On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 23:18:34 +0000 (UTC), gregz wrote:

> TFM® > wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:30:36 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:08:16 -0400, TFM® wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:40:58 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:34:47 GMT, Brick wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Glad 'Fats' finished with that last line 'cause I have a video clip of him
>>>>>> chowing down on mine. And here, I've been calling it BBQ because
>>>>>> I didn't know any better. I thought if you slow cooked meat with fire
>>>>>> and smoke, you could call it BBQ. Now I have to figure out what to
>>>>>> call the stuff I make because I cook it in an offset pit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now I'm going to have to tell John Muller and Aaron Franklin, two of
>>>>> the most popular pit masters in America, that what they're cooking is
>>>>> not BBQ. And have them change the name of their restaurants, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically, what TFM is saying now is that BBQ really *is* grilling,
>>>>> something that has been hotly debated here for way too many years.
>>>>
>>>> That's not at all what I'm saying and I'll thank you kindly to remove your
>>>> words from my mouth.
>>>> I'll stand by my purist definition of traditional barbecue along with a
>>>> good many other folks. Some of them I even have respect for.
>>>
>>> How is putting coals under the meat any different from grilling? And
>>> how is cooking in a offset not barbecue? What DO you call smoking
>>> meat in a offset if it's not barbecue in the most purist form of the
>>> word?
>>>
>>> Sorry if you feel offended, but your definition is just way to anal
>>> for me. This is worse than the debates over grilling vs. BBQ, which I
>>> always avoided. But now you hit a sore spot.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> As I said earlier, if you'd been paying attention, an offset smoker
>> produces smoke roasted meat. By the same token, barbecue cannot be
>> produced in a Weber or a Brinkmann or any bullet smoker if the water pan is
>> in place, regardless of contents of said pan.
>>
>> The difference in the flavor of the finished product cooked directly over
>> coals is so vastly different than that of smoke roasting as to constitute
>> another product entirely. Only one can be barbecue.
>>
>> I don't mean to pick your scabs, but do try it yourself. You're duly
>> equipped with your ECB. Cook 2 nearly identical cuts of meat. One using
>> the water pan (with whatever you want in it) and the other with nothing but
>> air between the coals and the meat.
>> If you're diligent enough with the fire management you will have something
>> truly wonderful when you're done.
>>
>> TFM®
>
> The only difference I see is fat induced smoke. Temperature should be no
> different, unless you want it to be different.
>
> Greg

There you have it, it all boils down to temperature. NOT. It's just like
boiling and steaming are both cooking with hot water so temp is the only
consideration, right?
Hint: It's not all about temperature. There's magic in them there coals.

TFM®