Looking for advice on LSG 20x42 vs 24x40

[Austin_bbq]

Hi,

I currently own a brinkman horizontal offset smoker (with tuning plates I made myself) and after a year of contemplating I finally placed an order for LSG 20x42 (add ons: 1/2” fire grate, probe ports, fireboard2 drive kit, fire management basket).

I personally like the 24x40, but the price difference swayed me towards the 20x42. Also, Chris assured me that the only difference in the 20x42 (apart from the technology) is the size of the cooking chamber and the firebox.. everything else in terms of the materials used etc is the same.

But I still have doubts and wondering if I would be missing any other feature. I have time to change my order and I am looking for advice/pointers if I should get the 24x40 instead. I use the smoker primarily for brisket, pulled pork and occasional ribs. I also do turkey 2 times a year for Christmas and thanksgiving.

 

[edapp]

In one of his videos he mentions that a 24x smoker will require twice as much wood to keep the same temperature as a 20x. Basically the difference between half splits and full splits.

That’s enough of a difference to make my mind. If you don’t rest need a 24x, I wouldn’t think twice about it.

 

[Austin_bbq]

If I follow what my brain is telling me, 20x is the right choice as well.. its priced better and I will probably never use all the additional space that the 24x has. One thing i dont like about the 20x is its appearance...it looks more like a pellet smoker. And i get it, this should not be a criteria to get the 24x :-D

Thanks for the advice @edapp. Its helpful when i am questioning my own judgement.

I am hoping to hear from others who have experience with both 20x and 24x.

 

[Lynn Dollar]

Doesn't the 24 X 40 have tuning plates ?


And the 20 X 42 is a top down smoker , that has a baffle directing heat up into the cook chamber ?


I think that would be a major consideration for me.

 

[txsmkmstr]

It used to be said around here quite a bit..... never go smaller than 24" diameter if you can afford it. Lots of good reasons for that. Personally, I like the looks of a more traditional pipe smoker (even with a square F/B) when compared to the shape of their newer offerings. While you'll likely be happy with your final decision remember this could very well be the last offset pit you'll ever need.

I personally like the 24x40

That says a lot to me right there.

They didn't even have the new fangled ones when I bought mine but rest assured I'll never want anything else but my 24x40. See sig line for some ideas if you're interested.

 

[edapp]

@AustinBBQ. I agree... I am not a big fan of the appearance of the 20x series or the way they deviated from a "traditional" offset design. In saying that, I would expect the performance is still very very good. There is just something about the pipe aesthetic and in BBQ, about having the ability to cook for a big crowd.

I decided that Workhorse had an edge over LSG when I was looking for an offset, but ultimately sent a deposit in for a Shirley.

What are your plans for the fireboard drive setup?

 

[Lynn Dollar]

24" wide vrs 20 " ........... what does the extra 4" do for you ?


A rack of spares can be laid crossways on a 20 or a 24 .


So , can ya get three pork butts side by side on a 24 and only two on a 20 ? If so, why would you want to do that ?


Ya probably could fit two brisket side by side on a 24 and not on a 20, but again, how often are ya gonna have more than one brisket on the smoker ?


On 24 X 40 with tuning plates, the 12" near the FB is most likely not gonna be unusable. Because the 20 X 42 is top down, that should ( and I say should cuz I've never cooked on one ) make the entire cooking grate useful. It will just be hotter on top , than on the bottom.


I'm really just throwing this out as something I would be considering in making this comparison.


Right now, I've got tuning plates in my OC Brazos from a pork butt cook that I will have to scrape off , take out and clean in a tub. I'm putting the job off because I dread getting into it.

 

[txsmkmstr]

On 24 X 40 with tuning plates, the 12" near the FB is most likely not gonna be unusable.

I don't have that problem..... Once up to temp things are withing 25* left to right and I can live with that. Cleaning is pretty easy - again, IMHO - with a putty knife.

As I said.... It used to be a fairly standard comment concerning recommended pit diameter - - - 24" was the benchmark posted. Just throwing this out also. Good luck to the O/P. Be sure to post pics of your new acquisition. :thumb:

 

[Lynn Dollar]

Well, if tuning plates were not a problem, I'd move on up to the 24 X 48 , which I really like that smoker. The only other problem is the stack seems to small, but why not spend a little more than the 40 ?

 

[Austin_bbq]

Thank you all for your inputs.

@ txsmkmstr - this indeed is going to be the last smoker I buy. I am going to sleep on it and decide in the morning. Most likely I am going to change it. Missus will not be happy. :wink:

@edapp - I have ordered a fan and the adapter along with the fire board2 kit and I have added temp control port to the fire box. I am hoping i have to spend less time tending the fire esp for overnight cooks for brisket.

 

[pjtexas1]

I thought the new shape allowed for larger grates than the standard 20" pipe smoker? When I was looking I never considered their 24" line as the cost vs the 20" was too much. I also ended up with a Shirley.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Lynn Dollar]

Well, if tuning plates were not a problem, I'd move on up to the 24 X 48 , which I really like that smoker. The only other problem is the stack seems to small, but why not spend a little more than the 40 ?

Was wondering .... have you done a biscuit test on that smoker ?

 

[robertm]

I suffered long and hard over the same issue. In the end, I don’t think there is one ‘right’ answer. The 20” is considerably less expensive, no argument there. The 24 has more capacity, you do lose some of that near the fire box. The 20” has no tuning plates which means less to fiddle with and less to clean up. The 24 has a bigger fire box which could be a negative if you care about the amount of wood or a positive because you can use bigger splits. Another thing to consider is the weight of the cooker door. It’s heavier and higher on the 24. Sounds silly but for some it matters. You can add a counter weight on the 24 if needed. Finally there’s the look. The 24” has that classic look, plain and simple.

For me it came down to capacity, ease of use and cost. I decided the 20x42 was more space than I’ll ever need so size different didn’t matter. I came from an egg so the added maintenance of an offset is not an aspect I was looking forward to. The lack of tuning plates and ease of maintenance on the 20” was a big positive for me. Finally the weight of the door played in my decision. My back hurts almost all the time from foolish sports done as a younger man. I didn’t want opening the cooker to become a chore.

After owning the 20” for 8 months or so I am very happy with my decision. It cooks really even left to right. Maybe 5 degrees different. Top to bottom is about 50 degrees. I really like this aspect of the cooker, gives me options. Even though it’s a 20” it’s not round so the top rack is huge. It easily holds 2 large packers up top.

Things I don’t like. I do wish it had a bigger fire box sometimes. I have to do a decent amount of chopping to get to the size splits it likes. I also really enjoy cooking on the fire box side. The bigger box would only make that aspect more useful.

If I could go back in time, I would make the same decision. If I had picked the 24” though I know I would have loved it just as much.

You can’t go wrong with either so pick the one that you really want and don’t worry about what ifs!

 

[ToOTHroTT]

I love my 20X42. I only really cook for myself and the wife and my kid on occasion when he comes over. I did do a cater job for sis in law and I had 8 3lb tritips and about 75 poppers on at the same time and I could have fit another 1 or 2 tritips. My temps from top to bottom shelf are about 40-50 degrees across the board. I like not having to fool with tuning plates just light the fire and go. For me I liked the look because it was different I would say you will love the 20" but if you have doubts go with what your heart tells you. Either way LSG makes a great product and awesome customer service.

 

[SO42N8]

I also struggled with this issue. Originally, I fell in love with the LSG 20x42. I think the shape is very distinctive and immediately recognizable as an LSG, widely recognized as a high quality maker.

Price was also an issue in the beginning (about 5 months ago), but as I perseverated, and visited and revisited not only the LSG site, but also Shirley, Johnson and others, I began to to think about airflow, namely traditional flow vs reverse flow. Both have advantages and disadvantages, what matters is personal cooking style. Some prefer reverse flow, some traditional with or without tuning plates. I bring this up because the 20" cookers by LSG have that baffle which necessarily interrupts the direct flow of air from the firebox to the stack.

I'm splitting hairs here but this is how I finally made my own decision to go with the traditional 24" pipe. I am drawn to traditional Texas bbq and the "Franklin" style of direct flow. I love the minutiae of tending and tweaking the fire to obtain that perfect blue smoke. I love the idea that I can use tuning plates to even out the temp or to create hotspots for more versatile cooks. I think of it like an Android phone vs iPhone. One is extremely user friendly, the other a little more demanding but more versatile- both excellent in their own ways.

The 20" series is closer to a reverse flow with a more even cooking temp left to right and disrupted airflow, but still with its own hotspots top to bottom. It's a fabulous pit! And you can't beat the price differential between the two. However, if you think about aggregating the cost of your pit over its lifetime, the larger cooker prices suddenly don't seem that much greater.

As for size... You'll never go wrong with excess cooking space (other than a little more fuel) but when you want to do that rare cook for some special event, there's no way to suddenly create extra cooking space on a too-small pit.

 

[robertm]

One other thought. Have you driven over there yet and checked out his store front? If not you need to. They have basically one over everything sitting there. I drove all the way down from north of Fort Worth just so I could put my hands on them and talk to Chris. He's good people and happy to answer any questions you might have.

 

[Lynn Dollar]

Well, as to Franklin " air flow " on a backyard cooker, I was running my Brazos with the door open and getting lots of air flow through the smoker, but it was so much air flow it was pulling direct heat into the cook chamber and I was getting bottom burn on the meats.


I had to cut down the air flow and I'm much happier with my cooks. I've done several biscuit tests without tuning plates, with tuning plates , and with plates in various configuration and I've found the sweet spot for this cooker.



But the Brazos does have a baffle that restricts air flow. I think it creates a venturi effect that speeds up the air flow. Mileage may vary on other style cookers.



Still, what Franklin does, may or may not work for you.