jnoble wrote:Does the food taste better whether cooked on a KK or another ceramic?
I came from a Kamado #7 that I drove into the ground (shed its tiles, cracked, but lots of good cooking) over five years. I figured, the Komodo Kamado, much nicer fit & finish, lasts many times longer, but similar enough shape and size that I could jump in with no learning curve.
I was wrong. Aesthetics aside, a fundamental difference in how the KK cooks comes from the fact that it is both very tight and very well insulated. One can get to and hold a temperature quicker, with less fuel. Early on, I made plenty of mistakes, trying to drive the KK as if it were a K7. But one learns.
I am of the opinion that traditional low & slow brisket is the single hardest entry in the barbecue repertoire. Just saying this opens up a can of worms, for this approach to brisket is easy on a ceramic cooker, if nearly impossible on an offset firebox cooker. And one school here favors quick, higher heat briskets involving foiling. The intensity of the debate supports my belief (shared by many others) that brisket responds to the synergy of skill and equipment.
Nevertheless, brisket made this way comes out better in a KK than it ever did in a K7. I can only speculate why: Tight, well-insulated, so less airflow. Does this dry the meat less? I can just imagine Harold McGee lecturing me that this has nothing to do with meat drying out, and if it did, a water pan would correct any differences in cooker tightness.
Perhaps. My intuition likes a very slow airflow. No one who can tell armagnac from cognac from moonshine would dispute that distillation is very sensitive to every variable. My hunch, supported by experience, is that so is barbecue.
Of course, you buy a KK because you want it.
Per la strada incontro un passero che disse "Fratello cane, perche sei cosi triste?"
Ripose il cane: "Ho fame e non ho nulla da mangiare."
