Charcoal Taste vs. Wood Taste

[spedly]

I used to have family that lived in Regina. How did you get a Pitmaker all the way up to SK?

Had it shipped via freight. It was expensive but it was back when the Canadian dollar was worth more than USD so it was better than it would be now.

 

[Charcoal_Addict]

I see you're in Canada too. How does Basque's compare to Fogo, Kamado Joe lump, or coconut? It's sugar maple lump but I think sometimes it can be a little on the strong side. But I've never used the other ones you've mentioned.

The Basques smells nice. It does vent off thin blue smoke. Compared to KJ lump which burns ridiculously clean it's a lump I use for Chicken and burger cooks were the food is not on long enough to use smoking wood.

The downsides to Basques:

- Maple lump is light and brittle. Basques has higher amounts of chips and dust vs KJ or Fogo
- It produces less ash than Fogo and burns hotter than Fogo. Fogo has better size consistency.
- KJ lump is heavier and much denser than both Fogo and Basques. More lump is left over for 2nd use with KJ lump vs Fogo and Basques. A temp burn off with KJ lump at 800 F will still leave half of the lump intact for another use.
- Fogo struggles to break 800F. It's hard to get it burn past 750 F.
- Basques burns past 800 F with ease but doesn't hold the temp as long as the KJ or Fogo lump does
- Both Basques and Fogo leave next to nothing but ash on high temp cooks
- Fogo has the highest ash production of the 3 lumps

Basques really shines on cooks from 300 F -600 F. That mostly where I use it. I prefer KJ over Fogo for low and slow and hot and fast cooks given Fogo and KJ are priced the same.

 

[spedly]

The Basques smells nice. It does vent off thin blue smoke. Compared to KJ lump which burns ridiculously clean it's a lump I use for Chicken and burger cooks were the food is not on long enough to use smoking wood.

The downsides to Basques:

- Maple lump is light and brittle. Basques has higher amounts of chips and dust vs KJ or Fogo
- It produces less ash than Fogo and burns hotter than Fogo. Fogo has better size consistency.
- KJ lump is heavier and much denser than both Fogo and Basques. More lump is left over for 2nd use with KJ lump vs Fogo and Basques. A temp burn off with KJ lump at 800 F will still leave half of the lump intact for another use.
- Fogo struggles to break 800F. It's hard to get it burn past 750 F.
- Basques burns past 800 F with ease but doesn't hold the temp as long as the KJ or Fogo lump does
- Both Basques and Fogo leave next to nothing but ash on high temp cooks
- Fogo has the highest ash production of the 3 lumps

Basques really shines on cooks from 300 F -600 F. That mostly where I use it. I prefer KJ over Fogo for low and slow and hot and fast cooks given Fogo and KJ are priced the same.

That's really good information - thank you. I'm going to pick up some KJ and give it a try. Unfortunately I've never seen Fogo available locally....

 

[gtr]

I don't use KBB (I don't like the ash & the stuff in it), but there are a lot of comp farkers as well as caterering/restaurant farkers who use it with fantastic results - winning comps, thousands of satisfied customers, etc. - which I'll admit I find surprising, but there it is plain as day. I'm guessing it has a lot to do with the cleanliness of the burn.

My preference will always be burning wood, lump charcoal, and hardwood briq's - in that order, but there's no denying that great food can be cooked with KBB. Just not by me. :doh:

 

[TedW]

Not all charcoal is the same, and it isn't yet pure carbon. If the pyrolysis temp is lower, then more oils are still retained. These oils create syn gasses and are flamable.

Higher temp pyrolysis will have more of these oils burned off, and will be more "pure" carbon. They are lighter in weight than low-temp charcoal. These charcoals I imagine would be worse to cook with.

 

[smoke ninja]

So is there anyone who prefers the taste of charcoal to wood?

All this talk on the matter but i dont hear the champion of charcoal out there

 

[cricky101]

So is there anyone who prefers the taste of charcoal to wood?

All this talk on the matter but i dont hear the champion of charcoal out there

Just charcoal? No. Wood chunks on charcoal are good though.

 

[smoke ninja]

Just charcoal? No. Wood chunks on charcoal are good though.

No, im referring to the FACT that when it comes to BBQ all wood trumps using charcoal. The concensus seems clear. Burning wood produces higher quality, if only slightly, than charcoal burns. Furthermore quality charcoal is better than cheap stuff (kbb).

That being said good Q can be made using any heat source....even a crockpot

 

[TedW]

Very enlightening thread. I like my BGE for quicker cooks. Looking at a LSG VO now

 

[Charcoal_Addict]

No, im referring to the FACT that when it comes to BBQ all wood trumps using charcoal. The concensus seems clear. Burning wood produces higher quality, if only slightly, than charcoal burns. Furthermore quality charcoal is better than cheap stuff (kbb).

That being said good Q can be made using any heat source....even a crockpot

Most experienced Charcoal users don't expect the charcoal to do anything beyond providing a reliable heat source which allows the smoking wood to do it's job.

Charcoal = Fuel
Wood = Flavor

 

[cheez59]

Most experienced Charcoal users don't expect the charcoal to do anything beyond providing a reliable heat source which allows the smoking wood to do it's job.

Charcoal = Fuel
Wood = Flavor

Ding, ding, ding! Winner winner BBQ dinner.

 

[fnjay]

Not sure if you don't like the charcoal flavor or the drippings flavor. Personally I use Stubbs and Cowboy in my PBC with chunks of wood from the backyard cherry tree and have never noticed anything I'd call a "charcoal" taste.

 

[fnjay]

So is there anyone who prefers the taste of charcoal to wood?

All this talk on the matter but i dont hear the champion of charcoal out there

Cant really say. I mean...lump charcoal comes from wood right :twitch:

Unless they are making it from something else now.

I use wood in most of its various states :loco:

 

[TedW]

So lump and sticks would taste the same since at some poetic level they're sorta the same?? :shock:

 

[fnjay]

So lump and sticks would taste the same since at some poetic level they're sorta the same?? :shock:

Throw a few wood chunks on to "dirty" it up and shazam! Like magic baby :grin:

 

[TedW]

Throw a few wood chunks on to "dirty" it up and shazam! Like magic baby :grin:

Ah. So maybe they're not the same thing? :wink:

 

[THoey1963]

I understand some people can tell the difference, but I guess to my simple pallet, I can't. KBB reminds me of BBQ from growing up. Still use it today, just with wood chunks added.

I knew I avoided this thread for a reason. Might as well ask "What does BBQ mean to you?" We all have our opinions. And you know what? All of them are right.

 

[TedW]

I think the thread is a good rundown of opinions. I learned something. I'm very glad for it.

Makes me want a stickburner

 

[fnjay]

I've cooked over campfires and eaten other peoples Q from all wood pits. I'm with THoey...if this imparts some "real wood" flavor vs. charcoal and wood chunks then my pallet is too simple to discern it. Maybe if I had them side by side rather than from one day to the next. Who knows.

My response about wood was just how this is running around in my head. I'll lay it out and you all can tell me if it is nonsense.

So....straight stick burners want a "clean fire" that burns thin blue imparting just the right amount of wood flavor. Lump charcoal is just wood with most of those "impurities" that might impart more flavor already burnt off, as such produces an extremely clean fire. Sounds about right so far?

Edit: I only read the first page and like one random thing by smoke ninja on the way in to posting. I may have to bow out and not get involved after seeing the rest of it now!:wink:

 

[RolandJT]

I'm going to insist that the stickburners go back to a burn barrel set up. If charcoal is bad because it is not all wood and therefore not real traditional BBQ, then I think any reasonable reading of BBQ history would say Carolina style burning the wood separately and shoveling coals under meat is the only true and original BBQ.

JK--I personally do prefer the flavor of all wood, but someone who knows what they are doing can get a really good approximation from a charcoal/chunk set up with 1/10 the work.

I do think Carolina whole hog is clearly superior to any other pork BBQ (although indirect whole pig is also good--both better than butt only), but it is rare when I can assemble enough friends to cook and eat one. In the real world most of what I eat is butts or picnics from the WSM.