deep fried prime rib questions
nefletch
4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
our turkey cooker. Getting things cleaned and ready, to
fry in 2 to 3 hours. I have only ever done 1 turkey in it, so
I am a novice. What would be the best temperature?
What would be an approximate time in the oil? What am
I looking for as far as crispness of the outside? Is it done
when it floats ( I think it heard this with a turkey) Any and
all recommendations are welcome. Thank you all in
advance.
Tom
Kent
"nefletch" <ace...@bbc.net> wrote in message
news:VoidnUfIXds-9LPW...@posted.mobiuscommunications...
fry enough to reach 120F at the center of the roast you're going to have to
overcook everything on its way. From the surface to the center it's going to
end up mostly gray and overdone and overly fatty. Standing rib has plenty,
plenty of beef fat in it by itself. You don't need, or want to add anything
more, especially vegetable oil. Roast it the traditional way. We always do
ours indirectly on the 22" Weber, at a fairly low temp. Make sure you rest
it after for at least 30 minutes while you make the Yorkshire pudding. We're
doing just that this afternoon.
May the almighty guide you not to do this. I'm praying for you on the
Sabbath.
Kent
Mark Thorson
>
> I think this will be a waste of a great and expensive piece of meat. To deep
I think it's a troll, but more clever than typical.
It would have been too obvious if he said he'd gotten
a pound of French black truffles and wanted a recipe
to batter and deep fry them.
Though, I wouldn't mind trying that if somebody else
were paying for it.
Steve Pope
>Kent wrote:
Olive-Oil-poaching beef rib meat works really well if done
right. Perhaps it could be done in the deep fryer, if
it has a low enough temperature setting?
Steve
nefletch
>> I need a little advice. My son showed up today with a
>> 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
>
> Doubtful that anyone here has tried it so you're on your own. After
> getting past my assumption that your son is an idiot I spent some time
>
Wow, all this time I thought sqwertz was the biggest dick
licking faggot on this group, you have rocketed to the top
of the list. Thanks for the great response of my sons
idea. I'm sure an asshole like yourself must have witnessed his mother
sucking the milkmans dick to have made you the person you are today
Steve B
"nefletch" <ace...@bbc.net> wrote in message
news:VoidnUfIXds-9LPW...@posted.mobiuscommunications...
Save your money. Don't waste a good cut of meat and all that oil. There
are different ways of cooking different cuts of meat, and deep frying for
prime rib isn't one of them.
Steve
Ed Pawlowski
Never tried it, but it would be interesting to do. Oil, of course, has to
be in the 360 range for any deep frying. I'd do it to an internal of about
125 degrees, but I have no clue how long that woud talke. Resting would
bring it to medium rare.
Here is a pork roast done the same way.
http://www.cookinglouisiana.com/Cooking/Recipes/Meat/Pork-Roast-Deep-Fried.htm
OK, here is what you want. 3 minutes per pound
http://bbq.about.com/b/2003/03/07/deep-fried-roast.htm
Ed Pawlowski
It has been done
http://bbq.about.com/b/2003/03/07/deep-fried-roast.htm
Now I have to pick up some truffles. I'm going to batter them and fry.
Ed Pawlowski
> Save your money. Don't waste a good cut of meat and all that oil. There
> are different ways of cooking different cuts of meat, and deep
> frying for prime rib isn't one of them.
>
> Steve
When I heard of fried turnkey, I thought pretty much the same way, but then
I tried it. Are you afraid of trying new things? Yes, it can be an
expensive experiment, but until yo try it . . . . . . . you'll never know
how good it may be
Steve B
"Ed Pawlowski" <e...@snet.net> wrote in message
news:-p-dnW7pbJQ8GLPW...@giganews.com...
I tried deep fried turkey, and it did nothing for me. I am always
interested in new foods and tastes, so much so that I think I could do the
Andrew Zimmer thing up to a point. Were I to travel, I would make it a
point of trying as many of the most unusual local delicacies I could.
As I said, up to a point. Eyeballs, spiders, entrails, stuff like that I'd
probably balk at, and things that just don't "smell" right. To me, smell
has a HUGE relation to eating something.
But then, I eat kippers, and when I pop a can, I can hear bellows from the
other side of the house. What do I know?
Just keep the KaoPectate and Pepto handy.
Steve
Mark Thorson
>
> As I said, up to a point. Eyeballs, spiders, entrails, stuff like that I'd
> probably balk at, and things that just don't "smell" right. To me, smell
> has a HUGE relation to eating something.
Never tried menudo? How sad. :-(
none of your business
the reason frying a whole turkey works is because there is a big hole
in the middle of the thing, allowing the bird to cook inside and
outside at the same time.
A standing rib roast does not. As someone else noted, it will overcook
on the outside before the center is even rare.
I wouldn't take a chance with such a lovely cut of meat. Better to
follow one of the many high temp roasting recipes that are out there.
Ran�e at Arabian Knits
<VoidnUfIXds-9LPW...@posted.mobiuscommunications>,
"nefletch" <ace...@bbc.net> wrote:
> I need a little advice. My son showed up today with a
> 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
> our turkey cooker.
Why? Why? Why would he do such a thing?
Regards,
Ranee @ Arabian Knits
"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13
jmcquown
news:4B2E964E...@sonic.net...
I love menudo :) Nothing at all wrong with honeycomb tripe.
Jill
Ekal Byar
"Ran�e at Arabian Knits" <arabia...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:arabianknits-CB42...@news.rainierconnect.com...
> In article
> <VoidnUfIXds-9LPW...@posted.mobiuscommunications>,
> "nefletch" <ace...@bbc.net> wrote:
>
>> I need a little advice. My son showed up today with a
>> 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
>> our turkey cooker.
>
> Why? Why? Why would he do such a thing?
>
Yeah. What she said.
Paul M. Cook
"nefletch" <ace...@bbc.net> wrote in message
news:VoidnUfIXds-9LPW...@posted.mobiuscommunications...
I agree with the others. It would be pretty awful, very greasy I would
think. I cannot imagine why you'd even want to do this. The traditional
method is to mix up a quarter cup of kosher salt, 2 tablespoons of coarse
freshly ground pepper and pack that all over the meat as a crust. Then
roast bone side down. It's the way you cook a prime rib.
Paul
pavane
"jmcquown" <j_mc...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:7p7kbg...@mid.individual.net...
Indeed, there are some mornings when menudo is the *only*
thing you can eat.
pavane
sf
wrote:
I have to agree with you, Mark. Only an ignoramus or a troll would
consider deep frying a decent piece of meat.
--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
jmcquown
news:EWxXm.223703$mn3....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
I'm told it's a "hangover soup". Personally I prefer chicken broth and
saltines ;)
Jill
Dave Smith
I tried menudo in an all you can eat breakast buffet in Colorado. It
was.... interesting. We were with my wife's cousin and her husband, and
for some reason we were discussing tripe. Cousin's husband pointed out
that I was eating tripe. I pointed out how much gristle <?> I had been
spitting out. I have to say that, despite the bits I could not swallow,
the menudo was delicious, and I mean really delicious.
sf
wrote:
What did you expect? Your post had a more money than brains tone, if
it wasn't an outright troll.
sf
<adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> I have to say that, despite the bits I could not swallow,
>the menudo was delicious, and I mean really delicious.
I tried it in a place that makes it *right*, my Nicaraguan neighbor
took me there. I *loved* menudo, hated the tripe. After the first
couple of bites I knew it wasn't going to "grow on me", so I ate
around it.
Dave Smith
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:10:55 -0500, Dave Smith
> <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>> I have to say that, despite the bits I could not swallow,
>> the menudo was delicious, and I mean really delicious.
>
> I tried it in a place that makes it *right*, my Nicaraguan neighbor
> took me there. I *loved* menudo, hated the tripe. After the first
> couple of bites I knew it wasn't going to "grow on me", so I ate
> around it.
The sauce from the tripe is delicious. The trip is.... a little troublesome.
Rob
So the truth comes out...
Rob
pavane
"Rob" <R...@itsgmail1709.com> wrote in message news:Oqidnfhh3--UX7PW...@giganews.com...
Indeed. The tripe and big flavor of the long-simmered broth, the
heat of the chilis, the chewiness of the tortillas, ... it is a beautiful
dish for the hungover, or those who really wish that they were.
Jill, chicken broth, nah. A bit too calm but may you always have
tolerable hangovers.
pavane
jmcquown
LOL I don't have hangovers at all. Menudo is just for when you want really
nice spicy hot soup made with hominy :)
Jill
Ranee at Arabian Knits
sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:19:50 -0800, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Kent wrote:
> >>
> >> I think this will be a waste of a great and expensive piece of meat. To
> >> deep
> >
> >I think it's a troll, but more clever than typical.
> >It would have been too obvious if he said he'd gotten
> >a pound of French black truffles and wanted a recipe
> >to batter and deep fry them.
> >
> >Though, I wouldn't mind trying that if somebody else
> >were paying for it.
>
> I have to agree with you, Mark. Only an ignoramus or a troll would
> consider deep frying a decent piece of meat.
My husband suggested that if they were going to ruin it anyway, they
might as well microwave it for 20-30 minutes before frying it to raise
the internal temperature.
gloria.p
> I need a little advice. My son showed up today with a
> 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
> fry in 2 to 3 hours. I have only ever done 1 turkey in it, so
> I am a novice. What would be the best temperature?
> What would be an approximate time in the oil? What am
> I looking for as far as crispness of the outside? Is it done
> when it floats ( I think it heard this with a turkey) Any and
> all recommendations are welcome. Thank you all in
> advance.
> Tom
>
>
I would recommend roasting it instead.
Why does he want to fry it? That's a nasty way to treat a lovely
cut of meat.
Please let us know how it turns out.
gloria p
Ms P
"nefletch" <ace...@bbc.net> wrote in message
news:VoidnUfIXds-9LPW...@posted.mobiuscommunications...
> 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
> our turkey cooker. Getting things cleaned and ready, to
> fry in 2 to 3 hours. I have only ever done 1 turkey in it, so
> I am a novice. What would be the best temperature?
> What would be an approximate time in the oil? What am
> I looking for as far as crispness of the outside? Is it done
> when it floats ( I think it heard this with a turkey) Any and
> all recommendations are welcome. Thank you all in
> advance.
> Tom
I did a quick search and got over 900,000 results for deep fried prime rib
so somebody must be doing it.
I'd just search and pick one.
Ms P
Ed Pawlowski
>
> I agree with the others. It would be pretty awful, very greasy I
> would think. I cannot imagine why you'd even want to do this. The
> traditional method is to mix up a quarter cup of kosher salt, 2
> tablespoons of coarse freshly ground pepper and pack that all over
> the meat as a crust. Then roast bone side down. It's the way you
> cook a prime rib.
> Paul
I'm truly amazed. Sure, a roasted prime rib is a delight, but how do you
know it won't be equal or better deep fried? Rather than make negative
comments about something you've never tried, why not help the guy and find
out what the result is? Better to try with his money that yours.
Where is the culinary adventure? Do you eat eggs prepaired onlyh one way?
Do yo bake your ham or have you ever tried boiling it?
Paul M. Cook
> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree with the others. It would be pretty awful, very greasy I
>> would think. I cannot imagine why you'd even want to do this. The
>> traditional method is to mix up a quarter cup of kosher salt, 2
>> tablespoons of coarse freshly ground pepper and pack that all over
>> the meat as a crust. Then roast bone side down. It's the way you
>> cook a prime rib.
>> Paul
>
> I'm truly amazed. Sure, a roasted prime rib is a delight, but how do you
> know it won't be equal or better deep fried? Rather than make negative
> comments about something you've never tried, why not help the guy and find
> out what the result is? Better to try with his money that yours.
He wanted an opinion, he got one. I can't imagine it tasting good.
Especially considering how thick and dense a big roast would be. For the
heat to get that deep into the meat the outer portions would be heavily
overcooked. And then there is the seasoning issue. I'd think boiling the
roast would not work out so great either.
>
> Where is the culinary adventure? Do you eat eggs prepaired onlyh one way?
> Do yo bake your ham or have you ever tried boiling it?
I am adventerous. I also know folly. I suppose I could deep fry a tin of
beluga caviar, too. I could make wine spritzers with 1986 Chateau Lafite.
I could do all that out of adventure but I'd not need to actually do it to
know it is silly and pointless.
Paul
Steve B
Couldn't get past the look. I guess I will have to taste it some time.
Steve
sf
<arabia...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My husband suggested that if they were going to ruin it anyway, they
>might as well microwave it for 20-30 minutes before frying it to raise
>the internal temperature.
I don't think microwaving helps to raise the internal temp either. :(
sf
The "look"? The "look" is good to me, unless I'm looking at tripe, of
course.
jmcquown
>
>>> I need a little advice. My son showed up today with a
>>> 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
>>
>> Doubtful that anyone here has tried it so you're on your own. After
>> getting past my assumption that your son is an idiot I spent some time
>>
> Wow, all this time I thought sqwertz was the biggest>
Before you call aem an idiot you should look at your son. Maybe you failed
to notice but your son is choosing to *deep fry* a prime hunk of beef. Why?
is really the only question. Did you raise the kid to be stupid or does he
come by it naturally? LOL
Jill
jmcquown
news:arabianknits-B678...@news.rainierconnect.com...
What a great idea, Ranee! Tee hee!
Jill
sf
wrote:
OK, but maybe he's an "adventurous" cook. Faint heart n'er won fair
maiden and all that stuff... or he's trying to scare one away.
ffu
Here's the point, have you ever deep fried a roast Jill, no I bet not so how
could you with your vast knowledge say it might turn out?
brooklyn1
More a case of more dollars than brain cells.
Deep frying is not going to work with such a large mass of meat, the
exterior will be chared more than an inch deep while the interior
remains dead raw. The only reason deep frying turkey works is because
of poultry anatomy, it's essentially a hollow shell of meat... it
fries equally from the inside as well as the outside... were the
turkey stuffed deep frying would produce garbage. Of course for the
truly adventurous they could try rib roast confit.
Bob Terwilliger
> Of course for the truly adventurous they could try rib roast confit.
That does sound like an interesting experiment, provided you can regulate
the temperature well for the time required.
A couple seasons ago, one of the "Top Chef" contestants received high praise
for poaching a rack of lamb in duck fat. Rib roast confit is not too far
removed from that idea.
Bob
Pete C.
sf wrote:
>
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:19:50 -0800, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Kent wrote:
> >>
> >> I think this will be a waste of a great and expensive piece of meat. To deep
> >
> >I think it's a troll, but more clever than typical.
> >It would have been too obvious if he said he'd gotten
> >a pound of French black truffles and wanted a recipe
> >to batter and deep fry them.
> >
> >Though, I wouldn't mind trying that if somebody else
> >were paying for it.
>
> I have to agree with you, Mark. Only an ignoramus or a troll would
> consider deep frying a decent piece of meat.
I suspect you are a bit off base on this. If the piece of meat in
question is an appropriate thickness frying it would be similar to the
high temp then low temp roasting technique which is known to work well.
Frying the exterior of the meat in fat isn't really much different that
roasting it as high temp where the exterior effectively fries in it's
own fat.
I suspect that if one were to use a "Broaster" pressure fryer which
would prevent boiling juices out of the meat, you would likely end up
with an exceptionally good result.
Nancy2
> "nefletch" <acek...@bbc.net> wrote in message
>
> news:VoidnUfIXds-9LPW...@posted.mobiuscommunications...>I need a little advice. My son showed up today with a
> > 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
> > fry in 2 to 3 hours. I have only ever done 1 turkey in it, so
> > I am a novice. What would be the best temperature?
> > What would be an approximate time in the oil? What am
> > I looking for as far as crispness of the outside? Is it done
> > when it floats ( I think it heard this with a turkey) Any and
> > all recommendations are welcome. Thank you all in
> > advance.
> > Tom
>
> overcook everything on its way. From the surface to the center it's going to
> end up mostly gray and overdone and overly fatty. Standing rib has plenty,
> plenty of beef fat in it by itself. You don't need, or want to add anything
> more, especially vegetable oil. Roast it the traditional way. We always do
> ours indirectly on the 22" Weber, at a fairly low temp. Make sure you rest
> it after for at least 30 minutes while you make the Yorkshire pudding. We're
> doing just that this afternoon.
>
> May the almighty guide you not to do this. I'm praying for you on the
> Sabbath.
>
> Kent
Ditto, a thousand times. What a waste! It reminds me of Gordon
Ramsey taking beef tenderloin steaks and making them flatter to saute
them for Steak Diane. Ugh.
N.
jmcquown
news:0r3vi5p14buscf0pi...@4ax.com...
Of course not. My vast knowledge tells me prime rib is far too expensive to
ruin by deep frying :)
RegForte
> "ffu" <s...@foodforu.ca> wrote in message
> news:0r3vi5p14buscf0pi...@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> Here's the point, have you ever deep fried a roast Jill, no I bet not
>> so how
>> could you with your vast knowledge say it might turn out?
>
> Of course not. My vast knowledge tells me prime rib is far too
> expensive to ruin by deep frying :)
It doesn't ruin it. That statement tells me you have neither
experience with this specific technique nor "vast knowledge".
There's two main reasons to deep fry meat. Cooking speed, and
to create a crispy surface texture. #1 isn't a very compelling
reason for most of us to hook up an large frying rig. #2 doesn't
apply to beef but it might to something with a skin (i.e. poultry).
Deep frying in no way "ruins" prime rib, it just adds
unnecessary complication. In actual fact, it's difficult
to tell the difference between deep fried and roasted side
by side. But, you would have to have actually tried it to
know that.
You may now resume giving advice about stuff you've never
actually done.
--
Reg
jmcquown
news:hgognn$q77$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Those quotes are yours and ffu's, not mine. Tell me, have YOU ever deep
fried a prime rib roast? Would you? If you had to pay $8.99 (or more) per
pound for prime beef roast, would you then dunk it in a deep fryer? Pray
tell! The majority of posters here seem to think it's a waste of good meat.
Please, convince me otherwise.
Jill
Christine Dabney
wrote:
Tell me, have YOU ever deep
>fried a prime rib roast? Would you? If you had to pay $8.99 (or more) per
>pound for prime beef roast, would you then dunk it in a deep fryer? Pray
>tell! The majority of posters here seem to think it's a waste of good meat.
>Please, convince me otherwise.
>
>Jill
Mind you I never have. But I am not going to say I would never do it,
as I don't know what the results would be like.
However, as one who likes to be open to new cooking methods,
techniques, and foods, I would certainly do so in a heartbeat, if the
results turned out to be very good to superlative. I am not going to
shut myself out of a good method just because it happens to be an
expensive piece of meat and it happens to be something I have never
done before. I might try a less expensive cut of meat first, but I
think I personally would be interested in at least seeing what it is
like and if it might produce superlative results. Why should I turn
down superlative results, if it does produce them?
Just my opinion, of course.
Speaking of newer techniques and equipment, I am oddly enough thinking
of eventually getting one of the new sous vide contraptions. One has
just come out that is getting a lot of press and is actually somewhat
reasonable in terms of cost compared to what they have been. I figure
that scores of highly respected chefs must know something if this is
something they are touting...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/dining/09sous.html?_r=3
http://www.sousvidesupreme.com/
http://blog.ruhlman.com/2009/12/the-sous-vide-supreme.html
http://www.surlatable.com/product/sousvide+supreme+water+oven.do?keyword=sous+vide&sortby=ourPicks
Christine
--
http://nightstirrings.blogspot.com
RegForte
> "RegForte" <r...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:hgognn$q77$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>> "ffu" <s...@foodforu.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:0r3vi5p14buscf0pi...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here's the point, have you ever deep fried a roast Jill, no I bet
>>>> not so how
>>>> could you with your vast knowledge say it might turn out?
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course not. My vast knowledge tells me prime rib is far too
>>> expensive to ruin by deep frying :)
>>
>>
>> It doesn't ruin it. That statement tells me you have neither
>> experience with this specific technique nor "vast knowledge".
>>
>> There's two main reasons to deep fry meat. Cooking speed, and
>> to create a crispy surface texture. #1 isn't a very compelling
>> reason for most of us to hook up an large frying rig. #2 doesn't
>> apply to beef but it might to something with a skin (i.e. poultry).
>>
>> Deep frying in no way "ruins" prime rib, it just adds
>> unnecessary complication. In actual fact, it's difficult
>> to tell the difference between deep fried and roasted side
>> by side. But, you would have to have actually tried it to
>> know that.
>>
>> You may now resume giving advice about stuff you've never
>> actually done.
>>
>
> Those quotes are yours and ffu's, not mine. Tell me, have YOU ever deep
> fried a prime rib roast? Would you? If you had to pay $8.99 (or more)
> per pound for prime beef roast, would you then dunk it in a deep fryer?
> Pray tell! The majority of posters here seem to think it's a waste of
> good meat. Please, convince me otherwise.
The above attributes are right where they should be.
The only reason I've ever used a deep fryer for prime rib is because
it made sense under the circumstances. I was serving a large crowd
and deep fried turkey was on the menu. Since there was a fryer
already set up I used it to cook the beef, thus freeing up other
cookers for all the other stuff.
That's the only reason to deep fry a big cut of beef, IMO. If you
have a fryer already set up there may be some benefit to be had,
depending on menu, crowd size, and logistics. The fact that it
cooked much faster was a welcome side effect also.
The crowd didn't much care which cooker it came out of. Most didn't
even notice.
As for convincing you of anything, nothing could be less important.
--
Reg
Dimitri
> Kent wrote:
>>
>> I think this will be a waste of a great and expensive piece of meat. To
>> deep
>
> It would have been too obvious if he said he'd gotten
> a pound of French black truffles and wanted a recipe
> to batter and deep fry them.
>
> Though, I wouldn't mind trying that if somebody else
> were paying for it.
My SIL swears by a deep fried rib roast. He said "best he ever had" IIRC
they used to deep fry them at the air paramedic station in the California
desert.
Dimitri
Ranee at Arabian Knits
Christine Dabney <arti...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> However, as one who likes to be open to new cooking methods,
> techniques, and foods, I would certainly do so in a heartbeat, if the
> results turned out to be very good to superlative. I am not going to
> shut myself out of a good method just because it happens to be an
> expensive piece of meat and it happens to be something I have never
> done before. I might try a less expensive cut of meat first, but I
> think I personally would be interested in at least seeing what it is
> like and if it might produce superlative results. Why should I turn
> down superlative results, if it does produce them?
I just don't think it would work with a piece of meat that large. It
might work with a rib steak, but a whole rib roast? I just can't see it
being anything but charred on the outside and raw on the inside. It's
not that I can't imagine deep fried meat, but that I can't fathom how
_this_ meat would turn out at all. Someone mentioned the cavity in the
turkey as being part of the reason it works to deep fry such a large
thing.
Chicken fried steak is good, but is done on steak and a rather tough
steak at that. Although there is room for innovation, I think there is
a reason that none of us has come across deep fried prime rib before.
Deep fried turkey tastes good, but requires a separate kitchen tool,
uses so much oil, cannot be stuffed, doesn't provide drippings for
gravy, etc, and seems more trouble than the flavor warrants. Others
disagree, of course, and they are the ones who make it! :-) We had it
done extremely well at our neighbor's house, but though we enjoyed it,
it wasn't so good that we wanted to try to do it ourselves.
Surely someone has tried deep frying a large roast. Even so, it
hasn't been popularized, and I think there is a reason for it. It
certainly isn't because folks don't like fried food.
Gregory Morrow
The OP's moniker should be "net*felch*"...
--
Best
Greg
pavane
| .......
| I just don't think it would work with a piece of meat that large. It
| might work with a rib steak, but a whole rib roast? I just can't see it
| being anything but charred on the outside and raw on the inside. It's
| not that I can't imagine deep fried meat, but that I can't fathom how
| Ranee @ Arabian Knits
| .......
Ok, please correct me where I'm wrong, but if you take a roast
of beef and surround it with dry heat in an oven, or liquid heat in
a deep fryer, both the oven and the oil at the same temperature,
shouldn't the heat transfer into the roast equally?
I've been trying, but I just can't see the logical flaw in this.
pavane
Ran�e at Arabian Knits
"Dimitri" <Dimi...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> My SIL swears by a deep fried rib roast. He said "best he ever had" IIRC
> they used to deep fry them at the air paramedic station in the California
> desert.
How big a roast was it?
Regards,
Ranee @ Arabian Knits
"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13
Doug Freyburger
>
> Ok, please correct me where I'm wrong, but if you take a roast
> of beef and surround it with dry heat in an oven, or liquid heat in
> a deep fryer, both the oven and the oil at the same temperature,
> shouldn't the heat transfer into the roast equally?
When heating is done by convection, the density, specific heat (heat
capacity) and conductivity of the medium counts.
Air is far less dense than oil so there is less contact-by-gram. That
will make the heat transfer rate in oil much higher.
Air has far lower specific heat than oil so an oven heated to 350F
contains far less heat than a container of oil heated to 350F so there
is more heat to tranfser once the item is in the oil.
Both air and oil are insulators not conductors. So 2 out of 3 factors
say the deep frying works faster than the oven roasting. This is why
deep frying is much faster than roasting. For chicken parts, whole
turkeys, prime rib roasts it doesn't matter.
Once the roast reaches the same temperature as the air/oil it no longer
matters, but no one cooks a roast to 250F.
So what matters is how burnt the outside is by the time the inside is
cooked. That's effected by the density and conductivity of the roast.
It's alsready been pointed out that if you cut toe prime rib into slices
no thicker than a turkey breast it should work about as well as a deep
fried turkey. But the OP gave no sign of cutting the prime rib roast
into appropriate sized pieces.
sf
<arti...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Speaking of newer techniques and equipment, I am oddly enough thinking
>of eventually getting one of the new sous vide contraptions. One has
>just come out that is getting a lot of press and is actually somewhat
>reasonable in terms of cost compared to what they have been. I figure
>that scores of highly respected chefs must know something if this is
>something they are touting...
>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/dining/09sous.html?_r=3
>
>http://www.sousvidesupreme.com/
>
>http://blog.ruhlman.com/2009/12/the-sous-vide-supreme.html
>
>http://www.surlatable.com/product/sousvide+supreme+water+oven.do?keyword=sous+vide&sortby=ourPicks
1 Sous vide $500
1 food sealer $60
1 box food bags $12
1 Salamander $ 700-2000
Plus tax
Some things are just better eaten out.
ra...@vt.edu
> Ok, please correct me where I'm wrong, but if you take a roast
> of beef and surround it with dry heat in an oven, or liquid heat in
> a deep fryer, both the oven and the oil at the same temperature,
> shouldn't the heat transfer into the roast equally?
> I've been trying, but I just can't see the logical flaw in this.
The flaw in your reasoning is "specfic heat." There's a lot more
heat energy stored in 350 degree oil than the same volume 350 degree
air. The liquid/solid interface probably gives better heat conduction
than a gas/solid interface.
Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.
Ran�e at Arabian Knits
"pavane" <pav...@somewhere.something.com> wrote:
> Ok, please correct me where I'm wrong, but if you take a roast
> of beef and surround it with dry heat in an oven, or liquid heat in
> a deep fryer, both the oven and the oil at the same temperature,
> shouldn't the heat transfer into the roast equally?
>
> I've been trying, but I just can't see the logical flaw in this.
I'm simply extrapolating from frying other solid pieces. If you fry
a whole breaded chicken breast, for example, at too high a heat, it will
burn on the outside and remain raw on the inside. If you do so at too
low a heat, it won't crisp up on the outside, but will be cooked. It
seems to get harder and harder to accomplish the balance the larger the
piece of food is. At least, IME.
Regards,
Ranee @ Arabian Knits
"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13
Christine Dabney
>1 food sealer $60
>1 box food bags $12
Sous vide would not be the only thing I would use a food sealer for.
As many have stated, a food saver is a good thing.
>1 Salamander $ 700-2000
Where does a salamander come into all this? Ever hear of a blow
torch? ;)
Christine
--
http://nightstirrings.blogspot.com
RegForte
> So what matters is how burnt the outside is by the time the inside is
> cooked. That's effected by the density and conductivity of the roast.
> It's alsready been pointed out that if you cut toe prime rib into slices
> no thicker than a turkey breast it should work about as well as a deep
> fried turkey. But the OP gave no sign of cutting the prime rib roast
> into appropriate sized pieces.
This also has several incorrect assumptions behind it. You
don't want to cut anything. In fact, that would result in an
overcooked center.
Prime rib is cooked to a relatively low internal temperature
of around 115/120 F accounting for overshoot, whereas poultry
is cooked much higher. This allows for the larger cross sectional
area in the case of beef roast. You don't want to fully cook the
inside (it's beef not poultry, apples and oranges) and the
dimensions of a rib roast make that possible.
Anyone who makes the "charred on the outside raw on the inside"
claim (or should I say "guess") has never actually deep fried
a rib roast.
--
Reg
jmcquown
news:arabianknits-41B0...@news.rainierconnect.com...
It hasn't been popularized because it's a silly idea. I suspect the OP is a
troll. I just checked the price at the local meat market. USDA Prime rib
roast is $10.99/lb. USDA Choice is $7.99/lb. Not to mention having to have
a deep fryer large enough to cook a guestimated 5 lb. roast and the oil it
would take to cook it in. Nope, that experiment is not gonna happen at my
house.
Jill
brooklyn1
>
>My SIL swears by a deep fried rib roast. He said "best he ever had".
>
>Dimitri
Your SIL is a "He"?
jmcquown
> Reg
Thus you prove my point. You already had a fryer set up and the people had
no taste. And I doubt it was USDA *prime*.
Jill
Pete C.
Why would a Son In Law not be a he???
sf
wrote:
SIL is also Sister in Law, but the pronoun should be enough to tell
the difference.
RegForte
> "RegForte" <r...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:hgold1$vok$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>>
>> The above attributes are right where they should be.
>>
>> The only reason I've ever used a deep fryer for prime rib is because
>> it made sense under the circumstances. I was serving a large crowd
>> and deep fried turkey was on the menu. Since there was a fryer
>> already set up I used it to cook the beef, thus freeing up other
>> cookers for all the other stuff.
>>
>> That's the only reason to deep fry a big cut of beef, IMO. If you
>> have a fryer already set up there may be some benefit to be had,
>> depending on menu, crowd size, and logistics.
>
>
> Thus you prove my point.
In what way? Your "point" was that deep frying ruins the dish.
An unsupported guess from someone with no actual experience.
> You already had a fryer set up and the people
> had no taste.
Um, your desperation is showing...
> And I doubt it was USDA *prime*.
Wrong yet again. A clean sweep.
--
Reg
Mark Thorson
>
> I'm told it's a "hangover soup". Personally I prefer chicken broth and
> saltines ;)
In my experience, it is an effective hangover remedy,
but then trick is you have to eat it _before_ you
start drinking. Actually, any brothy soup will do.
I suppose the salt and water combat dehydration.
Mark Thorson
> > Steve B wrote:
> >>
> >> As I said, up to a point. Eyeballs, spiders, entrails, stuff like that
> >> I'd
> >> probably balk at, and things that just don't "smell" right. To me, smell
> >> has a HUGE relation to eating something.
> >
> > Never tried menudo? How sad. :-(
>
> Couldn't get past the look. I guess I will have to taste it some time.
I recommend Juanita's brand. This is one item I prefer
canned. When I've had it made fresh at a restaurant,
the tripe is always too chewy. But the tripe
in Juanita's is almost gelatinous. It's perfect.
I don't eat it anymore because of Mad Cow Disease.
For some crazy reason the intestines harbor a lot
of prions. It's the only part of the cow outside
of the central nervous system which is considered
a high-risk material.
sf
wrote:
It's a prophylactic type hangover remedy? I hadn't heard that part.
Mark Thorson
>
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:08:42 -0800, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net>
> wrote:
>
> >jmcquown wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm told it's a "hangover soup". Personally I prefer chicken broth and
> >> saltines ;)
> >
> >In my experience, it is an effective hangover remedy,
> >but then trick is you have to eat it _before_ you
> >start drinking. Actually, any brothy soup will do.
> >I suppose the salt and water combat dehydration.
>
> It's a prophylactic type hangover remedy? I hadn't heard that part.
I discovered it by accident. I guess it's not widely known.
dsi1
> I need a little advice. My son showed up today with a
> 4 1/2 pound prime rib, and he wants to deep fat fry it in
> fry in 2 to 3 hours. I have only ever done 1 turkey in it, so
> I am a novice. What would be the best temperature?
> What would be an approximate time in the oil? What am
> I looking for as far as crispness of the outside? Is it done
> when it floats ( I think it heard this with a turkey) Any and
> all recommendations are welcome. Thank you all in
> advance.
> Tom
>
>
Interesting idea - just make sure you roast that meat to rare before you
place it in the hot oil - 400 degrees maybe?
none of your business
> sf wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:19:50 -0800, Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Kent wrote:
>
> > >> I think this will be a waste of a great and expensive piece of meat. To deep
>
> > >I think it's a troll, but more clever than typical.
> > >It would have been too obvious if he said he'd gotten
> > >a pound of French black truffles and wanted a recipe
> > >to batter and deep fry them.
>
> > >Though, I wouldn't mind trying that if somebody else
> > >were paying for it.
>
> > consider deep frying a decent piece of meat.
>
> I suspect you are a bit off base on this. If the piece of meat in
> question is an appropriate thickness frying it would be similar to the
> high temp then low temp roasting technique which is known to work well.
>
> Frying the exterior of the meat in fat isn't really much different that
> roasting it as high temp where the exterior effectively fries in it's
> own fat.
>
> I suspect that if one were to use a "Broaster" pressure fryer which
> would prevent boiling juices out of the meat, you would likely end up
> with an exceptionally good result.
I could see deep frying it until a nice crust forms, then putting it
in the oven to finish cooking.
Similar to pan frying a thick steak or chop and finishing it in the
oven.
Yes, pressure frying would probably work beautifully. Unfortunately,
that technology is not available for home use.
none of your business
SIL in this case must be Son In Law.
Though if his SIL was a she, it could be his Sister in Law.
Mark Thorson
>
> Deep frying in no way "ruins" prime rib, it just adds
> unnecessary complication. In actual fact, it's difficult
> to tell the difference between deep fried and roasted side
> by side. But, you would have to have actually tried it to
> know that.
Aren't you taking a risk of adding an off-flavor
to the meat from the frying oil? I don't see a
problem if the frying oil is fresh and something
like beef fat or lard. But if it had already been
used for something else or if it was a vegetable
oil, would that not be a problem, especially for
a valuable meat like prime rib?
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> Steve B wrote:
> > Save your money. Don't waste a good cut of meat and all that oil. There
> > are different ways of cooking different cuts of meat, and deep
> > frying for prime rib isn't one of them.
>
> > Steve
>
> When I heard of fried turnkey, I thought pretty much the same way, but then
> I tried it. Are you afraid of trying new things? Yes, it can be an
> expensive experiment, but until yo try it . . . . . . . you'll never know
> how good it may be
>
How can deep-frying prime rib at 350 degrees be any better than
roasting it in the oven at the same 360 degrees? Fried surface?
The goodness of prime rib is in the interior, and it will make no
difference if the exterior was fried or roasted/broiled/baked.
I would be more interested in slow-rotisseriing prime rib at, say, 200
degrees, and then blow-torching the outside before serving.
Anybody has an experience with low-temperature cooking beef?
Steve Pope
>How can deep-frying prime rib at 350 degrees be any better than
>roasting it in the oven at the same 360 degrees? Fried surface?
An analogy would be carnitas, which is sometimes made by
deep-frying large pieces of pork, and yes it ends up tasty.
Somehow though prime rib seems like less of a candidate
for such a technique.
Steve
pavane
<ra...@vt.edu> wrote in message news:hgopos$mjm$1...@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
Yeah, that's it. I had overlooked the heat energy and the conduction
that would result. Thanks to you and Doug for your responses.
pavane
Dimitri
"brooklyn1" <grave...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:06tvi5liaijntui4m...@4ax.com...
Son In law (Daughter's husband)
Dimitri
RegForte
Fair question. I can relate my experiences, but I'd
like to hear from a fry cook that does this full time.
They'd know all the tricks.
Generally speaking, obviously you don't want to use the
same oil for sweet and savory dishes. No cooking the
rum fritters in the chicken fryer, etc. On this I think
everyone would agree.
For 100% savory dishes it gets more complicated and probably
somewhat subjective. You wouldn't want to mix seafood with
anything else, no doubt. I've done meat based dishes then
vegetables afterwards with no detectable meat taste. I think
what's key is how much of one product you cook before you
switch to something else. Cooking a single batch may not
impart much flavor where cooking many batches will.
I know when I did the turkey and the prime rib I started
with fresh oil, and there was also some apps done before.
I think it went: fried zucchini, then the turkey, then the
beef. No off flavors noticed by me or any of the guests.
As far as using vegetable oil, I used to use peanut oil
exclusively but switched to corn oil. I haven't had a
problem with corn oil imparting any off flavors when
deep frying.
--
Reg
Ran�e at Arabian Knits
spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
> An analogy would be carnitas, which is sometimes made by
> deep-frying large pieces of pork, and yes it ends up tasty.
I've never heard of anyone deep frying large pieces of pork for
carnitas. I've heard of slowly braising it in lard, though.
Regards,
Ranee @ Arabian Knits
"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13
Mark Thorson
>
> Mark Thorson wrote:
>
> > RegForte wrote:
> >
> >>Deep frying in no way "ruins" prime rib, it just adds
> >>unnecessary complication. In actual fact, it's difficult
> >>to tell the difference between deep fried and roasted side
> >>by side. But, you would have to have actually tried it to
> >>know that.
> >
> > Aren't you taking a risk of adding an off-flavor
> > to the meat from the frying oil? I don't see a
> > problem if the frying oil is fresh and something
> > like beef fat or lard. But if it had already been
> > used for something else or if it was a vegetable
> > oil, would that not be a problem, especially for
> > a valuable meat like prime rib?
>
> Fair question. I can relate my experiences, but I'd
> like to hear from a fry cook that does this full time.
> They'd know all the tricks.
I'd like to hear that, too.
> Generally speaking, obviously you don't want to use the
> same oil for sweet and savory dishes. No cooking the
> rum fritters in the chicken fryer, etc. On this I think
> everyone would agree.
Yes, but I don't see much problem with staging
sweet before savory. Like funnel cakes before
chicken. Onion rings might be a problem, depending
on what the meat is. Most of the time, I think it
might be an improvement. In _The_Professional_Chef_
it is noted that frying oil is best after it's been
used a little bit. I haven't done enough frying to
notice that effect, and I usually don't re-use oil.
But in a commercial situation you obviously would,
and in the absence of information to the contrary
I'll assume they're correct.
> For 100% savory dishes it gets more complicated and probably
> somewhat subjective. You wouldn't want to mix seafood with
> anything else, no doubt. I've done meat based dishes then
> vegetables afterwards with no detectable meat taste. I think
> what's key is how much of one product you cook before you
> switch to something else. Cooking a single batch may not
> impart much flavor where cooking many batches will.
That's a very good point I hadn't considered.
Flavors will accumulate. I've been told by someone
with professional experience that frying potatoes is
a good way to clean up an oil you plan to re-use.
I should bring this subject up with her. I can easily
imagine potatoes they could absorb and drag out flavors.
Might even improve the potatoes, too.
> I know when I did the turkey and the prime rib I started
> with fresh oil, and there was also some apps done before.
> I think it went: fried zucchini, then the turkey, then the
> beef. No off flavors noticed by me or any of the guests.
Skating on the edge, I would say. Unless you had
done this particular combination before and had
high confidence it would work out okay. I would have
been more worried about the prime rib, and run that
before the turkey. The zucchini may have improved the
oil, so I don't disagree with running that first.
It's hard to imagine drag-in of beef fat from prime
rib spoiling the turkey. It would probably make it
better, if anything. Unless I was there, in which case
I'd point out that deep-frying temperatures do not
kill the infectious agent for Mad Cow Disease. But of
course, you knew that. It's better that you ran the
turkey first, to ensure I wouldn't accuse you of
delibrately running the beef first so I would have
neither the beef nor the turkey to eat. Bastard.
> As far as using vegetable oil, I used to use peanut oil
> exclusively but switched to corn oil. I haven't had a
> problem with corn oil imparting any off flavors when
> deep frying.
I can taste the corniness in corn oil, but I've never
found it unpleasant. I've never noticed a peanut taste
in peanut oil, but with all the fuss about peanut
allergies, I'd stay away from that one if I were you.
I can sometimes taste the coconut in stuff like tortilla
chips fried in coconut oil. If a flavorless coconut oil
were available, I'd think that would be the best choice
for a long-lived oil in a commercial setting where you
don't care about the cardiovascular health of the guests.
If I decide to become a sociopath and start a fast-food
chain, I'll probably use coconut oil in all of the fryers.
It's more saturated than beef fat or lard, so I'll be
able to run the oil longer and my customers will meet
their well-deserved deaths sooner.
Dan Abel
<6eb257c1-6e2e-448f...@z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
"Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr." <ostap_be...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> How can deep-frying prime rib at 350 degrees be any better than
> roasting it in the oven at the same 360 degrees? Fried surface?
Don't know about better or worse, but they would cook differently. Try
cooking french fries in a 375F oven and then some in 375F oil. The
timing will be very different and so will the texture and taste.
> The goodness of prime rib is in the interior, and it will make no
> difference if the exterior was fried or roasted/broiled/baked.
>
> I would be more interested in slow-rotisseriing prime rib at, say, 200
> degrees, and then blow-torching the outside before serving.
>
> Anybody has an experience with low-temperature cooking beef?
There have been many posts with many different techniques. I don't
remember the details, as I'm not that interested, but I think Steve
Wertz discussed putting a prime rib in a hot oven, and then turning the
oven off. I think others have discussed browning the prime rib, and
then cooking at 225F.
In this very thread, on this very day, Christine Dabney discussed
cooking sous vide. This involves very low temperatures, well under
200F, and sometimes a torch is used after cooking to make the food
appear cooked.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
da...@sonic.net
Ed Pawlowski
> Ditto, a thousand times. What a waste! It reminds me of Gordon
> Ramsey taking beef tenderloin steaks and making them flatter to saute
> them for Steak Diane. Ugh.
>
> N.
Lots of people seem to be doing it.
http://recipe.aol.com/recipe/deep-fried-prime-rib-with-madeira-sauce/84346
http://bbq.about.com/b/2003/03/07/deep-fried-roast.htm
http://www.ifood.tv/network/deep_fried_beef_roast/recipes
http://www.stubbsbbq.com/recipe_view/70
http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/010901.html#010901
gloria.p
Why has everyone mocked and insulted this man
for asking a food-related question? He honestly
wanted to know if anyone had experience with the
technique.
Has anyone asked how it turned out?
Imagine if someone had asked about frying a turkey
here. After the hundred negative posts, would
they have had the spirit to try it?
The flame wars and nitpicking here are more than
boring and mean-spirited. They show a side of
posters I once admired that I, for one, would just
as soon not experience.
gloria p
Christine Dabney
wrote:
I hope I was not one of them, Gloria. I truly am interested in
knowing if it turned out well.
I am not one to really scoff. It may be a fantastic technique...and if
so, I want to be aware of it. Even if I never use it in the short
run. The day may come that I want to try it...if it does indeed
produce good results.
I sure hope it turned out well for the OP. I hope he reports
back...in the face of all the criticism he got.
I must admit my first reaction was to say No Way, but I had a think
about it, and decided that it might be something that works. And if
it does, who am I to belittle it? Good food is good food. And that
is why we are here, is it not?
Christine
--
http://nightstirrings.blogspot.com
Dan Abel
"gloria.p" <gpue...@comcast.net> wrote:
Sorry, Gloria. Go back and read the thread. It has the marks of a
calculated flame war. The OP asked his questions. The first response I
saw was a little negative, but then gave some good thoughts. The OP
responded with a bunch of stuff that I am much too ashamed to repost.
My parents would have washed out my mouth with soap! Well, it just went
downhill from there.
The OP was obviously no stranger to this group.
Bob Terwilliger
> Speaking of newer techniques and equipment, I am oddly enough thinking
> of eventually getting one of the new sous vide contraptions. One has
> just come out that is getting a lot of press and is actually somewhat
> reasonable in terms of cost compared to what they have been. I figure
> that scores of highly respected chefs must know something if this is
> something they are touting...
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/dining/09sous.html?_r=3
>
> http://www.sousvidesupreme.com/
>
> http://blog.ruhlman.com/2009/12/the-sous-vide-supreme.html
>
> http://www.surlatable.com/product/sousvide+supreme+water+oven.do?keyword=sous+vide&sortby=ourPicks
That's not really sous vide. It's a temperature-controlled water bath. By
DEFINITION, sous vide is cooked in vacuum-packed envelopes, and that kit
doesn't contain a vacuum packer. Temperature-controlled immersion
circulators have been in the marketplace for years.
The vacuum packer in commercial sous vide kits is a LOT stronger than a
Foodsaver, which is one of the reasons commercial sous vide kits cost so
much. Mind you, the water bath may be worth the money, but Thomas Keller
uses his cryovac for a lot more than sous vide.
Bob
Christine Dabney
<virtualgoth@die_spammer.biz> wrote:
>That's not really sous vide. It's a temperature-controlled water bath. By
>DEFINITION, sous vide is cooked in vacuum-packed envelopes, and that kit
>doesn't contain a vacuum packer. Temperature-controlled immersion
>circulators have been in the marketplace for years.
Okay, go ahead and destroy my fun..LOL.
Yes, I know it needs a vacumn packer. And you do have to buy that on
the side.
And yes, Temp control immersion circulators have been available, but
not for home use. Only for commercial use. This is a home setup, now
available. A big difference, both in terms of price and
availability. This part is new. It is now available for the home
buyer, at a reasonable cost.
>
>The vacuum packer in commercial sous vide kits is a LOT stronger than a
>Foodsaver, which is one of the reasons commercial sous vide kits cost so
>much. Mind you, the water bath may be worth the money, but Thomas Keller
>uses his cryovac for a lot more than sous vide.
And the person that wrote the book with Thomas Keller on Sous Vide, is
Michael Ruhlman. Who is now touting this contraption as being an
introduction to it.
I will never be Thomas Keller.. But I can maybe achieve some results
worthy of being called sous vide, with this... Maybe.
Christine
--
http://nightstirrings.blogspot.com
Bob Terwilliger
> How can deep-frying prime rib at 350 degrees be any better than roasting
> it in the oven at the same 360 degrees? Fried surface?
>
> The goodness of prime rib is in the interior, and it will make no
> difference if the exterior was fried or roasted/broiled/baked.
I think this would be the main objection I'd have to deep-fried prime rib:
You'd have a large continuum of doneness. (On the other hand, if you have a
bunch of diners who all want different degrees of doneness, that's an
advantage.)
People *want* crispy skin on a turkey. I don't think you'd see so many
clamoring for the crispy exterior of a deep-fried prime rib, but maybe
that's just my personal bias. (Then again, I've never been all that taken
with the deep-fried turkey I've had.)
> I would be more interested in slow-rotisseriing prime rib at, say, 200
> degrees, and then blow-torching the outside before serving.
>
> Anybody has an experience with low-temperature cooking beef?
I usually roast beef at a very low temperature and then sear it on a
cast-iron griddle when it's close to being done. I thought about the
blowtorch technique recently and posted the idea, but I haven't tried it out
yet. An article I read mentioned a Spanish restaurant which went even more
extreme: The slow-cooked meat was cut into big cubes for serving, and then
was sprayed with ash instead of being seared.
Bob
Bob Terwilliger
>> An analogy would be carnitas, which is sometimes made by
>> deep-frying large pieces of pork, and yes it ends up tasty.
>
> I've never heard of anyone deep frying large pieces of pork for
> carnitas. I've heard of slowly braising it in lard, though.
I've always cooked carnitas twice: Once slowly in lard to cook and make
tender, and then broiled to make crisp. But I've seen deep-frying as the
second step before.
Bob
RegForte
I'm not so sure.
The OP asked a reasonable question. Someone called his
kid an idiot at which point he blew a gasket. Rather
predictable.
I do know that gloria looks rather silly up on the high
horse. I don't like or endorse the childish attacks either
but geeze, did she just get here yesterday?
In fact, along with the usual noise the thread contains
a pretty diverse range of views and is fairly substantive
as far as rfc exchanges go.
--
Reg
RegForte
> RegForte wrote:
>
>>For 100% savory dishes it gets more complicated and probably
>>somewhat subjective. You wouldn't want to mix seafood with
>>anything else, no doubt. I've done meat based dishes then
>>vegetables afterwards with no detectable meat taste. I think
>>what's key is how much of one product you cook before you
>>switch to something else. Cooking a single batch may not
>>impart much flavor where cooking many batches will.
>
>
> That's a very good point I hadn't considered.
> Flavors will accumulate. I've been told by someone
> with professional experience that frying potatoes is
> a good way to clean up an oil you plan to re-use.
> I should bring this subject up with her. I can easily
> imagine potatoes they could absorb and drag out flavors.
> Might even improve the potatoes, too.
>
>
Pastorio used to post a lot of good info about frying.
We need someone else to step up now that's he's gone.
>>I know when I did the turkey and the prime rib I started
>>with fresh oil, and there was also some apps done before.
>>I think it went: fried zucchini, then the turkey, then the
>>beef. No off flavors noticed by me or any of the guests.
>
>
> Skating on the edge, I would say. Unless you had
> done this particular combination before and had
> high confidence it would work out okay. I would have
> been more worried about the prime rib, and run that
> before the turkey. The zucchini may have improved the
> oil, so I don't disagree with running that first.
> It's hard to imagine drag-in of beef fat from prime
> rib spoiling the turkey. It would probably make it
> better, if anything. Unless I was there, in which case
> I'd point out that deep-frying temperatures do not
> kill the infectious agent for Mad Cow Disease. But of
> course, you knew that. It's better that you ran the
> turkey first, to ensure I wouldn't accuse you of
> delibrately running the beef first so I would have
> neither the beef nor the turkey to eat. Bastard.
>
My hope is that you are a mad scientist working
on a special tractor beam that will someday kill all
vestiges of mad cow disease. Thus your unusually
ambitious focus on it.
>
>>As far as using vegetable oil, I used to use peanut oil
>>exclusively but switched to corn oil. I haven't had a
>>problem with corn oil imparting any off flavors when
>>deep frying.
>
>
> I can taste the corniness in corn oil, but I've never
> found it unpleasant. I've never noticed a peanut taste
> in peanut oil, but with all the fuss about peanut
> allergies, I'd stay away from that one if I were you.
> I can sometimes taste the coconut in stuff like tortilla
> chips fried in coconut oil. If a flavorless coconut oil
> were available, I'd think that would be the best choice
> for a long-lived oil in a commercial setting where you
> don't care about the cardiovascular health of the guests.
That's my thinking about corn oil. It does have a slight
(and I mean slight) corn flavor but it's neutral and works
with pretty much everything. I'm happy to not have to stock
peanut oil anymore partly for logistical reasons and partly
because of the allergy thing.
--
Reg
Ophelia
"Christine Dabney" <arti...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:lbp0j5pbt5re48a0m...@4ax.com...
> I will never be Thomas Keller.. But I can maybe achieve some results
> worthy of being called sous vide, with this... Maybe.
Good luck with it, Christine. Report back please:)
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> In article
> <6eb257c1-6e2e-448f-865e-9d29bf7e0...@z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr." <ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > How can deep-frying prime rib at 350 degrees be any better than
> > roasting it in the oven at the same 360 degrees? Fried surface?
>
> Don't know about better or worse, but they would cook differently. Try
> cooking french fries in a 375F oven and then some in 375F oil. The
> timing will be very different and so will the texture and taste.
>
My thought experiment tells me that potatoes, fried in oil - gooood!!
a big hunk of tender beef, fried in oil - baaaad! :-)
Some people here say that it's worth experimenting. I am happy that
they have a lot of money to experiment with, and will be happy to read
the results of their expensive experiments.
>
> > The goodness of prime rib is in the interior, and it will make no
> > difference if the exterior was fried or roasted/broiled/baked.
>
> > I would be more interested in slow-rotisseriing prime rib at, say, 200
> > degrees, and then blow-torching the outside before serving.
>
> > Anybody has an experience with low-temperature cooking beef?
>
> There have been many posts with many different techniques. I don't
> remember the details, as I'm not that interested, but I think Steve
> Wertz discussed putting a prime rib in a hot oven, and then turning the
> oven off. I think others have discussed browning the prime rib, and
> then cooking at 225F.
>
What is better: first to brown and then slow-cook, or first to cook
and then to brown?
>
> In this very thread, on this very day, Christine Dabney discussed
> cooking sous vide. This involves very low temperatures, well under
> 200F, and sometimes a torch is used after cooking to make the food
> appear cooked.
>
Sous vide-ing meat in a vacuum-sealed envelope means low-temperature
boiling this meat in its own juice. Does anybody like boiled steak?
Sous vide seems better for preparing "63.5 degree eggs", chicken,
veggies etc; also for braising tough meats; but not for cooking tender
cuts of red meat. Low-temp roasting seems like a better idea.
Am I mistaken?
Ed Pawlowski
>
> I think this would be the main objection I'd have to deep-fried prime
> rib: You'd have a large continuum of doneness. (On the other hand, if
> you have a bunch of diners who all want different degrees of
> doneness, that's an advantage.)
>
> People *want* crispy skin on a turkey. I don't think you'd see so many
> clamoring for the crispy exterior of a deep-fried prime rib, but maybe
> that's just my personal bias. (Then again, I've never been all that
> taken with the deep-fried turkey I've had.)
>
That is exactly how we like ours. We start out on a high temperature, then
go lower to finish. You end up with a nice well done ring on the outside
and a very pink inside. Comes down to choices.
>
>> I would be more interested in slow-rotisseriing prime rib at, say,
>> 200 degrees, and then blow-torching the outside before serving.
>>
>> Anybody has an experience with low-temperature cooking beef?
>
> I usually roast beef at a very low temperature and then sear it on a
> cast-iron griddle when it's close to being done.
Never did a prime rib that way, but I've done other cuts on the smoker with
good results. did not do the browning later though.
Bob Terwilliger
> I will never be Thomas Keller.. But I can maybe achieve some results
> worthy of being called sous vide, with this... Maybe.
I'm curious about the seven-hour eggs.
Bob
Nancy2
> Nancy2 wrote:
> > Ditto, a thousand times. What a waste! It reminds me of Gordon
> > Ramsey taking beef tenderloin steaks and making them flatter to saute
> > them for Steak Diane. Ugh.
>
> > N.
>
That doesn't mean it's a good idea, it just means someone thinks it's
"trendy."
N.
Dimitri
"Ran�e at Arabian Knits" <arabia...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:arabianknits-3F51...@news.rainierconnect.com...
> In article <neRXm.115952$gg6....@newsfe25.iad>,
> "Dimitri" <Dimi...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>> My SIL swears by a deep fried rib roast. He said "best he ever had" IIRC
>> they used to deep fry them at the air paramedic station in the California
>> desert.
>
> How big a roast was it?
He does not remember exact the answer was : Big enough to feed 4 - 3
firemen/paramedics + 1 chopper pilot
--
Dimitri
Mirepoix