Just Asking -- Different Charcoal Brands, Types, And So On

[mike.stavlund]

Eapples, Chasing Smoke is a humble guy, but he's also a genuine chef. He's been to culinary school, and worked in the industry, and is devoting himself to kettle cooking now and doing some great stuff.  I've of course never eaten his food, but I can tell you I've always benefited-- big time!-- when I've followed his advice.  So I'm glad to see you listening to him closely here. 

Of course there are a lot of great cooks around here, but I'm just saying that his insights for you on this thread are golden, IMO. 

As others have said, don't be shy about cooking and learning as you go.  It's really the best way to learn, and you'll find lots of help and guidance around here if you don't mind asking for it. 

[Johnpv]

There have been many fantastic responses here already.  I'm going to agree with everyone that just changing brands or something like that isn't going to automatically make your food better or worse.  It really does come down to personal preference and how one product works for you vs another one.  That said, I'm not a KB fan, and I wish that more people would try different things, instead of just going straight to the KB.  I don't think I would describe me as a super taster, but there are certain flavors that stand out to me more than others (I'm sure it's the same for everyone).  One of those flavors is the flavor KB seems to impart on most food cooked with it,  one that for me does not agree with my palette.  To me it ALMOST seems like a mild version of the taste that starting your charcoal with lighter fluid will add.  Not exactly the same but similar. 

Like others lump is just a bit too inconsistent on size/shape and other variables to be used for consistent smoking.  I go with a combination of Stubbs all natural briquettes, and Royal Oaks all natural briquettes.  They produce less ash than the KB (though the Stubbs is close), and don't impart any chemical taste (least for my taste buds) to the food.  To come to this though it took a bunch of trying things out.  Which is one thing I really just recommend to any griller/smoker that's new to things.  Try out different products and see what works for you! 

When it comes to grilling, what works for me is good old Lump.  I've had my kettles well over 600 degrees using just a chimney full of good quality lump.  The nice thing about good lump is that you can easily snuff out the fire in a weber kettle and have a good amount of lump left over for the next cook.  This is one area I think product/brand does make a difference.  At the high end is Wicked Good's Weekend Warrior blend where I easily get 1/2 - 3/4 of my chimney from lump left over from previous cooks.   So while it does end up costing me around a dollar a LB I feel like I get my money's worth out of it.  I've also noticed that the higher quality lumps tend to pop less, and put on far less of a fireworks display as they get going.  I'd even say there's a noticeable difference in the scent of their smoke as they light up. 

I've tried a lot of brands and types of lump.  Which I'm just going to echo again, try different things!  There are a lot of great resources on the net, specially a site like the Naked Whiz's charcoal reviews, or amazingribs.com, or here at the weber kettle club.   The only issue I have with them, is products change, and you don't always see that reflected in the review, or info.  Which IMHO leads to people standing by one statement or comment and acting like it's a fact that will last for ever.   Cowboy Lump is a prime example of this, just a few years ago it wasn't worth any ones time, and now it's actually a pretty decent product.   

[saxart]

Here is something that just popped into my head.  I have ZERO info to back this up, so it's a theory, not a fact...

Suppose one of the main fillers in Briquettes is fine sand.   It works for the company making it because, 1) it's cheap, 2) it would help keep predictable temperatures that burn evenly with very little hot-spots, and 3) it's cheap.   Think about it...  As the wood fibers in the briquette burn off, they heat the sand, which gives off a warm, even, and consistent heat. 

Having said that, I just remembered that we have a whole-chicken thawing in the refrigerator for dinner tonight.  I think we may be having a 'coal-cook-off' at our place today!   Stay tuned for more....   

[Troy]

Here is something that just popped into my head.  I have ZERO info to back this up, so it's a theory, not a fact...

Suppose one of the main fillers in Briquettes is fine sand.   It works for the company making it because, 1) it's cheap, 2) it would help keep predictable temperatures that burn evenly with very little hot-spots, and 3) it's cheap.   Think about it...  As the wood fibers in the briquette burn off, they heat the sand, which gives off a warm, even, and consistent heat. 

Having said that, I just remembered that we have a whole-chicken thawing in the refrigerator for dinner tonight.  I think we may be having a 'coal-cook-off' at our place today!   Stay tuned for more....   

I love that your mind thinks like this. Society needs more of it!

However, it cooks down to inefficiency.
Any heat that is absorbed by the sand is heat that is not heating the cooker and your food.
This means more fuel is needed to achieve the same pit temp.

I've heard of people putting sand in their water pan, or putting giant discs of cast iron in their pit as a heatsink to 'make the fuel more efficient' - but it's absolutely false.
(there are benefits, but fuel efficiency is NOT one of them)

[Johnpv]

For people wondering, this is the list that kingsford gives out as what's in it's blue bag charcoal.  It starts with sawdust that is burnt in a low oxygen kiln and turned to charcoal dust.  They then add anthracite coal, mineral charcoal, starch, sodium nitrate, limestone, sawdust, and borax.  Different additives act as binders, others give it a bit more heat, others help it burn longer, and the limestone is what makes it ash over in white.  All those additives are also why you have so much ash from it. 

[Troy]

For people wondering, this is the list that kingsford gives out as what's in it's blue bag charcoal.  It starts with sawdust that is burnt in a low oxygen kiln and turned to charcoal dust.  They then add anthracite coal, mineral charcoal, starch, sodium nitrate, limestone, sawdust, and borax.  Different additives act as binders, others give it a bit more heat, others help it burn longer, and the limestone is what makes it ash over in white.  All those additives are also why you have so much ash from it.

I'm pretty sure their list is different now.
A year or two ago I sent a letter to kingsford requesting MSDS and other info (was working on a giant charcoal post for meatninja.com - never finished it though)
Their response letter was rather detailed and made no mention of anthracite coal (sad, because I wanted to talk smack about kingsford, but kinda happy that they weren't using it anymore)

Maybe they have re-added it?

[1buckie]

For people wondering, this is the list that kingsford gives out as what's in it's blue bag charcoal.  It starts with sawdust that is burnt in a low oxygen kiln and turned to charcoal dust.  They then add anthracite coal, mineral charcoal, starch, sodium nitrate, limestone, sawdust, and borax.  Different additives act as binders, others give it a bit more heat, others help it burn longer, and the limestone is what makes it ash over in white.  All those additives are also why you have so much ash from it.

I'm pretty sure their list is different now.
A year or two ago I sent a letter to kingsford requesting MSDS and other info (was working on a giant charcoal post for meatninja.com - never finished it though)
Their response letter was rather detailed and made no mention of anthracite coal (sad, because I wanted to talk smack about kingsford, but kinda happy that they weren't using it anymore)

Maybe they have re-added it?

I like how the minerals, coal tar, limestone, parrafin & stuff in Blue K's drives the hormones & anti-biotics out of the meat............personally.......

[saxart]

OK, I'm back with an update...  Don't laugh...  (Yet!)

I did a 'lump vs briquette' cook tonight to see what all of the fuss was about.   It looks like a lot of trouble, but really wasn't more than firing up two chimneys of charcoal and dumping them in two different grills.  So, here we go...

I was cooking chicken, with the thought that we would cook it 'indirect' to drag as much charcoal flavor into it as possible.  I'm not sure that really happened.  (More on that later) 

The first thing I did was to 'foil' the charcoal grate of two SJs I have here.  The foil funnels all of the incoming air directly into the coals and keeps a nice draft going.



After that I filled two chimneys with charcoal.   Since I don't have two SJ-sized chimneys, I used the SJ chimney as a measuring cup to fill the larger chimney so that I ensured there was an equal amount of charcoal in each.  Since the full-size chimney was too-big, I used a piece of sheet metal (not shown in this pic) to jam the charcoal up into the side of it to mimic the smaller chimney.



Time to make some fire!



In 20 minutes we had lit briquettes:  (You can see the sheet metal used to jab the briquettes up in this pic)



And lump:



Here we are ready to do some cookin:



The victim was a whole chicken that was cut in half:



Next was to slap that yard-bird on the kettles and monitor the temps.  I had set the bottom vents approx. half-open, and that seemed to hold the temp right around 350deg.  I was pretty surprised that it didn't take a lot of monitoring or adjusting.  They really held their temps pretty steady.  I was amazed.



It was at this point I stepped back and noticed that our driveway looked like some sort of a mad-scientist was at work.  LOL!



I spent the next hour watering some shrubs around the house.  Every once in awhile I'd peek in through the top vent of each and see this.   Ahhh...  All is well!



About 1hr 15 min later they were done.  Lets eat!



So at this point I was really wondering.  "What's the difference?"   Well, not much...  I'd almost say nothing really.  We really couldn't tell any difference between the two bird-halves.   So, did this experiment prove anything?  Not really.  Part of me wonders if instead of indirect you'd taste more of a difference with a 'high and hot' BBQ rather than this low and indirect cook.  Hey, another opportunity to grill some meat!!

Sorry...  Nothing to report.  But we did have some YUMMY chicken tonight!   

[Duke]

How about comparing the ash content?

[MINIgrillin]

this is all good info.  Thank you all for the time you have put into your responses.  Im learning a ton from this forum.  Thank you

[cbpeck]

Saxart, what lump & what briquette charcoals did you use? There is variance between brands.

[Troy]

nice

i used to do side by side tests a lot.
i would cook hot dogs and chicken breasts - both are neutral enough to pick up subtle flavor changes

when i did this test (several years ago)
there were big differences between kingsford and most lumps

the biggest surprise for me was the difference when you add fresh unlit kingsford to hot coals.
the heating and ignition of fresh briquettes produced a horrible flavor.

oddly enough, a snake method smoke with k-blue doesnt produce nearly as much of that flavor.
I think it's a matter of temp... cold briqs heating and burning emits a shitty white smoke
but already hot briqs igniting doesn't (as much)

[Eapples]

OK, I'm back with an update...  Don't laugh...  (Yet!)

I did a 'lump vs briquette' cook tonight to see what all of the fuss was about.   It looks like a lot of trouble, but really wasn't more than firing up two chimneys of charcoal and dumping them in two different grills.  So, here we go...

I was cooking chicken, with the thought that we would cook it 'indirect' to drag as much charcoal flavor into it as possible.  I'm not sure that really happened.  (More on that later) 

The first thing I did was to 'foil' the charcoal grate of two SJs I have here.  The foil funnels all of the incoming air directly into the coals and keeps a nice draft going.



After that I filled two chimneys with charcoal.   Since I don't have two SJ-sized chimneys, I used the SJ chimney as a measuring cup to fill the larger chimney so that I ensured there was an equal amount of charcoal in each.  Since the full-size chimney was too-big, I used a piece of sheet metal (not shown in this pic) to jam the charcoal up into the side of it to mimic the smaller chimney.



Time to make some fire!



In 20 minutes we had lit briquettes:  (You can see the sheet metal used to jab the briquettes up in this pic)



And lump:



Here we are ready to do some cookin:



The victim was a whole chicken that was cut in half:



Next was to slap that yard-bird on the kettles and monitor the temps.  I had set the bottom vents approx. half-open, and that seemed to hold the temp right around 350deg.  I was pretty surprised that it didn't take a lot of monitoring or adjusting.  They really held their temps pretty steady.  I was amazed.



It was at this point I stepped back and noticed that our driveway looked like some sort of a mad-scientist was at work.  LOL!



I spent the next hour watering some shrubs around the house.  Every once in awhile I'd peek in through the top vent of each and see this.   Ahhh...  All is well!



About 1hr 15 min later they were done.  Lets eat!



So at this point I was really wondering.  "What's the difference?"   Well, not much...  I'd almost say nothing really.  We really couldn't tell any difference between the two bird-halves.   So, did this experiment prove anything?  Not really.  Part of me wonders if instead of indirect you'd taste more of a difference with a 'high and hot' BBQ rather than this low and indirect cook.  Hey, another opportunity to grill some meat!!

Sorry...  Nothing to report.  But we did have some YUMMY chicken tonight!   

All of you guys/gals are absolutely amazing!   There is so much practical knowledge available here, in this forum and in other forums (or is that "fori"?  I don't remember too much from high school latin), stuff that can't be learned from just reading a cook book.  I only hope I can do you folks justice if/when I start cooking in earnest.

[Johnpv]

For people wondering, this is the list that kingsford gives out as what's in it's blue bag charcoal.  It starts with sawdust that is burnt in a low oxygen kiln and turned to charcoal dust.  They then add anthracite coal, mineral charcoal, starch, sodium nitrate, limestone, sawdust, and borax.  Different additives act as binders, others give it a bit more heat, others help it burn longer, and the limestone is what makes it ash over in white.  All those additives are also why you have so much ash from it.

I'm pretty sure their list is different now.
A year or two ago I sent a letter to kingsford requesting MSDS and other info (was working on a giant charcoal post for meatninja.com - never finished it though)
Their response letter was rather detailed and made no mention of anthracite coal (sad, because I wanted to talk smack about kingsford, but kinda happy that they weren't using it anymore)

Maybe they have re-added it?

There was a period there where they changed the formula, and people didn't seem to like it and they went back to the original.  Them including anthracite coal is accurate as of May of this year.  They also now make a competition briquette which they claim has far less ingredients than the regular KB.

[mike.stavlund]

I've got this idea of weighing full chimneys of lump vs. KBB to compare them, since I get about the same heat and cook time from each one.  But my KBB is buried under 100lbs of lump, and I'm lazy.  Someday though...