Any CharGriller Super Pro users out there? I know it's a low-end approach,
but I've generally been pretty pleased with the results I've gotten from it.
It just seems that I go thru a lot of charcoal during a smoking. This
weekend, I cooked a butt for about 9 hours, averaging around 240 deg, and
went thru about 13-14# of Royal Oak lump. That's in addition to 3 sticks of
hickory. Wx was mid-70's with a breeze, but nothing serious. This seemed to
be pretty typical of how much I usually use for a cooking of this length. My
cooker has the side firebox. I haven't done any mods such as a blanket to
address this issue, although I'm using some firebrick in the bottom of the
cooking chamber. I've also extended the chimney almost to the cooking
surface, and mounted a baffle between the firebox and the cooking chamber,
but didn't really think those would affect how much charcoal I use, one way
or the other. For all the pro's out there, does that sound like an
outrageous amount of charcoal? About right? Thanks for the feedback.

Jerry wrote:
Any CharGriller Super Pro users out there? I know it's a low-end approach,
but I've generally been pretty pleased with the results I've gotten from it.
It just seems that I go thru a lot of charcoal during a smoking. This
weekend, I cooked a butt for about 9 hours, averaging around 240 deg, and
went thru about 13-14# of Royal Oak lump. That's in addition to 3 sticks of
hickory. Wx was mid-70's with a breeze, but nothing serious. This seemed to
be pretty typical of how much I usually use for a cooking of this length. My
cooker has the side firebox. I haven't done any mods such as a blanket to
address this issue, although I'm using some firebrick in the bottom of the
cooking chamber. I've also extended the chimney almost to the cooking
surface, and mounted a baffle between the firebox and the cooking chamber,
but didn't really think those would affect how much charcoal I use, one way
or the other. For all the pro's out there, does that sound like an
outrageous amount of charcoal? About right? Thanks for the feedback.



Those little offsets tend to use a lot of fuel and require almost
constant maintenance to maintain a good temp.

Mr. Bricker has one and perhaps he can contribute some advice.

When I cooked on them I had to add fuel (wood) every 30-45 minutes to
keep a good burn going.

If you want to cut way back on your consumption and still be within a
budget, the WSM is champ in cheap metal cookers.



--
TFM®

Jerry ) opined:

Any CharGriller Super Pro users out there? I know it's a
low-end approach, but I've generally been pretty pleased
with the results I've gotten from it. It just seems that I
go thru a lot of charcoal during a smoking. This weekend, I
cooked a butt for about 9 hours, averaging around 240 deg,
and went thru about 13-14# of Royal Oak lump. That's in
addition to 3 sticks of hickory. Wx was mid-70's with a
breeze, but nothing serious. This seemed to be pretty
typical of how much I usually use for a cooking of this
length. My cooker has the side firebox. I haven't done any
mods such as a blanket to address this issue, although I'm
using some firebrick in the bottom of the cooking chamber.
I've also extended the chimney almost to the cooking
surface, and mounted a baffle between the firebox and the
cooking chamber, but didn't really think those would affect
how much charcoal I use, one way or the other. For all the
pro's out there, does that sound like an outrageous amount
of charcoal? About right? Thanks for the feedback.



Sounds about right. I used to use my CharGriller for all my
smoking, and this was typical. Same setup (baffle, bricks)
but I would use a moving blanket over the smoke chamber. The
CharGriller is just made of thin sheet metal. All your heat
is going out the sides and you have too little thermal mass to
keep a steady temp without constant feeding of the fire.

--
George B. Ross is
remove the obvious bits for email
Why is it that being a good boy and being good at being
a boy don't require the same set of skills? - anonymous

"TFM®" wrote in message
Jerry wrote:
Those little offsets tend to use a lot of fuel and require almost
constant maintenance to maintain a good temp.

Mr. Bricker has one and perhaps he can contribute some advice.

What you've forgotten my rusty special?


When I cooked on them I had to add fuel (wood) every 30-45 minutes to
keep a good burn going.

I was able to get that up to every 60-90 minutes. Took a couple of years of
practice though. But 10+ pounds for that long a cook? Sure, easy.

Exhaust full open, intake down to about 1/4 or so. That's after you got
temps up and a bed of coals. At that setting, it'd cook at about 225-250.

Google this group for the minion method on an offset, that may help, it goes
over it better than I can describe.

Good luck and enjoy the practice. You know you gotta have a cold one handy
doing that right?

Dale

--

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:02:45 GMT, TFM®
wrote:

If you want to cut way back on your consumption and still be within a
budget, the WSM is champ in cheap metal cookers.

I know this may be somewhat heretical--but for 'budget' and pretty
good results, I like my gas-fired bullet. Mine (MasterBuilt) I got
at Lowe's for 80 bucks last summer. I think there's another gas-fired
one that looks about the same, and may be a bit more solid, from one
of the 'name' makers--yes. Brinkmann. Add a propane tank and some
chunks of smoke-wood, and you're set up for around a hundred and a
quarter. Or less, depending on the cost of the full propane tank.
Hrm. Not on Lowes.com now, and where I did find the MasterBuilt, it's
$140. Not nearly as good a deal.

My MasterBuilt is called "7 in 1" but one of those "7" is 'gas
grill'--and it's not at all good at that. I'll be checking it out as
charcoal grill within a month or two, but I bought it to be a gas
smoker, and it's done me nicely for that.
(typing this post in between eating the last of yesterday's spareribs.
Yum.)

--
-denny-
"Do your thoughts call ahead or do they just arrive at your mouth unannounced?"

"It's come as you are, baby."

-over the hedge

On 3-Apr-2006, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?TFM=AE?= wrote:

Jerry wrote:
Any CharGriller Super Pro users out there? I know it's a low-end
approach,
but I've generally been pretty pleased with the results I've gotten from
it.
It just seems that I go thru a lot of charcoal during a smoking. This
weekend, I cooked a butt for about 9 hours, averaging around 240 deg,
and
went thru about 13-14# of Royal Oak lump. That's in addition to 3 sticks
of
hickory. Wx was mid-70's with a breeze, but nothing serious. This seemed
to
be pretty typical of how much I usually use for a cooking of this
length. My
cooker has the side firebox. I haven't done any mods such as a blanket
to
address this issue, although I'm using some firebrick in the bottom of
the
cooking chamber. I've also extended the chimney almost to the cooking
surface, and mounted a baffle between the firebox and the cooking
chamber,
but didn't really think those would affect how much charcoal I use, one
way
or the other. For all the pro's out there, does that sound like an
outrageous amount of charcoal? About right? Thanks for the feedback.



Those little offsets tend to use a lot of fuel and require almost
constant maintenance to maintain a good temp.

Mr. Bricker has one and perhaps he can contribute some advice.

When I cooked on them I had to add fuel (wood) every 30-45 minutes to
keep a good burn going.

If you want to cut way back on your consumption and still be within a
budget, the WSM is champ in cheap metal cookers.

--
TFM®

TFM® paints a pretty accurate picture. The first year I had my NBS
(daddy to Charbroil Silver) I threatened to pound it into scrap more
then one. After some tips from others and some personal mind control,
I learned to manage the beast. Sometime back, I weighed out a few
chimneys of Royal Oak lump and counted how many I used. It turned
out to be 10# or a little less to cook a butt and a couple racks of spares.
From the start of a cook, I don't have to check the fire for the first two
hours, then aproximately hourly after that. I'm lucky in that I can see
the stack thermometer from my living room, so I don't even have to go
outside to check the temp.

--
Brick (Paddling ever slower)

"George B. Ross" wrote in message
6...
Jerry ) opined:

Any CharGriller Super Pro users out there? I know it's a
low-end approach, but I've generally been pretty pleased
with the results I've gotten from it. It just seems that I
go thru a lot of charcoal during a smoking. This weekend, I
cooked a butt for about 9 hours, averaging around 240 deg,
and went thru about 13-14# of Royal Oak lump. That's in
addition to 3 sticks of hickory. Wx was mid-70's with a
breeze, but nothing serious. This seemed to be pretty
typical of how much I usually use for a cooking of this
length. My cooker has the side firebox. I haven't done any
mods such as a blanket to address this issue, although I'm
using some firebrick in the bottom of the cooking chamber.
I've also extended the chimney almost to the cooking
surface, and mounted a baffle between the firebox and the
cooking chamber, but didn't really think those would affect
how much charcoal I use, one way or the other. For all the
pro's out there, does that sound like an outrageous amount
of charcoal? About right? Thanks for the feedback.


Sounds about right. I used to use my CharGriller for all my
smoking, and this was typical. Same setup (baffle, bricks)
but I would use a moving blanket over the smoke chamber. The
CharGriller is just made of thin sheet metal. All your heat
is going out the sides and you have too little thermal mass to
keep a steady temp without constant feeding of the fire.

--
George B. Ross is
remove the obvious bits for email
Why is it that being a good boy and being good at being
a boy don't require the same set of skills? - anonymous

Just a quick note to say thanks to everybody for the feedback. Considering
the budget I'm working under, I guess I'm set with what I've got, and
actually pretty satisfied with it. That was after we came to an mutual
understanding, and I recognized it was in charge and I just needed to do
what it told me. I'd like to burn less lump, but it sounds like I'm about
where I should expect to be, so I won't worry about it. Might trying
throwing and old moving blanket over, just to see what happens. Anyway,
thanks for the help and for all the good advice.

George B. Ross wrote:
Jerry ) opined:

Any CharGriller Super Pro users out there? I know it's a
low-end approach, but I've generally been pretty pleased
with the results I've gotten from it. It just seems that I
go thru a lot of charcoal during a smoking. This weekend, I
cooked a butt for about 9 hours, averaging around 240 deg,
and went thru about 13-14# of Royal Oak lump. That's in
addition to 3 sticks of hickory. Wx was mid-70's with a
breeze, but nothing serious. This seemed to be pretty
typical of how much I usually use for a cooking of this
length. My cooker has the side firebox. I haven't done any
mods such as a blanket to address this issue, although I'm
using some firebrick in the bottom of the cooking chamber.
I've also extended the chimney almost to the cooking
surface, and mounted a baffle between the firebox and the
cooking chamber, but didn't really think those would affect
how much charcoal I use, one way or the other. For all the
pro's out there, does that sound like an outrageous amount
of charcoal? About right? Thanks for the feedback.



Sounds about right. I used to use my CharGriller for all my
smoking, and this was typical. Same setup (baffle, bricks)
but I would use a moving blanket over the smoke chamber. The
CharGriller is just made of thin sheet metal. All your heat
is going out the sides and you have too little thermal mass to
keep a steady temp without constant feeding of the fire.

I used a blanket too, old military wool, plus made seals for the doors
using silicon and Vaseline, plus, always placed two split logs in line
with the cooker spaced about 2 inches apart, set a top the base of coals.

--
Regards,

Piedmont

The Practical Bar-B-Q'r at: http://web.infoave.net/~amwil/Index.htm

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless,
whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism
or the holy name of liberty or democracy?

Mahatma Gandhi, "Non-Violence in Peace and War"

"Jerry" wrote in message
m...
Any CharGriller Super Pro users out there? I know it's a low-end approach,
but I've generally been pretty pleased with the results I've gotten from
it. It just seems that I go thru a lot of charcoal during a smoking. This
weekend, I cooked a butt for about 9 hours, averaging around 240 deg, and
went thru about 13-14# of Royal Oak lump. That's in addition to 3 sticks
of hickory. Wx was mid-70's with a breeze, but nothing serious. This
seemed to be pretty typical of how much I usually use for a cooking of
this length. My cooker has the side firebox. I haven't done any mods such
as a blanket to address this issue, although I'm using some firebrick in
the bottom of the cooking chamber. I've also extended the chimney almost
to the cooking surface, and mounted a baffle between the firebox and the
cooking chamber, but didn't really think those would affect how much
charcoal I use, one way or the other. For all the pro's out there, does
that sound like an outrageous amount of charcoal? About right? Thanks for
the feedback.

I've owned a CharGriller for 3 years now... the amount, 1 bag and a half,
seems about right. I now have it inside a steel shed 10' X 12' from sears. I
have 2 stove vents to suck out the smoke and now my temp is very stable. I Q
alot in the winter, Pennsylvania isn't as cold as the north west can get,
but any temp below 40 degrees wrecks havoc on these "cheap" types of
smokers. so far my taste buds can't tell the difference what it was cooked
in.

I put in the 4" stack extending down to the cooking surface. Also 2 1"
holes drilled on either side of the firebox adjustable opening. I turned the
grill insert over and use the handles that raise and lower it to line it up
with the internal firebox opening. I put in a thermometer at each end 1/2
inch from the cooking surface. Temps differ about 50 degrees. Once I get it
to 300 I close the intake to half letting it stabilize to 225 - 250. It
seems to take 2 chimney fulls of lump (lit) to get it there then about 1
(unlit) every 2 - 3 hours to keep it there.
Brisket I do the 2 lit on top of 3 unlit with the inlet half open then I
take a snooze for about 5 - 8 hours and check on it. It never takes much
fussing. I'm happy with it.

On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 00:35:58 -0400, "Andy" wrote:

Pennsylvania isn't as cold as the north west can get,

Excuuuuuuuse me???

What part of PA? What part of "the north west"? I doubt ANY part of
PA fits your description if compared to the Puget Sound area. Or
Portland/Vancouver. Or, ftm, Vancouver/Victoria.

(I know some East Coast types think the northwest begins somewhere
around Gary, Indiana. NOT.)

--
-denny-
"Do your thoughts call ahead or do they just arrive at your mouth unannounced?"

"It's come as you are, baby."

-over the hedge

On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 15:48:07 -0700, Denny Wheeler
wrote:

On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 00:35:58 -0400, "Andy" wrote:

Pennsylvania isn't as cold as the north west can get,

Excuuuuuuuse me???

What part of PA? What part of "the north west"? I doubt ANY part of
PA fits your description if compared to the Puget Sound area. Or
Portland/Vancouver. Or, ftm, Vancouver/Victoria.

(I know some East Coast types think the northwest begins somewhere
around Gary, Indiana. NOT.)

Yay! More posts about weather! Woot!

"Denny Wheeler" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 00:35:58 -0400, "Andy" wrote:

Pennsylvania isn't as cold as the north west can get,

Excuuuuuuuse me???

What part of PA? What part of "the north west"? I doubt ANY part of
PA fits your description if compared to the Puget Sound area. Or
Portland/Vancouver. Or, ftm, Vancouver/Victoria.

(I know some East Coast types think the northwest begins somewhere
around Gary, Indiana. NOT.)

LOL
I meant to the west of me not above me. Of course it's colder to the north
(and east) of me.

Ahhh never mind!!! details details! LOL

I love this place... no matter how you reply somebody has bite your butt!!!
LOL

"Andy" wrote in message
om...

"Denny Wheeler" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 00:35:58 -0400, "Andy" wrote:

Pennsylvania isn't as cold as the north west can get,

Excuuuuuuuse me???

What part of PA? What part of "the north west"? I doubt ANY part of
PA fits your description if compared to the Puget Sound area. Or
Portland/Vancouver. Or, ftm, Vancouver/Victoria.

(I know some East Coast types think the northwest begins somewhere
around Gary, Indiana. NOT.)

LOL
I meant to the west of me not above me. Of course it's colder to the north
(and east) of me.

Ahhh never mind!!! details details! LOL

I love this place... no matter how you reply somebody has bite your
butt!!!
LOL


Be thankful they don't smoke it first.

On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 21:44:53 -0400, "Andy" wrote:

(I know some East Coast types think the northwest begins somewhere
around Gary, Indiana. NOT.)

LOL
I meant to the west of me not above me. Of course it's colder to the north
(and east) of me.

I love this place... no matter how you reply somebody has bite your butt!!!
LOL

Sorry--but I do see a lot of 'the world ends at the Ohio River' type
attitude from Easterners.

(and certainly, Kevin's part of the NW is a lot colder than the
maritime areas)

--
-denny-
"Do your thoughts call ahead or do they just arrive at your mouth unannounced?"

"It's come as you are, baby."

-over the hedge

Denny Wheeler wrote:


Sorry--but I do see a lot of 'the world ends at the Ohio River' type
attitude from Easterners.

J.C. I sure as hell hope not! We're supposed to fly from NY
to Fairbanks, Alaska in 2 1/2 months. I sure as hell hope
it's still there?!?! ;-D

--
Steve