On 21-Apr-2004, "Duwop" wrote:
snip
You like grease fire smoke so much? I oughta charge you guys to cook on
my side cooker when I burn the drippings out. That's a freakin' grease
fire,
and it smells like it too.

Smoky taste from lava rocks my ass, smoky grease taste is what that is.

ROTFLMAO. Not too long ago, I fired up my offset NB to grill with the
fire in the cooking chamber. Forgot all about the four or five slow cook
session that went on before. Had probably a half inch of grease the full
length of the cooker bottom. Unfortunately for me it waited to ignite
until I had the food on and my back turned. I wish the grease lovers
could have been here to enjoy the result. The neighbors usually enjoy
the smoke from my cooker, but not that day.

--
M&M ("When You're Over The Hill You Pick Up Speed")

"Stephen Judge" wrote in message .. .
Wow - thanks for the response - there are obviously a lot of seasoned
(excuse the pun) BBQers out there.
Bottom line is that gas and wood seem to be two different things. As a
casual user, and likely to stick with simple grilling rather than attemting
slow cooking. I'm temped by the gas but first, I'll seek out some
non-impregnated charcoal and see what difference that makes. Not so easy to
chop down oak trees here in the UK (and of course our BBQ season is only 8
days long on a good summer).
Cheers

Stephen,

I recall watching an interview with Henry Kissinger back in the 90s,
just after the Soviet Union fell apart. When asked what the next
challenge was to world order, he replied "fundamentalism". I had no
idea he was talking about BBQ ...

I have both a gas burner and a Weber kettle. I use them differently:
Gas for the "quick and dirty" stuff (hamburgers, hot dogs, quickies on
a weeknight when I get back from work, etc) and the weber for when I
have some more time and inclination: smoking (fish, pork chops, ribs)
and grilling (steak, chicken, veggies). The Weber gives me much more
control: I can crank up the heat for searing, keep it stable for
roasting and smoking, and eliminate flareups by controlling the
airflow. I believe the flavour is better in the kettle, but its more
work than gas.

So I think it boils down to your priorities. If you want convenience,
get gas. If you're prepared to work a bit harder, but have a better
result, get a decent charcoal grill.

HTH

M&M wrote:
On 21-Apr-2004, "Duwop" wrote:
snip
You like grease fire smoke so much? I oughta charge you guys to
cook on my side cooker when I burn the drippings out. That's a
freakin' grease fire,
and it smells like it too.

Smoky taste from lava rocks my ass, smoky grease taste is what that
is.

ROTFLMAO. Not too long ago, I fired up my offset NB to grill with the
fire in the cooking chamber. Forgot all about the four or five slow
cook session that went on before. Had probably a half inch of grease
the full length of the cooker bottom. Unfortunately for me it waited
to ignite until I had the food on and my back turned. I wish the
grease lovers could have been here to enjoy the result. The neighbors
usually enjoy
the smoke from my cooker, but not that day.


Ya know what Howard? I think we may be sitting on a gold mine here. Think
about it, if these gassers think burning grease smoke is the great taste of
grilling/BBQ, dont you think there would be a market for "Real BBQ(tm) Wood
Smoked Grease" ? We'd need to design a dispenser that could sit over the
propane burner and dispense the grease at the proper level for that "Mmmmm
good smoky grease taste that meat eaters crave". Then we could sell it in 1
ounce bottles for $15. We could do premium blends too, "brisket over oak",
"chicken and apple". Why the possibilities are endless. And even better?
We'd clean up cleaning up.

Anyone in?

Dale
_-

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Stephen,

So I think it boils down to your priorities. If you want convenience,
get gas. If you're prepared to work a bit harder, but have a better
result, get a decent charcoal grill.

Because this is a BBQ newsgroup, it is important to keep pointing out that
whether the fuel it is charcoal or gas, grilling is grilling, and it ain't
'Q. Refering to a piece of equipment as a "barbecue" is flat out wrong.
Many, if not most, gas and charcoal grills make lousy barbecue at worst; or
are much more labor intensive than need be at best.
Dave

Duwop wrote:
M&M wrote:
On 21-Apr-2004, "Duwop" wrote:
snip
You like grease fire smoke so much? I oughta charge you guys to
cook on my side cooker when I burn the drippings out. That's a
freakin' grease fire,
and it smells like it too.

Smoky taste from lava rocks my ass, smoky grease taste is what that
is.

ROTFLMAO. Not too long ago, I fired up my offset NB to grill with the
fire in the cooking chamber. Forgot all about the four or five slow
cook session that went on before. Had probably a half inch of grease
the full length of the cooker bottom. Unfortunately for me it waited
to ignite until I had the food on and my back turned. I wish the
grease lovers could have been here to enjoy the result. The neighbors
usually enjoy
the smoke from my cooker, but not that day.


Ya know what Howard? I think we may be sitting on a gold mine here. Think
about it, if these gassers think burning grease smoke is the great taste of
grilling/BBQ, dont you think there would be a market for "Real BBQ(tm) Wood
Smoked Grease" ? We'd need to design a dispenser that could sit over the
propane burner and dispense the grease at the proper level for that "Mmmmm
good smoky grease taste that meat eaters crave". Then we could sell it in 1
ounce bottles for $15. We could do premium blends too, "brisket over oak",
"chicken and apple". Why the possibilities are endless. And even better?
We'd clean up cleaning up.

Anyone in?

Dale
_-


ROTFL MAO
Count me in! I'll even start using a drip pan in my Kamados to catch the stuff.
"Premium" would go for at least double that price.

BOB

On 22-Apr-2004, "Duwop" wrote:

Ya know what Howard? I think we may be sitting on a gold mine here. Think
about it, if these gassers think burning grease smoke is the great taste
of grilling/BBQ, dont you think there would be a market for "Real BBQ(tm)
Wood Smoked Grease" ? We'd need to design a dispenser that could sit over
the
propane burner and dispense the grease at the proper level for that "Mmmmm
good smoky grease taste that meat eaters crave". Then we could sell it in
1 ounce bottles for $15. We could do premium blends too, "brisket over
oak",
"chicken and apple". Why the possibilities are endless. And even better?
We'd clean up cleaning up.

Dale, I think you've hit on it. It sounds like you have the marketing end
under
control. I'll concentrate on organizing all the offset cooker guys/gals to
collect
that (lovely) grease. Hell, I've got bettern then a quart in my drip bucket
as we
write. We just need to find a guy to design that despenser and we're off to
the
races.
--
M&M ("When You're Over The Hill You Pick Up Speed")

On 22-Apr-2004, " BOB" wrote:

ROTFL MAO
Count me in! I'll even start using a drip pan in my Kamados to catch the
stuff.
"Premium" would go for at least double that price.

This thread is just getting too good BOB. You triggered the idea not only
of premium "stuff", but how about the different varieties. Cherry flavored
duck. Apple flavored chicken. The variations are endless.
--
M&M ("When You're Over The Hill You Pick Up Speed")

"Dave Bugg" deebuggatcharterdotnet wrote in message
...
Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Stephen,

So I think it boils down to your priorities. If you want convenience,
get gas. If you're prepared to work a bit harder, but have a better
result, get a decent charcoal grill.

Because this is a BBQ newsgroup, it is important to keep pointing out that
whether the fuel it is charcoal or gas, grilling is grilling, and it ain't
'Q. Refering to a piece of equipment as a "barbecue" is flat out wrong.

Dave, I hear ya. And you may be technically and historically correct, in
your context. But given that the OP is in the UK, and usenet is an
international medium, do you insist that he uses the American South
definition of BBQ?

It seems that pretty much the whole rest of the world has a much wider
definition of Barbecue than you do, and I doubt you're going to change
that. Meat has been cooked over fires for thousands of years, and saying the
only way to make good food is your way, is like saying the only way to eat
chicken is in curry.

Many, if not most, gas and charcoal grills make lousy barbecue at worst;
or
are much more labor intensive than need be at best.

Heck, there's no limit to the ways you can make lousy barbecue, if you're
determined. And sometimes labour intensive is part of the fun. But I have
also made some truly delicious food on both my gas grill and Weber Kettle,
and can provide witnesses.

Just my .02c ...

/s

On 22-Apr-2004, "Scarlet Pimpernel"
wrote:
snip
Dave, I hear ya. And you may be technically and historically correct, in
your context. But given that the OP is in the UK, and usenet is an
international medium, do you insist that he uses the American South
definition of BBQ?
and snip some more

Regardless of your opinion of international internet and all that. This
newsgroup was propogated to carry on the principiles of cooking
food outdoors over a wood fire, ala South Carolina pig cooking. And
I defy you to question any of the guys in the UK on this principle.
They at least know what they are talking about. We here benefit
from the unique products that they can cook and throw at us and
which many of of may never experience.

Graeme, I would appreciate it if you would weigh in here and bail
my ass out.
--
M&M ("When You're Over The Hill You Pick Up Speed")

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Dave, I hear ya. And you may be technically and historically correct,
in your context. But given that the OP is in the UK, and usenet is an
international medium, do you insist that he uses the American South
definition of BBQ?

Yes... since the derivation of this group is American barbecue, and uses a
FAQ that forms a common point of reference.

It seems that pretty much the whole rest of the world has a much wider
definition of Barbecue than you do, and I doubt you're going to
change that. Meat has been cooked over fires for thousands of years,
and saying the only way to make good food is your way, is like saying
the only way to eat chicken is in curry.

Be that as it may, there is a commonality and reference that this NG has
adopted. Although you have mentioned the most essential components: wood and
fire.

Heck, there's no limit to the ways you can make lousy barbecue, if
you're determined. And sometimes labour intensive is part of the fun.
But I have also made some truly delicious food on both my gas grill
and Weber Kettle, and can provide witnesses.

I have also produced good food on my Weber Genesis.... but I have never
produced barbecue -- nor have tasted anyone's product who has on a gas
grill -- that is equal to a wood-charcoal fired pit.

Realities.
Dave

On 22-Apr-2004, "Dave Bugg" deebuggatcharterdotnet wrote:
snip
Yes... since the derivation of this group is American barbecue, and uses a
FAQ that forms a common point of reference.
snip some more

God bless you Dave. And if you watch close, I'll bet that
Graeme is going to weigh in here on your side and mine.
He damn well knows the difference between 'Q' and
whatever. He also knows a hellavu bunch about other
food that I want to find out about. So detractors, kiss
off or we'll sick Nick on you for a week.
--
M&M ("When You're Over The Hill You Pick Up Speed")

"Dave Bugg" deebuggatcharterdotnet wrote:

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Dave, I hear ya. And you may be technically and historically correct,
in your context. But given that the OP is in the UK, and usenet is an
international medium, do you insist that he uses the American South
definition of BBQ?

Yes... since the derivation of this group is American barbecue, and uses a
FAQ that forms a common point of reference.

Is there something in the FAQ which contradicts this line from page
1?;
"for this list, anything having to do with smoking, grilling or any
other type of 'outdoor' cooking is welcome"

Jim

Jim Elbrecht wrote:
Is there something in the FAQ which contradicts this line from page
1?;
"for this list, anything having to do with smoking, grilling or any
other type of 'outdoor' cooking is welcome"

Jim

Jim, nobody was arguing that, Pimp is just another in a long line that wants
to argue semantics for some reason.
This is a discussion group who's medium is the written word, so one
neccessary part of communication is a common language, and definition is
part of that. Some people feel a need to argue the definitions this group
has agreed on.
Pimps' argument makes as much sense as me telling a British user that a
public school is NOT one you pay to go to, and since everyone else in the
world agrees with me, Englishmen must change their usage.
Just because much of the world settles for an approximation of BBQ is not a
reason to change it's definition.

Pimp, please search google on this subject, you'll see you're not going to
win any friends and you will **** people off as your arguments become
inevitably more strident and coarse. You seem like a good guy, don't let
this become your defining time here.

D
--

"Dave Bugg" deebuggatcharterdotnet wrote in message ...
Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Dave, I hear ya. And you may be technically and historically correct,
in your context. But given that the OP is in the UK, and usenet is an
international medium, do you insist that he uses the American South
definition of BBQ?

Yes... since the derivation of this group is American barbecue, and uses a
FAQ that forms a common point of reference.

It seems that pretty much the whole rest of the world has a much wider
definition of Barbecue than you do, and I doubt you're going to
change that. Meat has been cooked over fires for thousands of years,
and saying the only way to make good food is your way, is like saying
the only way to eat chicken is in curry.

Be that as it may, there is a commonality and reference that this NG has
adopted. Although you have mentioned the most essential components: wood and
fire.

The original question was regarding gas vs charcoal. Clearly it was
about grilling. Are you saying that because this is a BBQ list, we're
not allowed to talk about grilling here?

According to the BBQ FAQ you mentioned, and posted here a few days
ago:

--------8-----------------------
1.2 Charter


The BBQ Mailing List was started in early 1996 by Richard Thead to
facilitate the discussion of barbecue and grilling.

Here Rick's Charter for the BBQ List:

"The charter is really pretty broad. We include in-ground pits, log
burning pits, water smokers (gas & electric), grilling, etc. We should
try not have our discussions drift too far off. The long-term goal of
this list should be to show that BBQ is a subject that can be well
defined enough to carry on meaningful discussions about it."

We don't discuss religion, or politics and we post no obscene pictures
(provided you don't look at the mugs of some of our members on Garry's
Web page). Click here to see them if you must, but it's pretty scary
and people have left the List after seeing them.

We talk about Q here. We answer questions about Q. We fight about Q.
We take Q seriously. That's what we do. Sometimes, opinions and
prejudices border on religion, but just keep in mind that most of the
time a post that sounds critical, or even hostile, is most likely done
tongue-in-cheek. Don't take everything you read on this List too
seriously, in fact don't take anything you read on this List too
seriously! (Except safety.)

Here is what Rick used to send to new List subscribers:

" I'd like to keep this list fun and informative for everybody.
Hopefully, we can keep the flames to a minimum. We all need to keep in
mind that BBQ means different things in different places. I'm as
guilty as anybody of being a BBQ snob. However, for this list,
anything having to do with smoking, grilling or any other type of
'outdoor' cooking is welcome. The only thing I'd like to discourage is
the so-called 'oven BBQ,' where you throw something in the oven with a
bottle of liquid smoke and call it BBQ. There are plenty recipes for
that in the recipe archives already, and it has no place here.

Rick "
------8---------

- Are you saying that if we talk about BBQ, it can only be about "low
and slow" bbq? The FAQ covers this:

"--------------------

[Just what is barbecue?]

Ed Pawlowski--

There are many interpretations of the term 'barbecue' in the world.
Some people use it to describe a social gathering and cooking
outdoors. Others use it to describe grilling food. For our purpose
here, we are using the term to describe meat, slow-cooked, using wood
smoke to add flavor. There is equipment designed just for this type of
cooking.

Barbecuing is not grilling. Grilling is cooking over direct heat,
usually a hot fire for a short time. Barbecuing is cooking by using
indirect heat or low-level direct radiant heat at lower temperatures
and longer cooking times. The distinction between barbecuing and
grilling is the heat level and the intensity of the radiant heat. It
is the smoke from the burning wood that gives barbecue its unique and
delicious flavor.
--------------"

So in this context (the group), the term Barbecue should be understood
to mean either "low and slow" in something like a WSM or offset pit,
or indirect, as can be done in a Kettle, with smoke. Everything except
grilling directly over radiant heat. I can live with that, recognising
that its a local definition, rather than a global one.

I really enjoy reading this group (and ABF) and am not trying to rock
the boat here. However discussion about grilling is on topic,
according to the charter, and doesn't need to be regarded as a poor
cousin to "the real thing".

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 07:52:02 -0700, "Duwop"
wrote:

Pimp, please search google on this subject, you'll see you're not going to
win any friends and you will **** people off as your arguments become
inevitably more strident and coarse. You seem like a good guy, don't let
this become your defining time here.

Google will do that?
I did a Google search on BBQ, and I couldn't find any referrences to
****ing people off.
What did you search on?
:-)

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"