Larry Wolfe said:
This has officially given me a headache! I can envision someone who is new to BBQ reading this post about formulas, ratios, cube 1 and cube 2 size mass etc...................They're going to sign off the computer pound a 12 pack and then head to McDonalds for a McRib.
You'd think we were trying to build the Hoover dam as technical as this has gotten. :roll:
Well you both got a point (I have a B.S in Computer Science, so that qualifies me as a nut who likes to over analyze things). I like Mr. Scientist who lays this out pretty logical and Larry that has officially thrown in the towel (at this point. I haven't read on). So, I'm getting out of this that a smaller piece of tough meat will require more energy (relative to size) to make it tender then a larger piece of meat, but risk the loss of moisture.
So I have two comments:
1. Should we foil wrap the little guy so he can steam to death and use our brown paper bags that can breathe and have better bark for the big guy and
2. Has anyone given thought to the size of your cooking vessel? That is, who cares about the fixed size of molecules. Last time I checked, my WSM hasn't changed sizes. I'm thinking that if I have a large piece of meat, my WSM will be easier to regulate the temps 'cause the meat will absorb some of the energy while the little cut won't absorb as much (unless you guys are going to argue on how many pieces of charcoal or logs to use in your respective smokers). Would 20 pieces of charcoal be good for the little meat and 40 pieces be good for the larger one?
1 CI should have 20 chunks
8 CI should have 25 chunks
27 CI should have 30 chunks
64 CI should have 40 chunks
See. there. I made that up. I'm thinking that my chicken wing will be burnt well before my cornish game hen has a chance to render into some chicken stock or whatever. Get the point? Damn!! 2am. too late for some McRibs. Night!!!!!!
Just wondering.