This weekend I'm going to fire up the Brinkmann® Gourmet and do the
other half of the pork butt. I also have a single lamb shank that I
thought I'd put on with it.

How long does one do a lamb shank? Can it be done at the same temp
(about 280°F)as the butt?

I'm thinking of rubbing the lamb with a garlic and rosemary paste.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.
--
Janet Wilder
way-the-heck-south Texas
spelling doesn't count
but cooking does

Janet Wilder wrote:
> This weekend I'm going to fire up the Brinkmann® Gourmet and do the
> other half of the pork butt. I also have a single lamb shank that I
> thought I'd put on with it.
>
> How long does one do a lamb shank? Can it be done at the same temp
> (about 280°F)as the butt?
>
> I'm thinking of rubbing the lamb with a garlic and rosemary paste.
>
> Any suggestions would be appreciated.

You've got it exactly. 250-275 F or so until tender.
They come out great.

RegForte wrote:
> Janet Wilder wrote:
>> This weekend I'm going to fire up the Brinkmann® Gourmet and do the
>> other half of the pork butt. I also have a single lamb shank that I
>> thought I'd put on with it.
>>
>> How long does one do a lamb shank? Can it be done at the same temp
>> (about 280°F)as the butt?
>>
>> I'm thinking of rubbing the lamb with a garlic and rosemary paste.
>>
>> Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>
> You've got it exactly. 250-275 F or so until tender.
> They come out great.

How long? What internal temp?

--
Janet Wilder
way-the-heck-south Texas
spelling doesn't count
but cooking does

Janet Wilder wrote:

> RegForte wrote:
>
>>
>> You've got it exactly. 250-275 F or so until tender.
>> They come out great.
>
>
> How long? What internal temp?
>

My last batch took about three hours, but it's BBQ and it
varies. I've never used a probe, just the ol fork method
to determine tenderness. You want tender but not falling
off the bone tender.

Plus, I always ease up on the smoke a bit for this one.
Personal preference.

RegForte wrote:
> Janet Wilder wrote:
>
>> RegForte wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You've got it exactly. 250-275 F or so until tender.
>>> They come out great.
>>
>>
>>
>> How long? What internal temp?
>>
>
> My last batch took about three hours, but it's BBQ and it
> varies. I've never used a probe, just the ol fork method
> to determine tenderness. You want tender but not falling
> off the bone tender.
>
> Plus, I always ease up on the smoke a bit for this one.
> Personal preference.

Personally I like my lamb a little redder than my pork. I'm
thinking anything over 160.

My Pyrex probe tells me :

MRare 145
Medium 160
Well Done 170

Those are the listing pertaining to Lamb.

Craig

On Apr 10, 12:05*pm, RegForte > wrote:
>
> Plus, I always ease up on the smoke a bit for this one.
> Personal preference.

Yeah, lamb seems to really soak up the available smoke.

Craig Watts wrote:

> Personally I like my lamb a little redder than my pork. I'm thinking
> anything over 160.
>
> My Pyrex probe tells me :
>
> MRare 145
> Medium 160
> Well Done 170
>
> Those are the listing pertaining to Lamb.
>
> Craig

It doesn't work that way.

Ignore the stuff on your probe... final temp depends on the cut
more than anything.

What temp do you cook beef to? 125? How about 195?

Answer: could be either depending on the cut. Shanks are a tough cut
with lots of connective tissue so final temp is in the brisket/butt
range.

At 160 F it will be like chewing rubber bands.

>
> What temp do you cook beef to? 125? How about 195?
>
> Answer: could be either depending on the cut. Shanks are a tough cut
> with lots of connective tissue so final temp is in the brisket/butt
> range.
>
> At 160 F it will be like chewing rubber bands.

Janet,

Good luck with the lamb. Hopefully you can glean some
information from this to get you close to where you need to be.

RegFort,

Next time I try to offer some information to someone who is
requesting it I think I will just stick a loaded pistol down
my throat and pull the trigger.

craigster

On Apr 10, 7:32*pm, Craig Watts
> wrote:
> > What temp do you cook beef to? 125? How about 195?
>
> > Answer: could be either depending on the cut. Shanks are a tough cut
> > with lots of connective tissue so final temp is in the brisket/butt
> > range.
>
> > At 160 F it will be like chewing rubber bands.
>
> Janet,
>
> Good luck with the lamb. Hopefully you can glean some
> information from this to get you close to where you need to be.
>
> RegFort,
>
> Next time I try to offer some information to someone who is
> requesting it I think I will just stick a loaded pistol down
> my throat and pull the trigger.
>
> craigster

So the lesson you learned wasn't that the shank is a tough cut, not
the common cut of lamb, and has a different done point, but that when
you're wrong you should kill yourself?
Or alternatively, you didn't know as much about that cut of meat as
others, who provided better info, and an opportunity for you to learn
also. Which makes you want to kill yourself?

Kinda harsh on yourself there dude. I'd hate to be you, I'm wrong at
least once a week, or something like that.

>
> So the lesson you learned wasn't that the shank is a tough cut, not
> the common cut of lamb, and has a different done point, but that when
> you're wrong you should kill yourself?
> Or alternatively, you didn't know as much about that cut of meat as
> others, who provided better info, and an opportunity for you to learn
> also. Which makes you want to kill yourself?
>
> Kinda harsh on yourself there dude. I'd hate to be you, I'm wrong at
> least once a week, or something like that.

My apologies to both of you. You were right. I did not take
note of the cut. I assumed she was cooking a lamb roast as
we are this weekend.

My bad.

Craig

Craig Watts wrote:
>>
>> So the lesson you learned wasn't that the shank is a tough cut, not
>> the common cut of lamb, and has a different done point, but that when
>> you're wrong you should kill yourself?
>> Or alternatively, you didn't know as much about that cut of meat as
>> others, who provided better info, and an opportunity for you to learn
>> also. Which makes you want to kill yourself?
>>
>> Kinda harsh on yourself there dude. I'd hate to be you, I'm wrong at
>> least once a week, or something like that.
>
>
> My apologies to both of you. You were right. I did not take note of the
> cut. I assumed she was cooking a lamb roast as we are this weekend.
>
> My bad.
>
> Craig

No one was blaming you. If it's anyone's fault, it belongs the maroons
who make some of these kitchen themometers.

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 09:58:57 -0700, RegForte wrote:

> No one was blaming you. If it's anyone's fault, it belongs the maroons
> who make some of these kitchen themometers.

Aren't those thermometer numbers just telling you when the meat is "safe
to eat" rather than telling you when it's "done"? That is how I have
always interpreted them.

On 11-Apr-2009, "Nunya Bidnits" > wrote:

> In ,
> Rick Brandt > typed:
> > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 09:58:57 -0700, RegForte wrote:
> >
> >> No one was blaming you. If it's anyone's fault, it belongs the
> >> maroons who make some of these kitchen themometers.
> >
> > Aren't those thermometer numbers just telling you when the meat is
> > "safe to eat" rather than telling you when it's "done"? That is how
> > I have always interpreted them.
>
> That's how I see it too. A lot of remotes with alarm won't let you just
> set
> a temperature at which to be alerted, you have to select a meat, and then
> if
> it suits their legal department, beef will have several selections
> available
> for doneness... except for true charred rare, of course. These personal
> protection devices will let you effortlessly cook boneless center cut
> pork
> chops and chicken breasts until they rival the consistency and dryness of
> styrofoam.
>
> If a remote thermometer won't let you decide at what temp you want an
> alarm,
> be alarmed, and throw it out.
>
> MartyB in KC

I have a pair of 'No-name' therms that have those 'Meat' and 'Taste'
buttons. Chicken, turkey and pork give me a choice only of 'Done',
however I can set that 'Done' temperature anywhere I want to. Beef,
veal, and lamb give me four choices of doneness, rare, medium rare,
medium, and well. However I can set each of those memory temperatures
anywhere I want to and they stay where I set them unless or until I do
a master reset. I remember that I got them from 'Overstock.com' and
they cost $5.95 + SH. I've had them a bunch of years and never had
a failure except batteries. I have to replace a single AAA battery every
couple of years.

They have magnets on the back to stick them up. They hinge in the
middle so the display tilts up for counter use. The cables are 36 inches
long and both original cables are still functional. They have a sticker
on the back that says "00/6/20", China. Which I'm guessing is June
20, 2000, made in China. I can't imagine why they went out of stock,
unless there was a marketing problem. I can't imagine any of you
guys not being satisfied with one of these therms.

--
Brick WA7ERO (Youth is wasted on young people)

Craig Watts wrote:

> RegFort,
>
> Next time I try to offer some information to someone who is requesting
> it I think I will just stick a loaded pistol down my throat and pull the
> trigger.

It made sense to me. Do you need some ammo?

-sw

RegForte wrote:

> No one was blaming you. If it's anyone's fault, it belongs the maroons
> who make some of these kitchen themometers.

I wonder if there's a law pertaining to those pre-printed numbers. Or if
they do that just out of fear of being sued.

-sw

Sqwertz wrote:

> RegForte wrote:
>
>> No one was blaming you. If it's anyone's fault, it belongs to the maroons
>> who make some of these kitchen themometers.
>
>
> I wonder if there's a law pertaining to those pre-printed numbers. Or
> if they do that just out of fear of being sued.
>
> -sw

No laws that I know of, other than all the civil liability BS. From
the manufacturer's point of view they don't need the aggravation,
so they play it safe.