Quantcast
72-Hour Sous Vide Ribs: Are they worth it? You bet your @$$.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: 72-Hour Sous Vide Ribs: Are they worth it? You bet your @$$.

  1. #1

    Zwiefel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    2,185

    72-Hour Sous Vide Ribs: Are they worth it? You bet your @$$.

    After considerable sh1te-talking by forum members, I decided to try the sous vide ribs. I must now admit that it wasn't sh1te-talk at all.

    full rack of pork ribs, cut into 2-rib sections and bagged:


    Into Sous Vide @130 for 72-Hours:


    Time for a bit of crust formation, seasoning ribs before introduction to the high-heat:


    First time I've ever grilled fully-cooked food before:


    20 Minutes for a bit of Hickory smoke:


    Service:


    I must say...I've never had better ribs. I've had ribs as good though, but I doubt the people who made those ribs put as little effort into it as I did. Incredibly simple. Stupid proof even.

    MuchoBocho: Thanks for getting me into this...best thing that's happened to my kitchen since jKnives.
    Remember: You're a unique individual...just like everybody else.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    140
    That looks awesome! If it's not too late, can we get a picture of what the inside looks like?

  3. #3

    Zwiefel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    2,185
    Quote Originally Posted by vinster View Post
    That looks awesome! If it's not too late, can we get a picture of what the inside looks like?
    Too late for tonight...but I have 1 pair of ribs left, I could do a cold photo of those. Next time I'll probably drop the temp to 125ish. Still learning how to do this.
    Remember: You're a unique individual...just like everybody else.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Lucretia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Isle of Lucy
    Posts
    1,611
    One thing I've wondered about with sous vide...does the fat render out? Or are you left with fatty ribs?

    This was recent a batch off the smoker--fat pretty much gone, but very moist, and you could suck the meat off and leave a clean bone. Just curious--how does it compare with what you see with sous vide?

    Name:  Ribs2.jpg
Views: 31
Size:  25.7 KB
    Now is not the time to bother me. And it's always now. Wiley Miller

  5. #5

    Zwiefel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    2,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucretia View Post
    One thing I've wondered about with sous vide...does the fat render out? Or are you left with fatty ribs?

    This was recent a batch off the smoker--fat pretty much gone, but very moist, and you could suck the meat off and leave a clean bone. Just curious--how does it compare with what you see with sous vide?
    I'm certainly not a rib expert...I probably only eat them 3-4 times per year. However, my wife is very picky about fatty foods and she said, "these are the best ribs I've ever had."

    Here are two photos that show how cleanly the bone pulls away from the meat--in the background.


    Also, the internal color of the meat...clearly not overcooked and gray. After looking closely at the color, I might keep my 130F in the future...it were darned tasty

    Hopefully, this helps answer both questions.
    Remember: You're a unique individual...just like everybody else.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Lucretia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Isle of Lucy
    Posts
    1,611
    Just trying to understand here--isn't 125-130 degrees an optimum range for bacterial growth, and below the safe temperature for pork? Maybe it's taken care of by the long duration at temp?

    Just got "Modernist Cuisine at Home" from the library, so time to do a little reading.

    Glad they came out well for you!
    Now is not the time to bother me. And it's always now. Wiley Miller

  7. #7

    Zwiefel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    2,185
    Good question/comment Lucretia!

    You demonstrate a correct understanding of current USDA guidelines ...however, those are poorly designed. Actually, this very topic is addressed in MC@H in the section starting on page 60. I'm uncertain if it's the same section, but they talk about how the USDA guidelines pretty much ignore time and reduce the problem to one of temperature, which is an oversimplification--as you suggested with your question, that this is a multi-dimensional topic.

    Also, trichinosis is quite rare (heh) these days. I think the number is 1 in 10,000 pigs. The number for salmonella in eggs is 1/20,000. I like those odds pretty well as I doubt I will ever eat 10,000 eggs nor 5,000 pigs.

    Finally...even the USDA has lowered the recommended temp for pork to 140/145F, from the ridiculous 165F it had been for 30ish years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucretia View Post
    Just trying to understand here--isn't 125-130 degrees an optimum range for bacterial growth, and below the safe temperature for pork? Maybe it's taken care of by the long duration at temp?

    Just got "Modernist Cuisine at Home" from the library, so time to do a little reading.

    Glad they came out well for you!
    Remember: You're a unique individual...just like everybody else.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Bay area
    Posts
    457
    Here is the official word:

    http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/...try_Tables.pdf

    for pork/beef at 130 it takes 121 minutes for pasteurization to occur, I think, therefore we are probably safe with even 24 hours :- )

    seriously, do you think 72 hours is really necessary??

    I usually do steak at 131 for 24 hours in my sous vide machine...

  9. #9

    Zwiefel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Posts
    2,185
    Gic,

    I honestly dont know. I didnt see a big difference between 48 and 72. Im just starting to learn this stuff and Im following the advice Im getting. I can say that with goat, 24 to 48 hours made a HUGE difference.

    Thanks for the link, Ill follow it tomorrow to get a better understanding.

    Z
    Remember: You're a unique individual...just like everybody else.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    169
    I would guess that any overcooking you are seeing in these ribs is from the sear stage and not from being too well done at 130. FWIW, I've never heard anybody say that long cooking at anything below 130 is safe, and it isn't trichinosis at that level you worry about.

    Also, cooking steak for 24 hours is almost always a bad idea, unless you are talking about tough meat, it is going to get soft.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts