Sous vide short ribs, times, and temperatures

[Twyst]

It sounds as though you may just want to stick to braising when it comes to short ribs. The allure of sous vide shortribs is the steak like consistency. If you want melt in your mouth, shred with your fork texture a simple braise is the best way to accomplish that.

[torolover]

I don't think it's the ribs, since I got them at Whole Foods and they have lots of marbling in them. My goal is to get short ribs that are almost falling apart so I don't need a knife, but still moist and not stringy or tough. I have tried the low temps so far, but have not succeeded.

I have tried:

134F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, but not what I'm looking for. Still need a knife and it's not falling apart.

140F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, a little more flaky, but still need a knife

150F for 24 hours- not great, tough to chew and still need a knife

150F for 48 hours- not great, still tough to chew and need a knife

191F for 7 hours- OK, yes, falling apart, don't need a knife, BUT tough to chew on, and dry

I will try 160F at 24 hours next, and then at 36 hours.

Anyone else have good temp or times for moist, traditional falling apart short ribs?

Wow you are dedicated. I pretty much gave up after two attempts @ 48 hours each time and $40 dollars waisted. I just dont have the time or money to waste on this dish. My chuck roasts turn out amazing and cost a fraction of what short ribs cost.

I don't think it's the ribs, since I got them at Whole Foods and they have lots of marbling in them. My goal is to get short ribs that are almost falling apart so I don't need a knife, but still moist and not stringy or tough. I have tried the low temps so far, but have not succeeded.

I have tried:

134F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, but not what I'm looking for. Still need a knife and it's not falling apart.

140F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, a little more flaky, but still need a knife

150F for 24 hours- not great, tough to chew and still need a knife

150F for 48 hours- not great, still tough to chew and need a knife

191F for 7 hours- OK, yes, falling apart, don't need a knife, BUT tough to chew on, and dry

I will try 160F at 24 hours next, and then at 36 hours.

Anyone else have good temp or times for moist, traditional falling apart short ribs?I'm pretty close to finding the perfect time and temp for traditional falling apart short ribs, but keeping it stil moist!

I want to keep you guys updated on my experiments. I'm pretty close to finding and temp/time for traditional falling apart short ribs that are still moist and not stringy!!

160F at 24 hours- still not falling apart or fork tender

160F at 38 hours- falling apart, fork tender, still moist

160F at 42 hours- even more falling apart, need no knife, still moist

I'm going to try 180F at 6 hours and 8 hours next!!

Thanks for the tips guys!!

[torolover]

I don't think it's the ribs, since I got them at Whole Foods and they have lots of marbling in them. My goal is to get short ribs that are almost falling apart so I don't need a knife, but still moist and not stringy or tough. I have tried the low temps so far, but have not succeeded.

I have tried:

134F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, but not what I'm looking for. Still need a knife and it's not falling apart.

140F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, a little more flaky, but still need a knife

150F for 24 hours- not great, tough to chew and still need a knife

150F for 48 hours- not great, still tough to chew and need a knife

191F for 7 hours- OK, yes, falling apart, don't need a knife, BUT tough to chew on, and dry

I will try 160F at 24 hours next, and then at 36 hours.

Anyone else have good temp or times for moist, traditional falling apart short ribs?

Wow you are dedicated. I pretty much gave up after two attempts @ 48 hours each time and $40 dollars waisted. I just dont have the time or money to waste on this dish. My chuck roasts turn out amazing and cost a fraction of what short ribs cost.

>I don't think it's the ribs, since I got them at Whole Foods and they have lots of marbling in them. My goal is to get short ribs that are almost falling apart so I don't need a knife, but still moist and not stringy or tough. I have tried the low temps so far, but have not succeeded.

I have tried:

134F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, but not what I'm looking for. Still need a knife and it's not falling apart.

140F for 48 hours and 72 hours- great, a little more flaky, but still need a knife

150F for 24 hours- not great, tough to chew and still need a knife

150F for 48 hours- not great, still tough to chew and need a knife

191F for 7 hours- OK, yes, falling apart, don't need a knife, BUT tough to chew on, and dry

I will try 160F at 24 hours next, and then at 36 hours.

Anyone else have good temp or times for moist, traditional falling apart short ribs?I'm pretty close to finding the perfect time and temp for traditional falling apart short ribs, but keeping it stil moist!

I want to keep you guys updated on my experiments. I'm pretty close to finding and temp/time for traditional falling apart short ribs that are still moist and not stringy!!

160F at 24 hours- still not falling apart or fork tender

160F at 38 hours- falling apart, fork tender, still moist

160F at 42 hours- even more falling apart, need no knife, still moist

I'm going to try 180F at 6 hours and 8 hours next!!

Thanks for the tips guys!!

Another update. So far I found 180F at 9 hours and a half the best yet!!! Falling apart, no knife needed, still moist and not stringy!!

Thanks for the tip Sigma!!!!

[Lawless Cooks]

My first attempt at any longer cooking time Sous Vide and my first with short ribs.

Followed MCAH recipe and cooked at the higher end of their suggested range - 144F for 72 hours.

A day in I started having second thoughts about a temp so high. When they came out, they were great. I would have preferred slightly more towards mid-rare, but I'm on board, some of the best short ribs I've ever had. Next time I might try 136 or 138F.

They weren't fall apart/no knife, but fairly close. I didn't really care though. They were so moist and had so much more beef flavor than I was used to with restaurant short ribs.

Edited February 25, 2013 by Lawless Cooks (log)

[Zmaster]

My first attempt at any longer cooking time Sous Vide and my first with short ribs.

Followed MCAH recipe and cooked at the higher end of their suggested range - 144F for 72 hours.

A day in I started having second thoughts about a temp so high. When they came out, they were great. I would have preferred slightly more towards mid-rare, but I'm on board, some of the best short ribs I've ever had. Next time I might try 136 or 138F.

They weren't fall apart/no knife, but fairly close. I didn't really care though. They were so moist and had so much more beef flavor than I was used to with restaurant short ribs.

Lawless,

Those ribs look fantastic.

I have done short ribs several time and I have had great success with Heston Blumenthal's recipe which calls for pre-salting, multiple baths with a final bath temp of 56 C / 133 for 72 h. When they were done, you did not need a knife to cut, and were not at all tough with a great beefy flavor.

[Lawless Cooks]

Thanks - they tasted as good as they looked!

For my second attempt, I used 72 hours @ 138. The meat was sourced from a local butcher this time as opposed to Whole Foods last time. Not sure if it was the temperature or meat that made the difference but I think I liked the first time better. Need a few more experiments (followed by 5K runs) to figure it all out.

I want to get HB at Home and start playing around with his recipes and techniques. Have been watching him on YouTube and using his potato puree trick lately:steep the peels in the mile you are going to use ...

Sounds interesting, multiple temperatures and would like to understand the effects better.

[AzHP]

So my 3 day short ribs at 140F/60C came out, and while I can attest that the Anova cooked them perfectly, and they were pink and tender inside. Unfortunately, when I took them out of the vacuum packaging I could tell they smelled fishy. I gave them a generous helping of salt and pepper and seared them with a blowtorch, but the fishy taste persisted. It's unfortunate as I was looking forward to preparing a delicious meal for the last 3 days, but it was extremely disappointing. Any ideas on what went wrong?

[dcarch]

I am not sure what do you mean by "fishy" or "gamy".

Next time:

1. Make sure that the beef you buy is really fresh and in good condition.

2. Before you bag the beef, follow very strict cleanliness routines.

3. Sanitize the bag by boiling, and all the seasonings.

4. Sear/blow torch the beef to sanitize the meat before bagging.

For long cooks, it is very important to keep things very clean.

dcarch

[AzHP]

Thanks for the reply. The freshness of the beef may have been a concern. I bought the short rib towards the end of the day and while one of them was bright and moist looking, the other was a little darker red and dried out. I guess for long cook times the freshness of the meat really does come into play.

Additional notes, I used a foodsaver vacuum which I think took out all the air as the package sank straight to the bottom. I know that gamey flavors can be caused by oxidization of unsaturated fats, so I was wondering if it could be that the vacuum wasn't tight enough.

[cookalong]

It's quite common that beef, in particular, can taste/smell somewhat off after really prolonged cooking, due to surface bacterias. It happened to me once or twice. After that, I always briefly put the bag in really hot water before putting it in the waterbath (usually I put it in 80C for a couple of minutes). Haven't had any problems since I started doing that.

[FeChef]

Having cooked beef short ribs a few times, I can tell you that in my experiences, some grocery stores label a cut called "chuck roast tender/s" as "boneless short ribs" atleast in the US they get away with this, Im not sure about other countrys. When cooked traditionally you cant really notice a difference in texture. But when cooked for over 36 hours @ 133F they turn out like sawdust. Just when i was about to give up on SV short ribs, I came across a "wet aged" prime grade vacuum packaged 2 1/2 inch thick boneless short ribs at a wegmans for 9.98/lb. These were extremely marbled. I figured this was going to be my last attempt and if it turned out like sawdust i was done with trying to SV these. Well i stuck with the 36 hour/133F and they came out amazing. So beefy, they tasted almost "gamey" and reminded me of some really good SV beef tongue. This may not be a smell/taste you like but my point is, thats probably what your smelling/tasting, pure beefyness.

Also, always hit a meat your going to cook for over 4 hours with a blowtorch to kill off surface bacteria. People will argure that it does nothing for flavor, and you should post sear, but i personally feel that it adds a more bold roasted flavor, and doubles as a safer pastuerization.

[Baselerd]

From my experience, short ribs never smell great straight out of the bag.

[jayt90]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

[FeChef]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

[jayt90]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

[Shalmanese]

Standard food safety rules are overly simplified and not applicable to sous vide. Check Modernist Cuisine or Douglas Baldwin's writings on Food Safety to get a better understanding on the time-temp curves for pasteurization.

[FeChef]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

If the roast is still in one piece then the inside is sterile therfore not contaminated. As long as the surface was brought to pasteurization temps in a timely matter then theres nowhere for bacteria to grow. Again, educate yourself before posting false information.

[jayt90]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

If the roast is still in one piece then the inside is sterile therfore not contaminated. As long as the surface was brought to pasteurization temps in a timely matter then theres nowhere for bacteria to grow. Again, educate yourself before posting false information.

USDA information is far from false. If I accept your view, then the OP must have started with contaminated meat that did not pasteurize. My own thought, undeterred by sous vide, is that the 140 F temperature was not reached in time for pasteurization, and a higher temperature would suffice.

[FeChef]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

If the roast is still in one piece then the inside is sterile therfore not contaminated. As long as the surface was brought to pasteurization temps in a timely matter then theres nowhere for bacteria to grow. Again, educate yourself before posting false information.

USDA information is far from false. If I accept your view, then the OP must have started with contaminated meat that did not pasteurize. My own thought, undeterred by sous vide, is that the 140 F temperature was not reached in time for pasteurization, and a higher temperature would suffice.

As Shalmanese told you aswell, the USDA safety rules are overly simplified and do not apply to sous vide cooking. 140F is not needed to pasteurize. Given time, 132F is more then enough to pasteurize. I suggest again that you educate yourself, and as shalmanese suggested, you shoul look up douglas baldwin's guide to sous vide, and read up on his pasteurization charts.

[jayt90]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

If the roast is still in one piece then the inside is sterile therfore not contaminated. As long as the surface was brought to pasteurization temps in a timely matter then theres nowhere for bacteria to grow. Again, educate yourself before posting false information.

USDA information is far from false. If I accept your view, then the OP must have started with contaminated meat that did not pasteurize. My own thought, undeterred by sous vide, is that the 140 F temperature was not reached in time for pasteurization, and a higher temperature would suffice.

As Shalmanese told you aswell, the USDA safety rules are overly simplified and do not apply to sous vide cooking. 140F is not needed to pasteurize. Given time, 132F is more then enough to pasteurize. I suggest again that you educate yourself, and as shalmanese suggested, you shoul look up douglas baldwin's guide to sous vide, and read up on his pasteurization charts.

If USDA rules, which apply to cooking in general, do not apply to the sous vide anointed, and are false and uneducated, then I had better avoid sous vide in restaurants. At least then I won't encounter any experimental fishy meat, or worse.

[Shalmanese]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

If the roast is still in one piece then the inside is sterile therfore not contaminated. As long as the surface was brought to pasteurization temps in a timely matter then theres nowhere for bacteria to grow. Again, educate yourself before posting false information.

USDA information is far from false. If I accept your view, then the OP must have started with contaminated meat that did not pasteurize. My own thought, undeterred by sous vide, is that the 140 F temperature was not reached in time for pasteurization, and a higher temperature would suffice.

As Shalmanese told you aswell, the USDA safety rules are overly simplified and do not apply to sous vide cooking. 140F is not needed to pasteurize. Given time, 132F is more then enough to pasteurize. I suggest again that you educate yourself, and as shalmanese suggested, you shoul look up douglas baldwin's guide to sous vide, and read up on his pasteurization charts.

If USDA rules, which apply to cooking in general, do not apply to the sous vide anointed, and are false and uneducated, then I had better avoid sous vide in restaurants. At least then I won't encounter any experimental fishy meat, or worse.

The science behind heat pasteurization of pathogens is well established and controversial. If you bother to do even the most cursory piece of research, it'll be quite trivial to understand why the USDA recommendations do not apply to sous vide. As a further note, many industrial food processes also do not follow the USDA guidelines listed. Everything from deli ham to pasteurized eggs and are perfectly safe.

[gfweb]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

If the roast is still in one piece then the inside is sterile therfore not contaminated. As long as the surface was brought to pasteurization temps in a timely matter then theres nowhere for bacteria to grow. Again, educate yourself before posting false information.

USDA information is far from false. If I accept your view, then the OP must have started with contaminated meat that did not pasteurize. My own thought, undeterred by sous vide, is that the 140 F temperature was not reached in time for pasteurization, and a higher temperature would suffice.

To what temp do you cook your steaks? 145? I think not. The time temp curves cited above are well worth understanding

[sigma]

Some grass fed beef has a slightly fishy smell to it. Possibly it is just bad grass fed beef smell intensified in a bag.

[jayt90]

140 F is at the bottom of the safe zone for holding meat. Maybe you could check temperatures, inside and out with two or three thermometers. Or maybe bump up to 145 F.

This is completely false. I think you need to educate yourself on pasteurization times and temperatures.

Here is one of many sources stating that between 140 F and 40 F is trouble. I am just suggesting that the center of the roast may have been in the danger zone too long, and took on a smell from anaerobic microbe growth.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/8b705ede-f4dc-4b31-a745-836e66eeb0f4/Danger_Zone.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

What do you say, FeChef?

If the roast is still in one piece then the inside is sterile therfore not contaminated. As long as the surface was brought to pasteurization temps in a timely matter then theres nowhere for bacteria to grow. Again, educate yourself before posting false information.

USDA information is far from false. If I accept your view, then the OP must have started with contaminated meat that did not pasteurize. My own thought, undeterred by sous vide, is that the 140 F temperature was not reached in time for pasteurization, and a higher temperature would suffice.

To what temp do you cook your steaks? 145? I think not. The time temp curves cited above are well worth understanding

There is little point in turning the OP's thread against me, as at least three members have done. The OP had a problem doing a three day sous vide of questionable short ribs, not steaks or roast, and the best we have come up with is sear first, or dunk in very hot water.

The OP's temperature gauge could be off. It is clear the 72 hours was not sufficient for pasteurization; I have suggested that anaerobic bacteria thrived at 140 F or less, and produced a fishy smell, much like mistreated packs of shrink wrapped fish. I don't find the Baldwin tables safe enough, nor do I find much agreement in various temperature gauges.

What I have learned from the OP's problem is to heat treat ribs first, then use a water bath higher than 140 F.

145 F should be enough, and the time somewhat less than 72 hours according to Baldwin's charts, one of which suggests only 7 to 10 hours for a 10 cm. slab.

Pick and choose a chart, apparently, or stick with safe USDA guidelines.

[gavinprice]

Hi all, this is my first post here and so far have not been able to find any info on this.

I cooked some short ribs sous vide last weekend and then chilled them in a nice bath then put them in the freezer.

Tonight I reheated them in the water bath for 30 mins and had a lovely meal! However I have some leftovers and wondered whether or not it would be safe to refreeze the meat for reheating again? Now I know this would be a big no no if I hadn't chilled the meat in a nice bath after it's first cook but just wandered whether it was acceptable to do after the way I cooked it.

Thanks

Gavin Price