My dad's been using has grills for years, but I have been trying to convince him to use Kingsford charcoal.
Should I?
Which is better?
Should I?
Which is better?
Gas Grills or Charcoal?
- Thread starter SabresRule
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 11
- Views 4K
I like the conveniences of Gas (quick to light etc...) I scatter a few chips over the lava rock to get a smoke flavor...
If you go with gas, create or fill two or better three layers of lava small bricks; it will create smooth heat to your food.
I have both. I have a gas grill that I keep in the garage for rainy or snowy days when I just want some brats or quick burgers. I just push it outside and I can stand inside the garage nice and dry.
When I want to put some effort in of get a really good set of steaks, I always opt for the charcoal. I can get a small smoky flavor from gas with wood chips, but nothing like the tast of a full charcoal fire.
Oh and get awat from Kingsford briquets. Look for natural lump charcoal. GFS sells a 20lbs bag for 9.99. You get almost zero ash compared to Kingsford where you get about 30-40% ash. Kingsford used boraz and I think Lime or something as a binder. They do not burn. Natural lump has no fillers so it's all heat/flavor. A 20lbs bag of natural lump will make maybe 1 lbs of ash maybe 1 lb.
I 20 lb bag is about 3 ft high. After a burn of the whole bag, I bet I have about an inch of ash in the bottom.
When I want to put some effort in of get a really good set of steaks, I always opt for the charcoal. I can get a small smoky flavor from gas with wood chips, but nothing like the tast of a full charcoal fire.
Oh and get awat from Kingsford briquets. Look for natural lump charcoal. GFS sells a 20lbs bag for 9.99. You get almost zero ash compared to Kingsford where you get about 30-40% ash. Kingsford used boraz and I think Lime or something as a binder. They do not burn. Natural lump has no fillers so it's all heat/flavor. A 20lbs bag of natural lump will make maybe 1 lbs of ash maybe 1 lb.
I 20 lb bag is about 3 ft high. After a burn of the whole bag, I bet I have about an inch of ash in the bottom.
I have a gas grill. For "fast cooking" at 350 or so, maybe with a rotisserie, that's what I use. I have a Weber and it's flavorizer bars are superior to lava rocks, IMHO.
I use a Weber bullet to smoke when I'm not looking for fast results. NEVER use briquettes, as stated above. By removing the middle piece, this unit can become a charcoal grill. Never actually done that, I now much prefer slow smoking.
Since I've started smoking, I haven't even fired up the grill.
I use a Weber bullet to smoke when I'm not looking for fast results. NEVER use briquettes, as stated above. By removing the middle piece, this unit can become a charcoal grill. Never actually done that, I now much prefer slow smoking.
Since I've started smoking, I haven't even fired up the grill.
While I'm agree with points made above, I will remember that time when I used very dry wood ( I don't know what kind it was (pine ?), it's just been stashed at terrace for BBQ of rented cabin at Pine Mountain Lake); that's BBQ just big sphere type, but flavor, tender of that beef - my mouth remember it after many years. Regardless what used now - gas or charcoal or brickets - any meal can't come close.
I'm thinking it was rare right combination of steady heat, wood smoke and sort of IR radiation what that spheric BBQ created using wood.
I'm thinking it was rare right combination of steady heat, wood smoke and sort of IR radiation what that spheric BBQ created using wood.
Sabres, you asked this question in a different thread. I will post the answer again for all to see...
[FONT="]
You’re both right. It's a matter of opinion really. I have both a gas and a smoker that I convert to charcoal once in a while.
Personally, if I had to chose between 1 or the other though, I’d chose gas. Grill Master, Bobby Flay has admitted the same. Shocked? Lemme explain.....
Gas has the ease of temperture control, easy start-up and cleanup.
Charcoal requires more labor in starting up, controlling the temperture can be challenging and cleaning up is tedious. You live in Wisconsin and I Cleveland. In the winter, it can be a bear in playing with charcoal when you can just flick a switch and start-up a gas grill.
Charcoal cookers claim that there's more of an art to cooking since most of it requires physical attention, where as a gas grill is moderated by knobs and constant gas flow.
To me, the difference is in functionality and gas is more ideal for everyday use.
[FONT="]
[/FONT]
You’re both right. It's a matter of opinion really. I have both a gas and a smoker that I convert to charcoal once in a while.
Personally, if I had to chose between 1 or the other though, I’d chose gas. Grill Master, Bobby Flay has admitted the same. Shocked? Lemme explain.....
Gas has the ease of temperture control, easy start-up and cleanup.
Charcoal requires more labor in starting up, controlling the temperture can be challenging and cleaning up is tedious. You live in Wisconsin and I Cleveland. In the winter, it can be a bear in playing with charcoal when you can just flick a switch and start-up a gas grill.
Charcoal cookers claim that there's more of an art to cooking since most of it requires physical attention, where as a gas grill is moderated by knobs and constant gas flow.
To me, the difference is in functionality and gas is more ideal for everyday use.
I doubt it was pine. The pine tars would make for a horrible flavor. Not even sure that would be safe. Don't use gum trees either.
Just use hardwoods, including fruit trees.
I just didn't have any clue that time - you're right, pine would make bad smell; that wood was clean, produced high and steady heat, no odor - smoke was attractable same as meat. 
