Cook times, St. Louis ribs vs baby backs?

[busmania]

I’ve cooked hundreds of racks of ribs but never baby backs. Figured it was time. I’m assuming they will cook a little faster? They are about 3.5 pounds per rack. Doing 2 St. Louis and 2 baby backs and wondering if I start the baby backs 30-60 minutes after I put the St. Louis on?

 

[SirPorkaLot]

I’ve cooked hundreds of racks of ribs but never baby backs. Figured it was time. I’m assuming they will cook a little faster? They are about 3.5 pounds per rack. Doing 2 St. Louis and 2 baby backs and wondering if I start the baby backs 30-60 minutes after I put the St. Louis on?

That’s about right. Spares take me 4-4.5 hours and BBS take me 2.5-3 hours


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SMOKE FREAK]

That’s about right. Spares take me 4-4.5 hours and BBS take me 2.5-3 hours


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

John has it right.:thumb:

Mine take a while longer so I assume I'm cooking at a lower temp.

 

[busmania]

That’s crazy. Spares take me 5.5-6 hours and I usually wrap the last 1.5 hours. I’m convinced food just takes longer to cook at altitude.

Just trimmed the ribs. The baby backs have a very fat end on one end. Fatter than the spares. Normal?

 

[bowhnter]

You are doing St. Louis cut, not full spares correct?

For me, STL cut and BBs take about the same time ( about 4+ hrs or so) due to the extra meat on the back ribs.
It use to be that all I cooked was BB, now I have switched to St Louis cut due to the more even cooking, and better flavor imo.

 

[Fooball]

The baby backs have a very fat end on one end. Fatter than the spares. Normal?

Yes...normal. Almost like a pork chop.

I suggested about a week ago that due to that thickness of the bb that they take a bit longer than the St.Louis.

I was told that due to the leaner meat in the bb they still take shorter time than the St. Louis even though they are thicker.

In my experience of doing both types in the same cooker at the same time...I find the bb take a little longer due to their extra "pork chop" thickness on the one end.

BUT.... that's just my experience. No flame war here.

 

[1MoreFord]

The thing about back ribs is they come in such weight differences that I find there is no single time factor to quote. Real BB's cook much quicker than SL ribs or spares but once you get up to the heavy loin back style that weigh 3-1/2 lbs or so they cook more like SL ribs for me.

 

[Happy Hapgood]

If I want a pork chop, I'll buy one. Full spares or STL cut is the way I go. The BB's do cook faster in my experience.

 

[SmokerKing]

I find they cook at about the same time
of course weight and marinating constant temps are the variables

 

[busmania]

Thanks y’all. I’ll start them at the same time and just pull when they are done and put in warmer if I have to. These are pretty meaty. Kinda wishing I just did 4 racks of spares instead of 2/2 (spares/bb). Going to try and make a half rack of beef ribs into burnt ends too. A little extra side experiment.

 

[jermoQ]

I figure an hour less on the Baby's but go by the bend test to know if they are done

 

[smoke ninja]

The thing about back ribs is they come in such weight differences that I find there is no single time factor to quote. Real BB's cook much quicker than SL ribs or spares but once you get up to the heavy loin back style that weigh 3-1/2 lbs or so they cook more like SL ribs for me.

Good point. I rarely see what I consider babyback ribs anymore. They tend to be loin back ribs

 

[busmania]

I wrapped and removed all ribs at the same time and I think they were all cooked equal.

 

[ModelMaker]

Did a rack of BB's yesterday and 3 hrs on the grate and 2 hrs wrapped and they were comp standard but nagging Nancy wanted Grandmas wings (for MY father's day meal),
but her hangryness overwhelmed fall off the bone.
They were....fine, I guess.
Ed