Nonnymus wrote:

> Matt wrote:
>
>>
>> Yeah but the real beauty of the Bradley is that it can operate as
>> either a smoker and/or oven, with our without smoke. For example,
>> smoking a boston butt can take 12-16 hours in my Bradley, but I only
>> apply smoke for the first 4 hours when doing a butt. So yes, you may
>> be operating the Bradley for 16 hours, but it certainly doesn't cost
>> you $16 for those 16 hours. Generally foods will only absorb smoke the
>> first few hours of the smoke, after that you're just wasting smoke.
>> You can get the Bradley wood pucks directly from Amazon with free
>> shipping for .75 cents per hour (not $1/hr). Smoking a boston butt (4
>> hrs) for example, costs me $3 in pucks. You also have to keep in mind
>> that the Bradley produces some pretty fine smoke, and a little bit
>> goes a long way. When hot smoking salmon (one of my favorites) I
>> generally only apply 2.5 hours of smoke, even though it is in the
>> smoker for 5-7 hours in all. So while you may be operating your
>> smoker for 20 hrs per week, do you require smoke for all 20 hours?
>> probably not.
>>
>> I don't find the Bradley any more expensive to operate than any other
>> smoker, when you figure in the cost of lump charcoal and/or flavored
>> wood chunks used in other smokers. Just buying meats on sale and
>> smoking larger batches at a time and you can more than make up for the
>> cost of the wood pucks, imho.
>
>
> Matt has given you a very good answer, and I heartily concur. I've been
> the full route of everything from a little Weber grill as a youngster to
> a masonry pit to SS gas grill and IR grill. I got a Bradley about 8
> months back and absolutely love its simplicity and versatility. It
> produces results that equal or exceed even a well designed masonry pit.
> The only difference is that burning coals or charcoal give you a smoke
> ring, where the Bradley doesn't. Taste is not an issue- just that smoke
> ring some folks value as a measure of quality.
>
> I also modified the Bradley with a digital differential thermostat that
> regulates the heater instead of the Bradley thermostat. That's the
> smartest thing I've done in a long while. The differential thermostat
> begins to ramp down the hood temperature when the meat reaches within
> 25f of the setpoint, and by the time the meat equals the setpoint, the
> hood temp is at that value as well.
>
> I liked it so well I just had one sent to my son, along with a
> differential thermostat kit.

All well and good. Unfortunately it's not quite on point, or
even correct, for several reasons.

1> The OP is asking about cold smoking. The point about
not needing to use the pucks for 100% of the cooking time
doesn't apply.

2> His assertion that it's not more expensive to run than other
units is wrong on it's face. It is. Cooking large quantities
doesn't change that, either. It reminds me of the old joke: "Yes
we're losing money, but we'll make it up on volume".

--
Reg