Does anyone know of a toaster-oven that can maintain accurate temperature?

[Martin Fisher]

On 1/19/2019 at 6:16 PM, afrank said:

I would use my oven, but it’s too inaccurate and the temperature range is all over the place.

 

I actually experimented using a couple of thermometers. I set my oven to 220F and started keeping track of the temperature after about 15 minutes. The actual reading was from a low of around 225F to a high temperature of 255F. I should note that I have a super cheap oven and I kind of assume a higher-end unit would be able to maintain a temperature more accurately.

 

I would replace my oven, but I can’t. I’m living in a rental and the oven came with the apartment. So I’m looking for a device that is relatively small, that I can stow away easily when I don’t need it.

 

Something else you could try is the following—I've done it in the past to get a much more stable temperature.

Place a large covered roasting pan or stock pot in your current oven and test the average temperature inside that (keeping the sensor suspended)—it should be MUCH more stable.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2019 by DiggingDogFarm (log)

[JoNorvelleWalker]

What about a retort bag in a pressure cooker?

 

[Kerry Beal]

The reason to go higher than 212F (and thus require a liquid other than water) is to shorten the time - lower and longer will accomplish the same end with conventional sous vide - and with no smell. 

[gfweb]

Or you could just boil water which will be a steady 212F and take a little longer

[pastrygirl]

I haven’t tried it, but there is a gadget designed specifically for this - check out magicalbutter.com 

Edited January 21, 2019 by pastrygirl (log)

[gfweb]

How about the Instant POT 😀 ? That gets around 240F, no?

Edited January 21, 2019 by gfweb (log)

[dcarch]

If you use a pressure cooker, and if you find a way to adjust the regulator weight, I think you can have very stable and accurate temperature control from 212F to 250F, possibly to within one degree.

 

dcarch 

[KennethT]

According to the MagicalButter machine site, they recommend decarboxylating in the oven prior to using the MB machine.  Evidently, that machine grinds (with an immersion blender) and steeps the butter at a set temperature for a given time.

[Kerry Beal]

The Nova Decarboylator is a little oven apparently. 

[afrank]

21 minutes ago, KennethT said:

According to the MagicalButter machine site, they recommend decarboxylating in the oven prior to using the MB machine

Yeah, I'm currently focused on the decarbing phase. The MB machine is for infusing the butter. I've heard mixed reviews about it. My gut is telling me it's a $175 modified crock-pot. That said, there does exist a device designed specifically for decarboxylating called the Ardent Nova (around $200), which claims to be scientifically proven as the method that offers the best results — but here too, I have yet to be convinced based on the information I've gathered. Seems most likely to produce satisfactory results while riding on trend and marketing. I prefer to do my own testing : )

 

13 hours ago, Kerry Beal said:

The reason to go higher than 212F (and thus require a liquid other than water) is to shorten the time - lower and longer will accomplish the same

So that's the thing. From my research, there's this well known graph, which has been largely adopted (see below) which lead to the 40min/240F rule many go by, but lately I've also read that the graph is no accurate for reasons I'm not sure I know to explain. I just want to do my own testing and see how it works out for me : )

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by afrank (log)

[Kerry Beal]

4 minutes ago, afrank said:

Yeah, I'm currently focused on the decarbing phase. The MB machine is for infusing the butter. I've heard mixed reviews about it. My gut is telling me it's a $175 modified crock-pot. That said, there does exist a device designed specifically for decarboxylating called the Ardent Nova (around $200), which claims to be scientifically proven as the method that offers the best results — but here too, I have yet to be convinced based on the information I've gathered. Seems most likely to produce satisfactory results while riding on trend and marketing. I prefer to do my own testing : )

 

So that's the thing. From my research, there's this well known graph, which has been largely adopted (see below) which lead to the 40min/240F rule many go by, but lately I've also read that the graph is no accurate for reasons I'm not sure I know to explain. I just want to do my own testing and see how it works out for me : )

 

 

Keep in mind that graph refers to carboxylation of an extract - not plant material.

[afrank]

1 minute ago, Kerry Beal said:

Keep in mind that graph refers to carboxylation of an extract - not plant material.

 

Yeah, again, I don't know enough chemistry to know what I'm seeing exactly, but that's partly the reason why the conclusion is that the sweet spot is 40min/240F rather than 7min/293F as the graph would suggest. I think it has to do with plant moisture, among other things.

But as I said, some, including I believe the makers of the Ardent Nova, have attempted in language I don't exactly understand nor can verify, that the graph is innacurate.

[pastrygirl]

36 minutes ago, KennethT said:

According to the MagicalButter machine site, they recommend decarboxylating in the oven prior to using the MB machine.  Evidently, that machine grinds (with an immersion blender) and steeps the butter at a set temperature for a given time.

 

They also have this decarb box, not exactly sure how it works ... https://store.magicalbutter.com/decarbox-thermometer-combo-pack.html#Tablist3|ProductTabListVertical1

[afrank]

My take on all this is:

Ask 5 experienced botanical cooks what is the best method, you'll most likely get 5 different answers, each of them passionately claiming theirs to be proven methods.

My take on this is because each person is not doing exactly the same thing. So comparing doesn't make sense. I'm sure they use different strains, at different levels of moisture, different types of ovens of varying quality, etc.

Relying on lab test documentation would be great! — IF I were working in a lab.

But since I'm not working in a lab, but rather at home with what i have, I'd rather do testing myself and see what works best for me 🙂

[pastrygirl]

@Kerry Beal, next project: a high-temp version of the EZ Temper?

[gfweb]

18 minutes ago, afrank said:

Yeah, I'm currently focused on the decarbing phase. The MB machine is for infusing the butter. I've heard mixed reviews about it. My gut is telling me it's a $175 modified crock-pot. That said, there does exist a device designed specifically for decarboxylating called the Ardent Nova (around $200), which claims to be scientifically proven as the method that offers the best results — but here too, I have yet to be convinced based on the information I've gathered. Seems most likely to produce satisfactory results while riding on trend and marketing. I prefer to do my own testing : )

 

So that's the thing. From my research, there's this well known graph, which has been largely adopted (see below) which lead to the 40min/240F rule many go by, but lately I've also read that the graph is no accurate for reasons I'm not sure I know to explain. I just want to do my own testing and see how it works out for me : )

 

 

 

How will you assay the THC? That would be a bigger hurdle than the heating

[weinoo]

Just vape.

[Kerry Beal]

34 minutes ago, pastrygirl said:

@Kerry Beal, next project: a high-temp version of the EZ Temper?

In spite of appearances to the contrary - I'm not a fan!

[Kerry Beal]

Have a look at this graph.

[gfweb]

36 minutes ago, Kerry Beal said:

Have a look at this graph.

I saw that too. They give a reasonable curve based on several studies. 

 

I believe I’d use their numbers. Unless you are a pro and set up to do TLC or HPLC this isn’t easy stuff to assay. Equipment and expertise aren’t cheap. In another life I did a lot of this sort of thing. It isn’t a home project. 

 

Unless there’s a quick and quantitative assay I don’t know about. 

[Kerry Beal]

2 minutes ago, gfweb said:

I saw that too. They give a reasonable curve based on several studies. 

 

I believe I’d use their numbers. Unless you are a pro and set up to do TLC or HPLC this isn’t easy stuff to assay. Equipment and expertise aren’t cheap. In another life I did a lot of this sort of thing. It isn’t a home project. 

 

Unless there’s a quick and quantitative assay I don’t know about. 

Perhaps it's a bit of n of 1 testing.

[gfweb]

44 minutes ago, Kerry Beal said:

Perhaps it's a bit of n of 1 testing.

Organoleptic analysis. 

n-1 = 0

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by gfweb (log)

[KennethT]

2 hours ago, gfweb said:

 

How will you assay the THC? That would be a bigger hurdle than the heating

If this was for a business, I'd say that the sample should be sent to a lab for testing. Expensive, yes, but also necessary to pass state regulations and also so you can provide accurate dosing info.

[Kerry Beal]

1 minute ago, KennethT said:

If this was for a business, I'd say that the sample should be sent to a lab for testing. Expensive, yes, but also necessary to pass state regulations and also so you can provide accurate dosing info.

Indeed - if it were for business then lab testing would be required. For home use...

[afrank]

1 hour ago, Kerry Beal said:

Have a look at this graph.

Thanks! Yeah I did come across this at one point. Saving it now.

 

41 minutes ago, gfweb said:

I believe I’d use their numbers

I definitely do plan to test their numbers

 

2 hours ago, gfweb said:

How will you assay the THC?

I'm looking into two routes. It would either be getting a home test kit, or sending out to a lab. A friend introduced me to an acquaintance of his who has a business in Washington. I might be able to work with him on the testing part. Not sure, yet.