British BBQ Society Forums

I honestly thought you were going to pass out!! Then of course Q ate a spoonful! nutter!!

bencops wrote:You're the one who gave me the naga chili sauce!

Man I've never had anything less pleasant!

Only cos you've not eaten my food...

Steve wrote:I like John's suggestions, I also like the idea of keeping true to the roots of Q but how far do you take it.

Step 1: As outlined by John..

Step 2: No more of these electronic remote temperature probe thingies...

Step 3: While we're at it, bimetal thermometers are a bit too high tech too.

Step 4: In fact a pit is just that, a pit, what are these metal and ceramic monstrosities we are using, crack out the spade and get digging.

See where I'm going here, we can talk about staying true to the roots of Q but actually what we do is already far advanced from the roots, this is only human nature. What the purist rejects (or Luddite depending on your point of view) tends only to be the newest innovations, not those that have been around since before they started to Q.

Cuan, don't think I'm having a pop here, couldn't be further from the truth. This is the kind of debate I find fantastically interesting and the fact I'll engage with the likes of John and yourself (and several others before anyone gets the hump ) on it is an indication of the fact that I respect your views and opinions

On the chemical front, I would happily see phosphates, nitrates, protein and other ingredients disappear, so am I an ingredient purist or a chemical Luddite?

But it's not going to happen is it?

Nope, it ain't going to happen, however we try to be as honest as we can within reason, its easier to travel with a wsm than digging up Toby`s garden to build a pit, we make our own sauces and rubs where we can and simply make fire, drink beer, tend fire and cook meat. Once you are using force fed you pretty much cooking in an oven and I guess it takes a lot of the fun out of the competition. I understand why ppl do it, but in the interests of competitive spirit I don't like it

Toby wrote:I honestly thought you were going to pass out!! Then of course Q ate a spoonful! nutter!!

Its hot but you can eat it!

Steve, I take your point about where do you draw the line (its hard for me to objectively defend where I've drawn mine), but I don't buy that its at the point the technology was when you came to the "sport".

For me it seems to be where the technology crosses over from passive to active. I can't say why that should mean as much as it does (and I guess another year of scoring lower than those who do use technology to actively control their temperatures might change my mind for competitions). But if it didn't mean that much to me, I wouldn't be into it as much as I am and I wouldn't be competing, so there you go. I don't think anyone else is wrong.

For me:
Pit - yep
Kettle with vents - yep
Bullet with water pan, using evaporation and thermal inertia to control temps - yep
Bullet with no water pan, just using limited airflow and creating a low point of thermal equilibrium - this is where we are now
Ceramic cooker or insulated jambo using low air flow and low heat loss to control temps - yep, and I believe that good insulation creates good thermal inertia too, and that temp consistency is the key to good Q. I don't really care about fuel efficiency (in fact, I would prefer things to be burning more brightly, because its the fire I'm into).
Computer that monitors temps and controls airflow hence temps - no
Pellet cooker based on compressed sawdust being burnt in a computer controlled gale - no
Gas oven and thermostat - no
Electric oven and thermostat - no

Maybe different sections as there used to be in my old sport. "Out of the box" & "modified"

I like this thread

Very good point about active vs passive. But when it comes to fire management, haven't we all but killed the art anyway? When you cook over an open flame that takes work. You will end up with varying zones of heat and you have to understand your fire.

But once you get into the realm of a bullet, it is engineered to make fire management easy. Use of a heatsink to stabilise temperature and a simple, controlled airflow system do this and the better your bullet, the more stable it is too. This becomes even more so when you look at an insulated cooker such as a ceramic, which is designed to burn steadily in all conditions. Take Adie's Jambo also, he lights the fire sets the vent and throws in a log every hour, steady temperature all day, all night. There is an expensive piece of equipment designed to cook well but would you consider that takes away the fun or moves away from the roots of Q? Surely a forced draft system is only delivering the same performance to lower cost cookers.

The art of fire management comes in the form of how you initially set up your fire, something which is equally important with a forced draft setup. With forced draft, you also have to manage oscillations which will happen if you start lifting the lid regularly, much the same as spikes with normal airflow when you start foiling, the difference is really when you don't disturb it, it is effectively managing your vent tweaks for you, plus you'll never need to stir coals to knock ash off.

I'm a convert to forced draft, have to admit that. However I think a lot of that lies in what I enjoy about BBQ, you guys talk about the fire, my interest in the fire is limited to staging the delivery of wood to apply different smokes at different points in the cook.

I get my kicks out of developing the seasonings, marinades and sauces and by tinkering with the cooking process ie prep techniques, times, temps, different woods, foiling etc etc.

As of 2012 I will not be using a single commercially prepared rub, marinade, injection or sauce. Last year I did still use bought in rubs on my brisket, but I'm close enough to a beef rub I'm happy with now to start putting it into competitions. I've been working on and refining my recipes for 3 years now and I still get a burst of excitement when I think "I wonder how this ingredient would work in my rib rub"

My sauce is not to bad either

You can order this now - $299 for the unit plus another $100-ish depending on the adapter / blower you need. Actually works out more than a Stoker which surprised me.

So from a price perspective (to fit an 18" WSM)

CyberQ (1x Pit probe, 3x Meat probe, stand, power adapter & fan + adapter) - $399 - Base unit price $299. This device only controls 1x pit
Stoker (1xPit probe, 3x Meat probe, stand, power adapter & fan + adapter) - $470 - Base unit price $300. This device controls up to 3 pits

So I guess its a question of choice. The CyberQ for a WSM is cheaper by about $70 than a stoker for a similar package, but can only control 1 pit, which is fine for home usage, but in a comp, you probably want to control 3 pits.

If I was spending that amount of money it would be on the stoker every time, in the current set-up it offers more long term flexibility for controlling more than one pit, a lot of teams will have multiple cookers that would benefit from being controlled, this brings the cost down considerably, effectively saving you $300 for every extra cooker. If you have just one large pit and will never have more than one cooker to control then it's a hard choice, I've only seen a Guru in use I've never used one myself but I have used a Stoker extensively I would be happy with either but would likely still buy the Stoker, that said BBQ Guru have more brand based deals, BGE and Backwoods to name just 2, not sure what that tells you