Pulled Pork on WSM - BBQ Central

Go Back   BBQ Central > General > General Barbecue
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 09-09-2007, 10:26 AM   #1
Pork Butt
 
smokemaster's Avatar


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 152
Pulled Pork on WSM

Cooked a 2.5lb Boston Butt last night. Rubbed with McCormick Grill Master Pork Rub.



Full charcoal ring of Kingsford. 23 lit added with 3 cherry chunks.
Clay pot base, butt on top rack.

The rub was OK. Not bad for off the shelf. Needs some tweeking.

__________________

__________________
WSM - Modified
2 - UDS's
Modified CharBroil Silver Smoker Offset


"Beauty Follows Smoke"
smokemaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2007, 10:58 AM   #2
Smoker
 
boar_d_laze's Avatar


 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 334
Smokemaster,

I feel for you, brother. A 2.5# butt roast is a difficult piece of meat to cook low and slow in any cooker. The heart of the problem is the ratio of surface area to volume. It's so small, the meat dries too easily. You end up with proportionally too much bark. The bark makes the rub and glaze choices even more important.

Keep at it,
Rich
__________________

__________________
What were we talking about?

Klose Steak Grill with Swing Set
Backwoods Fatboy with DigiQ II
Other Stuff
boar_d_laze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2007, 02:53 PM   #3
Master of All
 
ScottyDaQ's Avatar


 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In ur house, eatin ur foodz.
Posts: 7,490
Looks good to me !!!
__________________
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Weber Smokey Mountain Cooker ?
Weber 22.5 One Touch Gold ?
Weber Smokey Joe Gold ?

Weber Grill Decency Agent # KTL9352
ScottyDaQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2007, 03:24 PM   #4
Pope O'Que
 
Smokey_Joe's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: North Central Massachusetts
Posts: 2,378
For such a small piece of meat, you had a good smoke ring goin'

Sho looked edible to me! I agree with Boar_D_Laze.....
such a small piece of meat makes rub selection extra important.
__________________
JFOA

The weather is here.... wish you were beautiful

Imagine my disappointment if i were here to make you happy
Smokey_Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2007, 04:25 PM   #5
Official BBQ Central Mark
 
surfinsapo's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,044
Good Job on that pork!!!! [smilie=a_goodjob.gif]
surfinsapo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 06:35 AM   #6
BBQ Centralite


 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 3,323
Looks good to me, nice SR and bark.
__________________
John

"De gustibus non disputandum est,"
John A. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 06:50 AM   #7
Official BBQ Central Mark
 
Larry Wolfe's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bealeton, Virginia
Posts: 14,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by boar_d_laze
Smokemaster,

I feel for you, brother. A 2.5# butt roast is a difficult piece of meat to cook low and slow in any cooker. The heart of the problem is the ratio of surface area to volume. It's so small, the meat dries too easily. You end up with proportionally too much bark. The bark makes the rub and glaze choices even more important.

Keep at it,
Rich
I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud here..........................but I gotta ask...........how is a 2.5lb butt any different to cook than a 10lb butt? It's still the same cut of meat, just a smaller portion. The ratio to surface area idea also baffles me?? If you have a 10lb butt you have more area for rub/bark, with more meat. If you have a 2.5lb butt you have less area for rub/bark but you also have less meat. That's like saying ribs have too much area for bark? I would cook and rub a 2.5lb butt exactly the way I would a 10lb butt, I would obviously use less rub because less would be required due to the size difference and I would also cook it less time because less time would be required because it's a smaller cut.
__________________
Larry Wolfe
Visit the Wolfe Pit
Wolfe Rub Recipes
Larry Wolfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 07:31 AM   #8
Official BBQ Central Mark
 
007bond-jb's Avatar


 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Baton Rouge La
Posts: 6,427
I don't care for McCormics rubs Some of their seasonings are good though
__________________
BBQ Shaken Not Stirred
He who don't cook, better not complain
Why limit happy to an hour
Yes beer qualifies as an appetizer


BOY!

http://www.youtube.com/user/007bondjb
007bond-jb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 07:37 AM   #9
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
A 2.5lbs butt?
That's small as can be.
Looks good man!
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 10:22 AM   #10
Pork Butt
 
SoEzzy's Avatar


 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SLC
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Wolfe
The ratio to surface area idea also baffles me?? If you have a 10lb butt you have more area for rub/bark, with more meat. If you have a 2.5lb butt you have less area for rub/bark but you also have less meat.
Maybe this is worth reading, maybe not, decide for yourselves.

http://www.geocities.com/mileswmathis/size.html a small thesis on the surface area / volume question with respect to the mouse - elephant problem.
__________________

__________________
"There's no such thing as a little garlic" A. Baer


http://www.soezzy.com/

KCBS certified barbecue judge.
SoEzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off








Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.