Basic Pulled Pork Smoke

[jarjarchef]

 
I've prepared pulled pork many times but still come back to this post for great reminders.

My daughter is home from college for the long weekend and she asked me last night if I had any pulled pork for her to take back to school. Well how could I say no to that?  I went to store and they had pork butts on sales so I picked up one got it ready to go. I put it on around 8:00 this morning with some Famous Dave's pork rub with a little added seasoning.  The smoker is rolling with some apple and hickory.  I will spritz it with apple juice throughout.

.  View media item 428893
View media item 428894

Looks good.

My daughter just started the college adventure, but she has the pre-ordering of menus down. I make sure I have small freezer bags to pack a care package when she leaves. The mini fridge we found her has a decent sized freezer, so she has the room for more than most.

 

[tonka16827]

Its great that they want to take some of the comforts of home back with them.  We will send her back today with plenty of pulled pork and some smoked cheese that I did last month along with the plenty of her favorite sweets.   She goes to college  close to both my in-laws and my parents and both send plenty of home made goodies like salsa, pickles, peppers - all the good things that we grew up with on the farm with her when she sees them. My dad still makes some of his own sausages too - so she gets a few rings of that when she sees them.  Its nice to be needed for something other than cash!

 

[bigsmoketexas]

Is 240 for 5 hrs, 240 3 hrs foiled, a good temp and time for a shoulder? Will be smoking one bone in this weekend

 

[marauder]

 i personally dont foil pork shoulder  i like the bark it adds alot of flavor to pulled pork. use alot of rub. 220- 240  till  internal temperature reaches 200 degrees.. could take as long as 1.5 lbs per hour.  i did a 10 lb pork shoulder this weekend  it was 14 hrs cook time

 

[bucsrno1]

Hello,

I looked all over the forum for a place to post my "Pork Shoulder" AKA "Pulled Pork".

Please don`t be mad but this was the only place that I could find to post my "Pulled Pork".

I got a really nice Pork Shoulder at the grocery store & brought it home.

I took it out of the package & rinsed it & dried it off with paper towels as best I could.

I slathered it with yellow mustard & applied the barbecue rub.

I fired up my smoker at 250 degrees put on the Pork Shoulder for 10.5 or 11 hours.

I did not wrap & I basted it every hour with apple juice.

I went for a internal temp. of 195 or 205 degrees.

When I took my Pork Shoulder in the house I wrapped it tight with aluminum foil then I wrapped it with beach towels.

I let it rest for four hours.

View media item 439339
View media item 439340
After I pulled it apart I made some Carolina Barbecue Sauce
1 quart Apple Cider Vinegar
2 Tablespoons Kosher Salt
2 Tablespoons Crushed Red Pepper flakes
1 Tablespoon Black Pepper Ground.

I used regular hamburger buns & store bought cole slaw to build the "Pulled Pork" sandwich.

It turned out great!

 

[mkriet]

Hello,
I looked all over the forum for a place to post my "Pork Shoulder" AKA "Pulled Pork".
Please don`t be mad but this was the only place that I could find to post my "Pulled Pork".
I got a really nice Pork Shoulder at the grocery store & brought it home.
I took it out of the package & rinsed it & dried it off with paper towels as best I could.
I slathered it with yellow mustard & applied the barbecue rub.
I fired up my smoker at 250 degrees put on the Pork Shoulder for 10.5 or 11 hours.
I did not wrap & I basted it every hour with apple juice.
I went for a internal temp. of 195 or 205 degrees.
When I took my Pork Shoulder in the house I wrapped it tight with aluminum foil then I wrapped it with beach towels.
I let it rest for four hours.
View media item 439339
View media item 439340


After I pulled it apart I made some Carolina Barbecue Sauce

1 quart Apple Cider Vinegar

2 Tablespoons Kosher Salt

2 Tablespoons Crushed Red Pepper flakes

1 Tablespoon Black Pepper Ground.
I used regular hamburger buns & store bought cole slaw to build the "Pulled Pork" sandwich.

It turned out great!

That looks awesome. I'm going to have to try this. I'm more of a fan of Memphis/KC sauce, but some Carolina Q sounds pretty good to bring me to summer thoughts again.

 

[tonka16827]

Looks great - I love the basic and simplicity of pulled pork like this.  I use the same basic formula and I do a finishing sauce that is pretty much the same too - I've never had any complaints.   We just fed 45 friends for a 50th birthday party and everyone loved the pork - some of the kids wouldn't even both with a bun when they came back for seconds, they'd just put a pile on their plate.  ENJOY!  

 

[bug230]

Smoked my first butt on my GMG using this recipe. Best pulled pork I've had.

View media item 447902
View media item 447903

 

[poppafinch]

Hey all,

Looking to cook a 9lb butt tomorrow and had a question or two. 31 pages is a lot to go through to find my answer, so I'm sorry if this has been asked already.

Is there a difference in wrapping in foil (at 165 IT), or placing in a tin pan and covering that in foil?

Is it the "tightness" of the foil wrap that makes a difference? Or does it matter at all? I also figured if I used the pan, I could save a buck or two on foil, and also not disturb the bark as much.

What do y'all think? Any feedback would be great. Thanks!

Finch

And by the way, I've done a number of butts before, but have never "wrapped", so this will be a first of four that I just picked up at my local market. But hey, at .99 cents a pound I couldn't just buy one!

 

[johnmeyer]

I don't think the tightness of the wrap matters, and I put mine in a pan and cover it with foil. This has several benefits:

• It is much easier than wrapping in foil;
• The pan catches all the juices (this also keeps the water pan and drip pan in the MES a lot cleaner);
• I can then simply put the pan into a cooler without having anything leak out of the foil

The main purpose of the wrap, I believe, is to stop "the stall" by preventing the pork from "sweating." I've read several scientific studies of what causes the stall, where the temperature stays at around 160 for many hours. From what I've read, it happens because the moisture escaping from the meat evaporates, thus cooling the meat at the same rate that the meat is taking in heat from the cooker. However, once you enclose the meat so the moisture can't escape, there is no more evaporation, no more evaporative cooling, and as a result the meat resumes its upward temperature climb. The meat will still exude moisture, which is the trapped in the pan, forming juices, but that released moisture no longer evaporates and cools.

I just re-read two experiments done by Cook's Illustrated (same people as America's Test Kitchen). The first one cooked two identical roasts, one at 450 degrees and the other at 250, this latter temperature being similar to many smoker temps. They were both cooked to the same final internal temperature. The high-temp roast lost 25% of its original weight, whereas the one cooked at the low temperature lost only 9.25%. This is a good argument for not cranking up the heat to get through "the stall."

In the second test they put several roasts into sealed vacuum bags, some with no liquid, and the others filled with varying amounts of braising liquid. They put the sealed bags into 190 degree water and cooked them for almost two hours. At the end of the cooking time, when they measured the liquid, the increase in liquid (i.e., the liquid that came out of the meat) was absolutely identical, whether the meat was immersed in liquid, or whether the bag was dry.

So, if I am to believe these tests, the moisture lost from the meat will not be slowed or diminished by wrapping, but WILL be slowed by keeping the temperature down.

Finally, this same group has done all sorts of other tests about resting meat after cooking. Most of the pulled pork recipes call for putting the pork into a cooler for one or more hours. The Cook's Illustrated tests showed that this resting time does indeed help the meat to reabsorb some of the liquid.

So, my conclusion:

• Wrap the meat to get through the stall, but don't expect that to make it more moist;
• Resist the temptation to crank up the heat to get through the stall;
• Let the meat sit for a long time before pulling.

Of course there is one more thing these tests didn't reveal, because they weren't dealing with a long smoke, and that is the formation of bark. It is pretty clear that the sooner you wrap, the less bark you are going to get. And, that is where experience comes in. I am a novice at smoking, so I can't comment at all on that, and I haven't seen any scientific experiments to guide me.

That's why I read as many of the posts in this forum as I can.

 

[dr k]

 
I don't think the tightness of the wrap matters, and I put mine in a pan and cover it with foil. This has several benefits:

• It ismuch easier than wrapping in foil;
• The pan catches all the juices;
• I can then simply put the pan into a cooler without having anything leak out of the foil

The main purpose of the wrap, I believe, is to stop "the stall" by preventing the pork from "sweating." I've read several scientific studies of what causes the stall, where the temperature stays at around 160 for many hours. From what I've read, it happens because the moisture escaping from the meat evaporates, thus cooling the meat at the same rate that the meat is taking in heat from the cooker. However, once you enclose the meat so the moisture can't escape, there is no more evaporation, no more evaporative cooling, and as a result the meat resumes its upward temperature climb. The meat will still exude moisture, which is the trapped in the pan, forming juices, but that released moisture no longer evaporates and cools.

I just re-read two experiments done by Cook's Illustrated (same people as America's Test Kitchen). The first one cooked two identical roasts, one at 450 degrees and the other at 250, this latter temperature being similar to many smoker temps. They were both cooked to the same final internal temperature. The high-temp roast lost 25% of its original weight, whereas the one cooked at the low temperature lost only 9.25%. This is a good argument for not cranking up the heat to get through "the stall."

In the second test they put several roasts into sealed vacuum bags, some with no liquid, and the others filled with varying amounts of braising liquid. They put the sealed bags into 190 degree water and cooked them for almost two hours. At the end of the cooking time, when they measured the liquid, the increase in liquid (i.e., the liquid that came out of the meat) was absolutely identical, whether the meat was immersed in liquid, or whether the bag was dry.

So, if I am to believe these tests, the moisture lost from the meat will not be slowed or diminished by wrapping, but WILL be slowed by keeping the temperature down.

Finally, this same group has done all sorts of other tests about resting meat after cooking. Most of the pulled pork recipes call for putting the pork into a cooler for one or more hours. The Cook's Illustrated tests showed that this resting time does indeed help the meat to reabsorb some of the liquid.

So, my conclusion:

• Wrap the meat to get through the stall, but don't expect that to make it more moist;
• Resist the temptation to crank up the heat to get through the stall;
• Let the meat sit for a long time before pulling.

Of course there is one more thing these tests didn't reveal, because they weren't dealing with a long smoke, and that is the formation of bark. It is pretty clear that the sooner you wrap, the less bark you are going to get. And, that is where experience comes in. I am a novice at smoking, so I can't comment at all on that, and I haven't seen any scientific experiments to guide me.

That's why I read as many of the posts in this forum as I can.

Kinda like a steam bath room.  You can only handle so much because of the lack of evaporative cooling and your IT starts to go up.

-Kurt

 

[cliffcarter]

...The first one cooked two identical roasts, one at 450 degrees and the other at 250, this latter temperature being similar to many smoker temps. They were both cooked to the same final internal temperature. The high-temp roast lost 25% of its original weight, whereas the one cooked at the low temperature lost only 9.25%. This is a good argument for not cranking up the heat to get through "the stall...."So, my conclusion:

• Wrap the meat to get through the stall, but don't expect that to make it more moist;
• Resist the temptation to crank up the heat to get through the stall;
• Let the meat sit for a long time before pulling.

This cooking temp gives the lie to ATK's results, high temp butt cooks range in temps from 280°-325°. I cook butts at these temps and have no problems with moisture loss and I have no stall.

It is obvious to me and to many others that cook "hot and fast" that the quality of the finished product certainly does not suffer and IMHO is much better in all respects when cooking at higher temps. In other words... crank up the heat at the start and avoid the stall.

 

[johnmeyer]

 
Kinda like a steam bath room.  You can only handle so much because of the lack of evaporative cooling and your IT starts to go up.

-Kurt

Exactly! Most steam room temps are not much over 110 degrees F. I find I can't stay in a steam room for more than about ten minutes.

By contrast, most saunas are operated at at least 180 degrees, and I have often stayed in a sauna at that temperature for almost fifteen minutes. My sweating keeps me relatively cool. However, if someone comes in and dumps a little water on the coals, I have to get out pretty quickly, because I then get hot very quickly.

 

[johnmeyer]

 
This cooking temp gives the lie to ATK's results, high temp butt cooks range in temps from 280°-325°. I cook butts at these temps and have no problems with moisture loss and I have no stall.

It is obvious to me and to many others that cook "hot and fast" that the quality of the finished product certainly does not suffer and IMHO is much better in all respects when cooking at higher temps. In other words... crank up the heat at the start and avoid the stall.

I make no claim to knowing the "ideal" temperature for smoking pork butt. Also, 300 degrees is s LOT less than 450, and in oven cooking that would still be considered a relatively low temperature. My only point is that, based on testing, lower temperature cooking retains more moisture. And, it very well could be that the big increase in moisture loss doesn't start happening until, perhaps 350 degrees or higher. I just don't know.

I first learned about the advantages of keeping roasting temperatures low by reading the original nutritional expert, Adelle Davis, who wrote a series of books way back in the 1950s. It was in her first book that I first read about cooking meat roasts at what, at the time, seemed like ridiculously low temperatures, like 225 degrees F. She knew the science, even back then, of how proteins react to heat, which is the main reason for the huge moisture loss at the super-high heat of 450 degrees.

As I said in my earlier post, I haven't found any temperature tests that have been done with a smoker.

I can't disagree with the idea of not wrapping to avoid the stall. I do love my bark and therefore would prefer to not wrap. My "solution" at this point is to start the smoke a LOT earlier, like the night before, and just plan for the thing to take 18-20 hours.

 

[dr k]

 
I make no claim to knowing the "ideal" temperature for smoking pork butt. Also, 300 degrees is s LOT less than 450, and in oven cooking that would still be considered a relatively low temperature. My only point is that, based on testing, lower temperature cooking retains more moisture. And, it very well could be that the big increase in moisture loss doesn't start happening until, perhaps 350 degrees or higher. I just don't know.

I first learned about the advantages of keeping roasting temperatures low by reading the original nutritional expert, Adelle Davis, who wrote a series of books way back in the 1950s. It was in her first book that I first read about cooking meat roasts at what, at the time, seemed like ridiculously low temperatures, like 225 degrees F. She knew the science, even back then, of how proteins react to heat, which is the main reason for the huge moisture loss at the super-high heat of 450 degrees.

As I said in my earlier post, I haven't found any temperature tests that have been done with a smoker.

I can't disagree with the idea of not wrapping to avoid the stall. I do love my bark and therefore would prefer to not wrap. My "solution" at this point is to start the smoke a LOT earlier, like the night before, and just plan for the thing to take 18-20 hours.

I think your both right!  If you want to get a big smoke ring go lower, if not higher.  325*F is considered low in an oven considering the range of an oven.  Those of us that also have electric smokers that max at 275*F keep me around 235*F-245*F or so average. 

I've heard a lot about uncoated butcher's paper to wrap with instead of foil to get through stalls to keep the bark from softening from too much steam and condensation from the foil.  It's an in between on smokiness from naked the whole time vs. foiled.

-Kurt

 

[cliffcarter]

 
I make no claim to knowing the "ideal" temperature for smoking pork butt. Also, 300 degrees is s LOT less than 450, and in oven cooking that would still be considered a relatively low temperature. My only point is that, based on testing, lower temperature cooking retains more moisture. And, it very well could be that the big increase in moisture loss doesn't start happening until, perhaps 350 degrees or higher. I just don't know.

I first learned about the advantages of keeping roasting temperatures low by reading the original nutritional expert, Adelle Davis, who wrote a series of books way back in the 1950s. It was in her first book that I first read about cooking meat roasts at what, at the time, seemed like ridiculously low temperatures, like 225 degrees F. She knew the science, even back then, of how proteins react to heat, which is the main reason for the huge moisture loss at the super-high heat of 450 degrees.

As I said in my earlier post, I haven't found any temperature tests that have been done with a smoker.

I can't disagree with the idea of not wrapping to avoid the stall. I do love my bark and therefore would prefer to not wrap. My "solution" at this point is to start the smoke a LOT earlier, like the night before, and just plan for the thing to take 18-20 hours.

I know you are not making the claim, America's Test Kitchen is. 

First- it is America's Test Kitchens that that is promoting a test that has no "real world" validity, they simply doubled the 225° cooking temp to 450° to demonstrate the moisture loss. BBQ pit masters that cook at temps of 350° and above have the good sense to keep moisture in the pit using a water pan and avoiding that loss and keeping the meat moist.

Second- my point is simply that if you stop cooking at 225°-250° and start cooking at 300°( or as high as an electric pit will go if you own one of them) you will avoid the "stall" and the need to foil. And you will also avoid those monstrously long cooks, at 300° my pork butt cooks average 1 hour per pound. I put an 8 pounder on at 8AM and it is done at supper time

.

Third- I do remember Adelle Davis-

http://www.quackwatch.com/04ConsumerEducation/davis.html

 

[johnmeyer]

 
Third- I do remember Adelle Davis-

http://www.quackwatch.com/04ConsumerEducation/davis.html

That article is a little harsh, but quite a bit of it is true. Her first book "Let's Eat Right To Keep Fit" was filled with pretty good advice. However, she then went on to write "Let's Get Well." It was this second book that got a lot of people in trouble, because she claimed that pretty much any ailment could be cured by changing your diet and, if needed, popping vitamin pills. She was responsible for starting all the nutritional fads we've seen come and go. For instance, back in the 1950s she sung the praises of massive doses of vitamin C long before Linus Pauling came along and made similar claims a decade later.

In her defense, she was the first to point out the nutritional losses in refined food; the problem of too much sugar in our diet; and many other problems in the typical American diet.

I've read all her books, and still have them. There is some good advice in there, but like so much nutritional advice we get bombarded with every day, you have to wade through a lot of junk to find the good stuff.

P.S. I just re-read that article, and the author, while an M.D., apparently never read any of her books. He claims that none of her claims were sourced with science. In fact, almost every single paragraph of all her books are footnoted, and almost 10% of the page count are the reference pages for those footnotes.

 

[chopper1]

Great instructions! Well done.

I really like your idea about the Rum or Bourbon spray & I will definitely give that a "shot" on my next Pork Butt.

Here are some pictures of one I did for my neighbor a couple of months ago.

I've heard it doesn't matter to rub with yellow Mustard prior to applying the rub, but I always do. (Father in law respect thing)

My neighbor lady was quite pleased. She fed this to her family a day before Christmas.

-Chopper

View media item 451330
View media item 451331
View media item 451332
View media item 451333
View media item 451334
View media item 451335
View media item 451336

 

[sirsmokey]

These all look so delicious! I got some ribs on now. PS I just got a set of those Meat Claws, chopper, and they are totally AWESOME. Wayyyy easier then using forks. I like to growl and make bear noises as I rip the meat apart:241:

 

[krj]

So I wanted to do a test run with a pork butt on my PBC, just to try and get an idea for the timing. Fired up the PBC and had the butt seasoned and on at 9:50am, internal temperature read at 39F, and had a spot that was still a little frozen. I set an hourly timer to check internal temperature, so I could take notes.

9:50 - 39F
10:50 - 113F
11:40 - 176F
11:45 - 183F Wrapped in foil
12:30 - 210F Towel and Cooler
1:30ish(we were hungry) - Ate

First let me say, it was delicious. Tender, juicy, and flavorful. The butt was a small one, bone out. I had picked up for the intent of testing, and weighed in at 3.1lbs To me, it just seemed like the cook time went really fast, and I never hit any plateau. Again, it was really delicious, I'm just leery of doing either two or three 3lbs again, or grabbing a big 8lb and my times being completely off. Causing my to miss the lunch serve time.

One picture of the leftovers.

View media item 465989