Not Telling wrote:

> One clear downside is that you have to use their little proprietary
> compressed wood disks for smoke generation. This could be expensive in
> the long run.

You bet. At a cost in supplies of one dollar an hour it gets
expensive very quickly. Using it 20 hours a week will end up
costing you over $1000 per year in supplies alone. That's almost
3 times the cost of the unit itself.

> On the plus side, it seems the smoke generation is a separate function
> from the heat source which is electric. Besides promising a steady
> thermostatically controlled temperature, it should allow me to do
> cold smoking. I would like to try my hand at making my own bacon and
> smoking fish. We catch a lot of mackerel up here in the summer and it
> seems like a good way to use them.

Cold smoking is it's strong point. It's very stable and doesn't
require much adjustment. I run mine in cold smoke mode for 10 hours
at a time without having to touch it even once.

> As I've said , I live in Maine, and for a large part of the year it is
> just too damn cold to use most smokers. Does anyone have experience
> with a Bradley in the cold?

It's insulation is not as good as some of the other smoker/oven
type units such as Cookshack. Cold weather usage is definitely
an issue.

Bradley also has a pretty good forum. You might want to read
some user's comments... keeping in mind that they're somewhat
biased in favor of the unit.

http://www.bradleysmoker.com/forum/

--
Reg email: RegForte (at) (that free MS email service) (dot) com