 |
|
| General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
Hacking your slow cooker for Sous Vide
In article
>, Bryan > wrote: > On Nov 11, 11:19*pm, isw > wrote: > > In article >, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *"Kent" > wrote: > > > "isw" > wrote in message > > > ]... > > > > In article >, > > > > "Kent" > wrote: > > > > > >> "isw" > wrote in message > > > >> ]... > > > >> > In article om>, > > > >> > "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote: > > > > > >> >> George wrote: > > > > > >> >> >>>>http://www.cookingforgeeks.com/blog/...diy-sous-vide/ > > > > > >> >> >>>> For those of you who are 'tinker' inclined. > > > > > >> >> >>> Someone should make a unit that drops into a standard cooler > > > >> >> >>> (Igloo, > > > >> >> >>> Coleman, etc.). *One could do wonderful things with those > > > >> >> >>> inexpensive > > > >> >> >>> cryovaced USDA Select beef tenderloins, and other even cheaper > > > >> >> >>> cuts. > > > >> >> >>> We have a local store that sells those Select subprimals. *I > > > >> >> >>> should > > > >> >> >>> suggest to them that they consider investing in a commercial > > > >> >> >>> sous > > > >> >> >>> vide > > > >> >> >>> cooker. > > > > > >> >> >> Obviously I'm missing something here. *If you take a cheap, > > > >> >> >> tough > > > >> >> >> piece > > > >> >> >> of meat, and cook it to rare all the way through, won't you end > > > >> >> >> up > > > >> >> >> with > > > >> >> >> a rare, cheap, tough piece of meat? > > > > > >> >> > You just process the tougher cuts at a lower temp for a longer > > > >> >> > time > > > >> >> > (> > > > >> >> > 24 > > > >> >> > hours). That breaks down the connective tissue and turns the > > > >> >> > collagen > > > >> >> > into > > > >> >> > gelatin similar to braising only much better. So you could get > > > >> >> > the > > > >> >> > great > > > >> >> > beefy taste of say chuck and have it tender but not almost > > > >> >> > flavorless > > > >> >> > like > > > >> >> > a filet. > > > > > >> >> There are plenty of tough cuts which don't *have* the connective > > > >> >> tissue > > > >> >> you > > > >> >> mention. Cooking them for a long period of time just makes them > > > >> >> dry, > > > >> >> since > > > >> >> the proteins contract and drive the water out. > > > > > >> > Not if you keep the temperature low enough (and sous-vide does). If > > > >> > proteins don't contract at 131 F in one minute (as, say, when you > > > >> > pull > > > >> > that rare steak from the pan), then they won't contract after 24 > > > >> > hours > > > >> > at that same temperature -- the denaturing of proteins is > > > >> > temperature > > > >> > dependent, but not time dependent. But the collagen (or some of it) > > > >> > *will* break down. Give it a try. > > > > > >> > Isaac > > > > > >> We did something like this with eye of round. *There was an article in > > > >> Cooks > > > >> Illustrated some time ago about this. It isn't sous vide, since the > > > >> meat > > > >> is > > > >> not under vacuum and submerged. > > > > > > Insofar as home-cooking sous vide is concerned, I don't think the > > > > "vacuum" part is very important. The main points are to cook in a > > > > liquid, which conducts heat far better than air, and to isolate the > > > > product from the cooking liquid so the flavor doesn't get diluted. > > > > > > Restaurant sous vide cooking (cook, flash chill, rewarm when an order > > > > comes in) is a very different thing. > > > > > > Isaac > > > > > I thought as you that the vacuum part isn't important. I put a piece of > > > sirloin into a ziplock bag, and sucked out the air. I warmed it very very > > > slowly to 130F in water. It didn't work. The air spaces between the > > > plastic > > > and the meat kept the meat from cooking. > > > > Well, that's odd, because that's exactly what I did -- using "ZipLok" > > freezer bags and the little pump they provide for them. Worked fine. > > > > And I've read that *as long as you get rid of air bubbles*, you don't > > even need the vacuum. I've seen descriptions of that method on line. > > Basically, you submerge the bag slowly, and let the water push the air > > up and out. > > > > But if your description describes what you actually did: "warmed it very > > very slowly to 130F in water", that's not sous vide. You need to put the > > meat in water that's already at 130 F (or whatever), and keep it at that > > temperature for quite a while -- say an hour or more. Lots more (24-48 > > hours) if you're wanting to tenderize a tough cut. > > True, and the reason to keep the water circulating is so you can bring > the meat up to that temperature as quickly as possible without > bringing the surface of the meat to a higher temperature. It's kind > of like a convection oven. Would you send me a supplies/sources list > and plans? John K. and I want to build one. I will gladly send you what I have, but I should warn you, it's more of an "idea starting point" than a finished item. I'm a retired physicist/engineer, and I know how to do the full-tilt-boogie of product documentation, but I rarely do that for personal hacks. Isaac |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Pressure Cooker vs Sous Vide | General Cooking | |||
| My Sous Vide Experiences. (WAS: Hacking your slow cooker for Sous Vide) | General Cooking | |||
| My Sous Vide Experiences. (WAS: Hacking your slow cooker for Sous Vide) | General Cooking | |||
| My Sous Vide Experiences. (WAS: Hacking your slow cooker for Sous Vide) | General Cooking | |||
| My Sous Vide Experiences. (WAS: Hacking your slow cooker forSous Vide) | General Cooking | |||
Threaded Mode
