Smoke time vs heating time

[Mike]

There is a difference between the time smoke is being produced, and the time heat is available.
I understand some folks might want a lighter smoke over say 3 hours and some want smoke for all 3 hours.
Is there a general rule of thumb stating the ratio of smoke time to cooking time? - Mike

 

[JC in GB]

I have never heard of such a rule. A stick burner runs smoke 100% of the time as does a pellet grill. Electrics and charcoal units can be run with our without smoke.

The best advice I can give you is don't over-smoke your food. Many beginners want to get a good smoke flavor on their BBQ so they run heavy smoke. This results in a nasty, bitter product, kind of like an ex-spouse. I couldn't resist but probably should have.

You want a steady thin smoke during 2/3 of your cook. If you want lighter smoke flavor run smoke for less time. Some say that smoke flavor get less attached to meat as it heats up.

Hope this made some sense.

JC

 

[zwiller]

^Well said. TBS for whole cook is my take.

 

[Gecko10]

Here is how I do it on my Pit Boss 820. YMMV.

Smoke on P4-5 for 1.5-2 hrs. Finish at 320-350.

 

[bill1]

So Mike, are we answering your question, or have we totally misinterpreted what you were trying to get at?

If we knew what sort of cooker you own/prefer, we might give more relevant answers.

I'm thinking you might have a pellet grill where most vendors have two "modes" of operating: a cook mode and a smoke mode?? If so, Gecko10's answer is heading in the right direction.

 

[GaryHibbert]

I smoke my meat the entire time it's in the smoker. But that's just how I like it. If I didn't want smoke, then I'd just throw in on the gas grill.
How long you apply smoke is determined ONLY by the amount of smoke flavor YOU want--kinda like what color wine you drink with your meal.
Gary

 

[SecondHandSmoker]

I'll throw in my 2 ¢ worth here.
If I am cooking for folks who have never ate smoked meats before, then I'll keep the smoke very light, about one to two hours for poultry, for example.
However, I do maintain a constant chamber temp during those two hours and then for the remainder of the cook without any more smoke production.
Now, when I am cooking for self admitted die hard smoke junkies like myself, then I am rolling TBS the whole time while still maintaining the same chamber temp, say 225-250 for low and slow.

 

[Inscrutable]

I’ve seen a few places say that meat stops absorbing smoke when it gets to about 120*
Not sure if valid.

On the egg it’s getting it the whole time, as I mix wood chunks in with the charcoal.
on the electric, I‘ll go for at least half the cook time on long cooks, the whole time on short ones.

Just play around with it yourself and see what suits your palate.

 

[Mike]

So Mike, are we answering your question, or have we totally misinterpreted what you were trying to get at?

If we knew what sort of cooker you own/prefer, we might give more relevant answers.

I'm thinking you might have a pellet grill where most vendors have two "modes" of operating: a cook mode and a smoke mode?? If so, Gecko10's answer is heading in the right direction.

Bill and others - thanks for all the replies, and yes, I got an answer I like, which is "there is probably a minimum, somewhere around half the time, but it depends on how much smoke exposure you want to get the amount of smokiness you are looking for".

As for my set-up, it's a 10 gallon garbage can, heated by a 1000 Watt hotplate - Mike

 

[JC in GB]

What are you using to control temp in that unit?

JC

 

[SecondHandSmoker]

’ve seen a few places say that meat stops absorbing smoke when it gets to about 120*

In addition to the 120*, I've seen up to 170* before the meat pores close up thus hindering anymore smoke absorption.

 

[Inscrutable]

Yeah, guessing this is not an exact science (no pun)

 

[SecondHandSmoker]

Yeah, guessing this is not an exact science (no pun)

Yup.
It's not exactly rocket science either.

 

[1MoreFord]

I’ve seen a few places say that meat stops absorbing smoke when it gets to about 120*
Not sure if valid.

In addition to the 120*, I've seen up to 170* before the meat pores close up thus hindering anymore smoke absorption.

Meat absorbs smoke as long as it is cooking in smoke.

What stops is smoke ring formation. It stops somewhere around 140°F meat temp.

 

[bill1]

The effect of pores is not an "open or shut" case either. (Sorry couldn't resist.)
I'm guessing here, but I suspect meat pores are the capillaries that wick meat moisture to the surface as the meat cooks. I can believe they shrink with cooking just because with less water you have less surface tension keeping pressure on the capillaries. But then again, less water in the capillaries means more room for smoke! (I love how I can convince myself of anything!)

And there are multiple mechanisms to making meat taste smoky too besides porosity. E.g. the water beading on the surface is effective at grabbing smoke and condensing out around it, just like a cloud raindrop forms by condensing around dust. As 1moreFord notes, that doesn't just stop at 120 or 170F. Then again I'd expect the effect to be more prominent in the early (cooler) part of the cook.

Still, I suspect porosity is a major driver. That's prob why pressure cooking with smoke is SOOO effective...the increased ambient pressure enlarges the pores. Similarly, I'd think vacuum-packing meat would shrink down the pores, and they might not snap back again when the bag is vented. Can anyone with one of those vacuum bag thingies comment as to whether vac-packed meat seems less likely to take smoke flavor when ultimately used?

 

[SecondHandSmoker]

Meat absorbs smoke as long as it is cooking in smoke.

What stops is smoke ring formation. It stops somewhere around 140°F meat temp.

I do believe that Inscrutable and I were pointing out that there is alot myth and misinformation that exists out there.

 

[SecondHandSmoker]

The effect of pores is not an "open or shut" case either. (Sorry couldn't resist.)
I'm guessing here, but I suspect meat pores are the capillaries that wick meat moisture to the surface as the meat cooks. I can believe they shrink with cooking just because with less water you have less surface tension keeping pressure on the capillaries. But then again, less water in the capillaries means more room for smoke! (I love how I can convince myself of anything!)

And there are multiple mechanisms to making meat taste smoky too besides porosity. E.g. the water beading on the surface is effective at grabbing smoke and condensing out around it, just like a cloud raindrop forms by condensing around dust. As 1moreFord notes, that doesn't just stop at 120 or 170F. Then again I'd expect the effect to be more prominent in the early (cooler) part of the cook.

Still, I suspect porosity is a major driver. That's prob why pressure cooking with smoke is SOOO effective...the increased ambient pressure enlarges the pores. Similarly, I'd think vacuum-packing meat would shrink down the pores, and they might not snap back again when the bag is vented. Can anyone with one of those vacuum bag thingies comment as to whether vac-packed meat seems less likely to take smoke flavor when ultimately used?

Thermophoresis is occuring the whole time during the cook. As water continues to evaporate and cool the surface of the meat, the smoke particles will be attracted to the meat surface.

As for vac-packed meat, that does sounds like a good experiment to try out sometime,

 

[Bearcarver]

In case anyone is still interested:
I keep my AMNPS putting out light smoke the whole time my meat is in My MES 40.
Never Heavy, but light the whole time.
I get up to 11 hours of light smoke from one load of Hickory in my AMNPS.

Bear

 

[1MoreFord]

I do believe that Inscrutable and I were pointing out that there is alot myth and misinformation that exists out there.

Really? Sounded to me like y'all were both clueless and looking for guidance.

Maybe y'all ole timer's round here know your own brand of humour and satire better than us newbies.