 pound per person of finished product. You will lose 40% of the raw product after cooking. Using 40 people as a reference You would figure 40 * 5.6 oz (1/3 lb.) / 16 (oz.) = 13.4 lbs. of finished product or 22.5 lbs. of raw product. Older folks will eat less, younger people eat more. The number of side dished will either increase or decrease this amount. It is always smart to figure an extra 20% into the end result."

    There was a change between than and now from 17 to 22.5 lbs. Taking the 11.5 and adding 20% extra to raw, which wouldn't be 20% cooked, would be 27 lbs of raw.

    The original divide the number I used for your formula of 1.6 does not match either of your calculations. 40 people ÷ 1.6 = 25 lbs raw, hence this 24 lbs. raw for 40 people is 1.5 lbs over the newer 22.5 lbs. and no 20% consideration.

    To match the 22.5 lbs. exactly the divide people number would have to be 1.777778.

    1.8 = 22.2
    1.7 = 23.5

    Many books and other forums suggest the 2.4 division number. A few pounds one way or the other isn't going to make much difference.

    Getting to a point of beating a dead horse.

    GG
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Celtic Wolf
    Celtic Wolf Posts: 9,773
    Back them it was pointed out to me my math was wrong. I corrected it.

    This time my math was backed up with a good old calculator. Not trying to beat a dead horse just want you to stop contributing the 1.6 figure to me. It is wrong..
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Grandpas Grub
    Grandpas Grub Posts: 14,226
    Celtic Wolf wrote:
    Back them it was pointed out to me my math was wrong. I corrected it.

    This time my math was backed up with a good old calculator. Not trying to beat a dead horse just want you to stop contributing the 1.6 figure to me. It is wrong..

    I didn't notice the change, that's on me.

    I am not at all contributing the 1.6 to you. Just trying to show there is a simple calculation to come up with the same result. However, the 1.6 is now off a little so I will take a second look.

    The objective is to make the calculation easier, that is one calculation rather than several calculations.

    GG
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Celtic Wolf
    Celtic Wolf Posts: 9,773
    2.4 for 4 oz. 1.75 for 5.6 oz.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Categories