Good to know.
What info is bunk? I don’t take any professional sites opinions on brands without a grain of salt, but as far as wood composition, that should all be true?
There were many things (too many to mention), but as soon as I came across this line I realized the article was complete BS:
"The Lumberjack BBQ Grilling Pellets have very minimal ash build up..."
Now I love Lumberjack and is mostly all I use, but anyone will tell you they leave MUCH more ash than other brands because they are not debarked - even the Lumberjack website will tell you that. So it's obvious the author has never used them and may not even own a pellet grill, so I really would not trust any of his other claims that he distilled from reading a few forum posts. He's not an expert on the subject matter.
How did he perform his analysis of "Pellets Favored by the Pros"? By reading a few forum posts. Then there's this bizarre line: "
If you can, avoid standard pellets. These are made for wood stoves and use imitation flavors."
What? Why would a mfg add imitiation flavor to a wood stove pellet?
His claim that "High end cooking pellets, such as
BBQ Delight, offer that same flavor wood taste at a more affordable price point. " is false. BBQ Delight are good pellets, but you're not going to get the same flavor from a pellet that has only 30% flavor wood as 100%.
The article does more to confuse than clarify with so many misleading statements and the references to "professionals" are a joke. Who are these so called professionals?
The whole point of the article can be summed up towards then end when the author states "The time’s come to finally click the buy button" which of course are littered throughout the page.
FAKE REVIEW
