> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Thanks!
>
> I followed the Professor and cooked Dinner #1. Came out good but not
> spectacular since I only marinated for 3 hours. I also used Kingsford
> (Professor insists that it should be avoided). Can someone comment? I
> went to a BBQ demo in NYC a few weeks ago and there was Kingsford
> everywhere you looked. Professor recommends lump charcoal that some
> claim burns unevenly,
>
> RW
>
Try it both ways, don't be afraid to experiment. I have seen many times that
what works for one person, doesn't work for someone else. As far as
Kingsford goes compared to most if not all other brands of briquettes, it is
the best IMHO.

One firm difference between lump and briq.s is that there is almost no ash
as compared to briq's., which can mean hotter temps if you like to sear a
steak. This is due to lump adds much more infared radiation as compared to
briq's. The reason for this is that the briq's are covered in ash which
translates into convection cooking. But, if you are cooking indirect, then
infared doesn't make a difference. It will all be convection, regardless of
lump or briq's.

I believe the problems of lump being inconsistat is often the lump is so
small that it burns up quicker but if you sort the lump all the time and
hand pick the pieces, you can always have a consistant burn. But if you just
dump the bag as you go, bigger pieces tend to rise to the top. Then you get
to the bottom and theres nothing but little pieces, it will burn different.

Lump will cost you more, I doubt the benefits of lump over briq's is worth
it, that is unless you are a steak afficinado and want to sear a steak to so
called perfection.
My3 cents

--
Mike Willsey (Piedmont)
The Practical Bar B Q'r at,
http://groups.msn.com/ThePracticalBarBQr/_whatsnew.msnw