I've done a few pork butts and shoulders this year with pretty good success.
The outer portions are done well and can be pulled off like you would expect
pulled pork to look. Problem I'm having is that the inner portion nearest
the bone is never "pullable" and needs to be sliced off with a knife. The
pieces I'd smoked range from 8-10 lbs and I've cooked them for 8-10 hours at
250-300F. I use a thermometer to check the temp of the meat and it is
always above 170 as suggested.

At the risk of sounding somewhat stupid, am I just not cooking them long
enough? Is it typical for the inner portions to not be as pullable as the
outer portions? The meat tasks great it is just not quite the same texture
and doesn't give that "pulled pork" feeling.

Any comments would be welcome.

Thanks

Tom in Howell, NJ

Teejay wrote:
I've done a few pork butts and shoulders this year with pretty good
success. The outer portions are done well and can be pulled off like
you would expect pulled pork to look. Problem I'm having is that the
inner portion nearest the bone is never "pullable" and needs to be
sliced off with a knife. The pieces I'd smoked range from 8-10 lbs
and I've cooked them for 8-10 hours at 250-300F. I use a thermometer
to check the temp of the meat and it is always above 170 as suggested.

It needs to be above 180 - 185F. I've never heard anyone correctly suggest
that 170F would result in pullable pork.

At the risk of sounding somewhat stupid, am I just not cooking them
long enough?

Nope, you're not.

Is it typical for the inner portions to not be as
pullable as the outer portions?

The inner portion should pull from the bone.

The meat tasks great it is just not
quite the same texture and doesn't give that "pulled pork" feeling.

More time is all you need, Tom.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

In alt.food.barbecue, Teejay wrote:


At the risk of sounding somewhat stupid, am I just not cooking them long
enough?

Bingo. Throw away the clock and the thermometer. Cook them until you can
remove the bone clean (or at least yu can twist it).



--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel

"Teejay" wrote in message
...
I use a thermometer to check the temp of the meat and it is always above
170 as suggested.

At the risk of sounding somewhat stupid, am I just not cooking them long
enough?

Suggested by whom? Shoot for about 185. Takes a couple of more hours or a
hotter temperature.

Teejay wrote:
I've done a few pork butts and shoulders this year with pretty good success.
The outer portions are done well and can be pulled off like you would expect
pulled pork to look. Problem I'm having is that the inner portion nearest
the bone is never "pullable" and needs to be sliced off with a knife. The
pieces I'd smoked range from 8-10 lbs and I've cooked them for 8-10 hours at
250-300F. I use a thermometer to check the temp of the meat and it is
always above 170 as suggested.

At the risk of sounding somewhat stupid, am I just not cooking them long
enough? Is it typical for the inner portions to not be as pullable as the
outer portions? The meat tasks great it is just not quite the same texture
and doesn't give that "pulled pork" feeling.

Any comments would be welcome.

Tom, you're getting some good advice from some real pros. My only
suggestion would be to cook the meat more at the 250f level for about
6-7 hours, then reduce the temp to the 190f range and let the meat
'soak' in the heat until the bone is loose. I start my own butts at
225f with a target internal temp of 180-185f, and the temp reduces
automatically as the meat temp rises. When doing it manually, I'd shoot
for a bit higher starting temperature than I do and then manually bring
it down to the desired meat temperature and let nature take its course.
For a butt or shoulder the size you're talking about, I'd expect at
least 12-13 hours or more. It's done when the bone is loose and the
meat "breaks" if you try picking it up. I'd not time it at all.

--
---Nonnymus---
You don’t stand any taller by
trying to make others appear shorter.

On 20-Jul-2007, "Teejay" wrote:

I've done a few pork butts and shoulders this year with pretty good
success.
The outer portions are done well and can be pulled off like you would
expect
pulled pork to look. Problem I'm having is that the inner portion nearest

the bone is never "pullable" and needs to be sliced off with a knife. The

pieces I'd smoked range from 8-10 lbs and I've cooked them for 8-10 hours
at
250-300F. I use a thermometer to check the temp of the meat and it is
always above 170 as suggested.

At the risk of sounding somewhat stupid, am I just not cooking them long
enough? Is it typical for the inner portions to not be as pullable as the

outer portions? The meat tasks great it is just not quite the same
texture
and doesn't give that "pulled pork" feeling.

Any comments would be welcome.

Thanks

Tom in Howell, NJ

It doesn't much matter where you got the idea to pull your picnics and
butts at 170° Tom, but I'd sure never expect one to pull at that low a
temp. I've never read anyone here stating that as a target temp. I shoot
for 185+ and usually go to 195°F or so. On rare occasions a butt doesn't
want to pull completely at 195°, but I'm not going to hold my breath
waiting for the next time that happens. They do tend to start drying out
above 195°, but I've had some very edible pork that was allowed to go
all the way to 206°. Speaking of using the bone as a test for doneness,
the shank-end bone of a picnic will come out pretty easily as you can
get a good grip on it. Pulling the bone from a 190° butt is another story.
Maybe it works for some folks. I wouldn't try it. It isn't that easy to get
it out even after it has rested for a couple of hours and then it tears the
butt all to hell while you're getting it out. I wouldn;t relish the prospect
of trying it too early and then having to return it to the pit for more
time.
--
Brick(Enforce the law first; change it later if necessary)

Thanks to everyone for your comments. The thermometer manufacturer
recommends pork is done at 170 but doesn't describe it as "pulled pork."
The meat is definitely done and tastes great when I take it off at about
170--its just not as tender as you folks have described.

Gotta go--get another shoulder and try it out!

Thanks again.

Tom in Howell, NJ
"Brick" wrote in message
newsrgoi.60$9A6.25@trnddc01...

On 20-Jul-2007, "Teejay" wrote:

I've done a few pork butts and shoulders this year with pretty good
success.
The outer portions are done well and can be pulled off like you would
expect
pulled pork to look. Problem I'm having is that the inner portion
nearest

the bone is never "pullable" and needs to be sliced off with a knife.
The

pieces I'd smoked range from 8-10 lbs and I've cooked them for 8-10 hours
at
250-300F. I use a thermometer to check the temp of the meat and it is
always above 170 as suggested.

At the risk of sounding somewhat stupid, am I just not cooking them long
enough? Is it typical for the inner portions to not be as pullable as
the

outer portions? The meat tasks great it is just not quite the same
texture
and doesn't give that "pulled pork" feeling.

Any comments would be welcome.

Thanks

Tom in Howell, NJ

It doesn't much matter where you got the idea to pull your picnics and
butts at 170° Tom, but I'd sure never expect one to pull at that low a
temp. I've never read anyone here stating that as a target temp. I shoot
for 185+ and usually go to 195°F or so. On rare occasions a butt doesn't
want to pull completely at 195°, but I'm not going to hold my breath
waiting for the next time that happens. They do tend to start drying out
above 195°, but I've had some very edible pork that was allowed to go
all the way to 206°. Speaking of using the bone as a test for doneness,
the shank-end bone of a picnic will come out pretty easily as you can
get a good grip on it. Pulling the bone from a 190° butt is another story.
Maybe it works for some folks. I wouldn't try it. It isn't that easy to
get
it out even after it has rested for a couple of hours and then it tears
the
butt all to hell while you're getting it out. I wouldn;t relish the
prospect
of trying it too early and then having to return it to the pit for more
time.
--
Brick(Enforce the law first; change it later if necessary)

"Teejay" wrote in message
...
Thanks to everyone for your comments. The thermometer manufacturer
recommends pork is done at 170 but doesn't describe it as "pulled pork."
The meat is definitely done and tastes great when I take it off at about
170--its just not as tender as you folks have described.

Gotta go--get another shoulder and try it out!


Yes it is "done" in the sense that it is cooked, but that does not make it
barbecue. That is for a pork roast or chop according to USDA guidelines.

Pay no attention to recommendations at so the doneness according to some
lawyer at the thermometer factory. They want you to eat well done steaks
too. The meat used for making barbecue is tough, fatty, and needs to be
slow cooked for a long time. This differs from other cuts from the same
animal. A tenderloin is done at 135, a loin is done at 140 and the USDA
shudders at the thought of eating pork at that temperature.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

In alt.food.barbecue, Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

Pay no attention to recommendations at so the doneness according to some
lawyer at the thermometer factory. They want you to eat well done steaks
too. The meat used for making barbecue is tough, fatty, and needs to be
slow cooked for a long time. This differs from other cuts from the same
animal. A tenderloin is done at 135, a loin is done at 140 and the USDA
shudders at the thought of eating pork at that temperature.

I agree. The markings on thermometers, and many of the guides you see
online and elsewhere want you to overcook everything.

My guess is that they figure you won't put the thermometer in the right
place, and so they quote what the overdone outside meat should read,
rather than what the cool center should be. Or something like that.

170 degrees for a pork loin roast? It would be dry. 185 for poultry?

Is it possible that these excessive temperatures were from an era when
meat had lots of parasites in it? Did you used to have to overcook pork
to kill the trichinosis (sp?). Or are they from an era when pork had lots
more fat in it, and the meat would still be juicy at 180?

--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 14:29:44 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

In alt.food.barbecue, Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

Pay no attention to recommendations at so the doneness according to some
lawyer at the thermometer factory. They want you to eat well done steaks
too. The meat used for making barbecue is tough, fatty, and needs to be
slow cooked for a long time. This differs from other cuts from the same
animal. A tenderloin is done at 135, a loin is done at 140 and the USDA
shudders at the thought of eating pork at that temperature.

I agree. The markings on thermometers, and many of the guides you see
online and elsewhere want you to overcook everything.

My guess is that they figure you won't put the thermometer in the right
place, and so they quote what the overdone outside meat should read,
rather than what the cool center should be. Or something like that.

170 degrees for a pork loin roast? It would be dry. 185 for poultry?

Is it possible that these excessive temperatures were from an era when
meat had lots of parasites in it? Did you used to have to overcook pork
to kill the trichinosis (sp?). Or are they from an era when pork had lots
more fat in it, and the meat would still be juicy at 180?

No, they're from an era (now) where the mantras a
"Sue the *******s"
and
"Cover your ass"

-denny-
--

The test of courage comes when we are in the minority.
The test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.

wrote in message
Is it possible that these excessive temperatures were from an era when
meat had lots of parasites in it? Did you used to have to overcook pork
to kill the trichinosis (sp?). Or are they from an era when pork had lots
more fat in it, and the meat would still be juicy at 180?

Two factors, the first being trichinosis, but that has been eliminated from
commercial pork. The other is the very lean meat we have today from
selective breeding and grain feeding. Fifty years ago, pork had lots of fat
and could take the high temperature and not dry out. They put the garbage
collector out of business.