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.

torolover

Does Sous Vide with water lose more moisture than Sous Vide with nothing in pouch?

Recommended Posts

Let's say I sous vide chicken thighs at 165F for 3 hours in 3 different ways.

 

#1  Sous vide with nothing in the pouch.  (I use Ziplock and the underwater displacement method).

#2  Sous Vide with Chicken stock (no salt) in the pouch

#3  Sous Vide with Water in the pouch

 

Would # 1 chicken loose less moisture then  #2 or #3 because it has less liquids to dilute the chicken?

 

Would # 2 loose less moisture then #3 because chicken stock has some chicken "juice" which can go back into the chicken?

 

or Would all three chicken samples loose the same moisture, because whatever surrounds the chicken doesn't affect moisture loss.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummm... how do you propose to add these liquids to your pouch?  Most of us have vacuum sealers that don't seal liquids well.  I wonder how many people here have the equipment to try your experiment... chamber vac units ain't inexpensive.  And moisture loss is more a function of target temperature than environment... read the Serious Eats SV chicken page.


Christopher D. Holst aka "cdh"

Learn to brew beer with my eGCI course

Chris Holst, Attorney-at-Lunch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, cdh said:

Ummm... how do you propose to add these liquids to your pouch?  Most of us have vacuum sealers that don't seal liquids well.  I wonder how many people here have the equipment to try your experiment... chamber vac units ain't inexpensive.  And moisture loss is more a function of target temperature than environment... read the Serious Eats SV chicken page.

 

I use a Ziplock, and use the under water displacement method.

 

I believe it's quite common?

 

Thanks!

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, torolover said:

Let's say I sous vide chicken thighs at 165F for 3 hours in 3 different ways.

 

#1  Sous vide with nothing in the pouch.  (I use Ziplock and the underwater displacement method).

#2  Sous Vide with Chicken stock (no salt) in the pouch

#3  Sous Vide with Water in the pouch

 

Would # 1 chicken loose less moisture then  #2 or #3 because it has less liquids to dilute the chicken?

 

Would # 2 loose less moisture then #3 because chicken stock has some chicken "juice" which can go back into the chicken?

 

or Would all three chicken samples loose the same moisture, because whatever surrounds the chicken doesn't affect moisture loss.

 

 

 

 

 

Water loss in sous vide is mainly from protein contraction as it cooks.  So pretty much the same in all three conditions 

 

Forgetting the cooking aspect, a piece of meat would lose salt if soaked in water and give up water if soaked in a strong brine. 

 

If the soaking liquid was roughly 0.9% salt there would be no net gain or loss.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think @gfweb

 

has the correct answer.

 

Id suggest a lower temp for you CkTh's

 

Id rather keep flavor lin the meat , unless Im making soup stock.

 

try 145 F , and taste vis 165 and taste.

 

season after you cook.

 

I know that's not your question , but I had to toss out those temps.


Edited by rotuts (log)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a really good question! I'm actually tempted to test and write an article on my blog about this now that you mention it but without testing it I think the result would be about the same for all three situations. First, I would say that cooking a whole chicken in a ziplock bag using water displacement method and not adding additional liquid could be risky. The thorax will remain empty and filled with just air which is a very inefficient heat-transferring medium. I'd advice against doing this just from a food safety standpoint but say you're using theoretical risk-free chickens then... comparing this chicken to another one cooked with water in the baggie, or stock in the baggie... without salt, I'd say they should be about the same. Cooking something suspended in water doesn't really add to its water content. Try cooking chicken breasts in boiling water for a few minutes... dry AF. Most animal protein is mostly water anyway and the only thing we can do to add extra water is to force it in by applying some sort of mechanical force, like diffusion by using salt during say brining. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple.

 

Weigh the options before and after cooking, do a percentage calculation.

 

dcarch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...