Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

What Are You Cooking Sous Vide Today? (Part 3)


FrogPrincesse
 Share

Recommended Posts

bag them

 

even if you have to tim them in 1/2

 

then keep them very very cold in your frefrig

 

then frwwze

 

salt is the issue w pre-seasoinf 

 

if you have seasoning w/o salt

 

o ahead and do it now

 

if not , wait

 

salt now will bring fluid out

 

kee tha fuind inn for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Salt brings fluid out for like ten minutes, but it reabsorbs back into the meat. Salting well in advance gives the salt time to work its way beneath the surface of the meat and will help the roast hang onto moisture during the cooking process. And the workflow is much nicer if you season beforehand as opposed to vacuum sealing, freezing, unbagging, seasoning, and rebagging. That sounds awful and unnecessary.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rotuts said:

@weinoo 

 

what differences do you notice between the legs?

 

any tase differences ?  Size ?

Definitely different size in this case, as the Moulard legs are quite large, and the Rohan not so.

 

Will let you know about any taste/texture difference - haven't tried this batch yet, and for me the only way to tell is side by side.

 

You can certainly see a difference in color though!

Edited by weinoo (log)
  • Like 1

Mitch Weinstein aka "weinoo"

Tasty Travails - My Blog

My eGullet FoodBog - A Tale of Two Boroughs

Was it you baby...or just a Brilliant Disguise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone ever tried to sous vide sausage in natural casings? I want to try an experiment and sous vide a pork/beef mixture in natural hog casing for 24 hours at 145F. But i am concerned what will happen to the natural casing after cooking that long at that temp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, btbyrd said:

I've done it, but never for that long. Sausage and other ground meats tends to get pappy and mealy after four hours or so.

Reason being is im using medium coarse and large coarse grind mixture, and i want the large coarse to have a pulled beef/pulled pork texture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, FeChef said:

Has anyone ever tried to sous vide sausage in natural casings? I want to try an experiment and sous vide a pork/beef mixture in natural hog casing for 24 hours at 145F. But i am concerned what will happen to the natural casing after cooking that long at that temp.

For what it’s worth: here.  This worked for me. Your mileage may vary. 

Anna Nielsen aka "Anna N"

...I just let people know about something I made for supper that they might enjoy, too. That's all it is. (Nigel Slater)

"Cooking is about doing the best with what you have . . . and succeeding." John Thorne

Our 2012 (Kerry Beal and me) Blog

My 2004 eG Blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sous vide newbie question.  I want to cook the pictured pork chops on Wednesday.  There are two in the package, bone in.  They are three inches thick.  I have the ATK cookbook sous vide for everybody.  They have a recipe for bone in thick cut pork chops (but 1.5 inches, not as thick as the ones I have), and advise cooking at 140 for 2-3 hours, rest for 10 minutes, and then searing to finish.  In your opinion, is that sous vide time long enough for the chops I have?  I have only used my sous vide once, to pasteurize eggs, so I am really flying blind here.  Thanks for any advice!

 

pork.thumb.jpg.525e39d615b4aa6bfcfeee3b341827d1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@liamsaunt 

 

Nice !

 

can you repackage and Vac ?

 

I know people ae very leary cooking pork at

 

below the level that kills 

 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/trichinosis/symptoms-causes/syc-20378583

 

Id cook your pork at the same temps you enjoy beef

 

I like 130.1 for beef

 

but that's up to you

 

if you choose a lower temp , more 'Jus 'stays in the meat.

 

OK is there is Jus in your bag , at what ever temp when done

 

use it for the sauce

 

SV doesn't do everything 

 

it will not Mailliar your meat

 

once you identify your ' done-ness '

 

make sure you chill the meat

 

any meat , so after a ' very hot minimal time sear '

 

your meat does not go too fat above your

 

desired doneness.

 

chill etc to get to your chosen point

 

on yo0ur plate 

 

pls psot pics of your experience

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sous vide cooking times increase exponentially as thickness increases. A slab of meat four inches thick takes at least three times as long to cook as one that is only two inches thick. If you're cooking a tender cut to a particular core temperature, you can consult charts (like those from Doug Baldwin) to see how long something will take to come up to temperature. These charts usually list times for slab-shaped items, cylindrical items, and sphere-shaped items. For steaks and chops, consult the slab column. For pork chops 3" thick, cook for 6.5 hours.

 

Also, I'm jealous of those awesome looking red waddle chops. Heritage Foods USA are good people.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

""    A slab of meat four inches thick takes at least three times as long to cook as one that is only two inches thick. ""

 

it does not.

 

once IsoTherm is achieved 

 

that varies w thickness, for sure

 

then , it's the time you want 

 

at your temp

 

to achieve tenderness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My citations are in my Freezer

 

what you might be implying 

 

but most likely not 

 

is that a a thicker cut of meat 

 

takes longer to get to

 

isoThem.

 

the meat is at the SV temp , through out.

 

but its not going to be exponential 

 

but once there 

 

all is the same in  The Bath

 

and the time for your tenderness point

 

is the same , after that initial IsoTherm time

 

for any cut of meat , what ever thickness.

 

Q.E.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK

 

5 mm takes 4 min

 

10 mm takes 8 min

 

etc   Core Temp

 

all though it was a Long Time Go

 

that's arithmetic 

 

not the times you have implied

 

 

"""   Sous vide cooking times increase exponentially as thickness increases. ""

 

just saying

 

Edited by rotuts (log)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I borrowed the term "exponential" from Polyscience. I guess they weren't being precise. The point is that the relationship between thickness and the time it takes the core to reach temperature is not linear. A one inch thick steak takes 75 minutes to come up to temperature. Intuitively, one might think that a two inch thick steak would take double the time, 150 minutes. But in fact, it takes 210 minutes -- a full hour longer. If you bothered to read further than the first two rows in the chart, you'd notice that while a 1-inch sphere of protein only takes 25 minutes to come up to temp, a 2-inch sphere takes 90 minutes; a 3 inch sphere takes 165 minutes, and 4-inches 285 minutes. So a four inch sphere takes almost eleven and a half times as long to cook as a one inch sphere. 

 

Anyway, the question was about cooking times for pork of a given thickness. You've provided no insight on this issue. The original recipe calls for 2-3 hours in the bath for chops 1.5" thick. Doug Baldwin's table indicates that a chop of 40mm (1.57") will come up to temp in 2.5 hours, so this checks out. But this is far from enough time to cook chops 3 inches (or 75mm) thick. Even doubling the time would not be enough. If you're cooking in a Ziplock bag, you can always just open it up and check the chops with an instant read thermometer after four hours and see how hot the core is. If you're cooking at 140, the center may be fully cooked at that point, but just not all the way up to bath-temperature. It takes a much longer for the core to come up those last couple of degrees than it does to warm up toward the beginning of the cook. This explains Baldwin's note that you can shave 13% off the cook time if you just want the core to come up to two degrees less than the bath temperature. 

 

Finally, for what it's worth, I prefer pork cooked to a higher temperature than beef. All that's down to personal taste. I'm not scared of pink pork, but just prefer a slightly firmer bite. ChefSteps and Kenji (and apparently ATK) recommend 140F; Modernist Cuisine recommends 136F. There's no "right" temperature, but I'd advise against an ultra-low temp cook for your first SV pork experience.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"'  I borrowed the term "exponential" from Polyscience "'

 

a bit too bad there , Yes ?

 

""  about cooking times for pork of a given thickness. You've provided no insight on this issue "

 

Ive done my best to explain what ive done

 

to my personal liking

 

and I have Many Pounds that are in my freezer to enjoy

 

you might want to go back into his thread as see.

 

its all there

 

Edited by rotuts (log)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you!  I will follow your advice and report back on this thread with pictures.  I don't eat pork other than bacon occasionally, so won't be able to comment on the taste personally, but will let you know what the pork eaters think.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, rotuts said:

""  about cooking times for pork of a given thickness. You've provided no insight on this issue "

 

Ive done my best to explain what ive done

...

you might want to go back into his thread as see.

 

its all there

 

 

 

Again, you have said nothing that begins to address the question at hand. I just reread the relevant parts of this thread. The dialectic seems to go something like this:

 

liamsaunt's question: Is 2-3 hours long enough to cook the chops I have?

Rotuts's best attempt at an answer: Nice chops! Can you unbag and re-vacuum seal them for some reason? I like mine cooked at 130.1F! By the way, SV doesn't brown meat! Here's some unsolicited advice about searing that doesn't really matter on a 3-inch-thick steak! Send pics! 

My answer: 2-3 hours isn't long enough for the chops you have. Doug Baldwin's SV tables are a good resource if you want to estimate how long it will take protein of a given thickness to come up to temperature. A 4-inch thick piece of protein takes at least 3 times as long to come up to temp as a 2-inch thick one. 

Rotut's retort: No it doesn't, once isotherm is achieved.

Me: Dude, we're talking about how long it takes for isotherm to be achieved. Also, who calls it "isotherm?" Do you have any citations?

Rotuts: LOOK IN MY FREEZER! After something comes up to temperature, time=tenderness! QED.

Me: We're not talking about what happens after something comes up to temperature. Here's that table of thickness and cooking times to illustrate the point I was making.

Rotuts: But it's not exponential! CHECK MY FREEZER! I HAVE EXPLAINED THE BEST WAY I KNOW HOW! Go back in the thread and see - it's all there.

Me: Except for the part where you even begin to address the question that was asked.

 

Maybe I missed something, but I don't think so.

 

14 minutes ago, liamsaunt said:

Thank you!  I will follow your advice and report back on this thread with pictures.  I don't eat pork other than bacon occasionally, so won't be able to comment on the taste personally, but will let you know what the pork eaters think.

 

I'm sure they will come out great! Sous vide does wonders for pork. I look forward to seeing pics of the finished product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its a very long thread

 

as I recall

 

Evelyn Wood's might not be of help here

 

but I can , and have been wrong before

 

not to often w pork I hope

 

N.B.:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotherm

 

N.B.II :

 

isotherm – in thermodynamics, a curve on a p-V diagram for an isothermal process

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isothermal_process

 

""  In thermodynamics, an isothermal process is a type of thermodynamic process in which the temperature of the system remains constant: ""

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, liamsaunt said:

Sous vide newbie question.  I want to cook the pictured pork chops on Wednesday.  There are two in the package, bone in.  They are three inches thick.  I have the ATK cookbook sous vide for everybody.  They have a recipe for bone in thick cut pork chops (but 1.5 inches, not as thick as the ones I have), and advise cooking at 140 for 2-3 hours, rest for 10 minutes, and then searing to finish.  In your opinion, is that sous vide time long enough for the chops I have?  I have only used my sous vide once, to pasteurize eggs, so I am really flying blind here.  Thanks for any advice!

 

pork.thumb.jpg.525e39d615b4aa6bfcfeee3b341827d1.jpg

Just to be clear ...you have 2 chops each 3" thick or 2 chops a total of 3" thick? Looking at the weight, I'd guess 2 chops are in that package. Could be wrong or you could have two packages.

 

I love sous vide for pork. I like 140 to 145F x 3 or 4 hours for 1.5 inch or so. Sear off the fat last.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today I’m starting a version of Tom Kerridge’s “hog roast” from his new hand and flowers cookbook
 

belly of pork rolled and SV for 8 hours at 70°, the skin in a separate bag done for 24 hours. Once they’re both cooked and chilled I’ll put them back together again ready to roast tomorrow evening. 
 

 

69A7C0C5-04E7-48E8-845F-718B11CCAD99.jpeg

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...