TheNakedWhiz Posted August 20, 2007 Report Share Posted August 20, 2007 I currently have 9 pieces of a certain other company's extruded coconut charcoal burning in my KK. 5 pieces are from an older vintage, 4 are from a current vintage. (I just wanted to be precise here...) The thermometer read 120 when I started (it is almost 100 here today, and the cooker is black, so it sounds reasonable). After 35 minutes, the cooker is at 270 degrees with vents wide open. (returning to my meaningless existence now.....) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNakedWhiz Posted August 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2007 1 hour, 18 minutes, 340 degrees. I'd say this cooker keeps the heat in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerard Posted August 20, 2007 Report Share Posted August 20, 2007 Aren't you forbidden from using that charcoal? I'm pretty sure you weren't authorized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNakedWhiz Posted August 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 F*** ME!!! You are right! (Forgive me, but I think one childish outburst in reaction is understandable, lol) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trish Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 F*** ME!!! You are right! (Forgive me, but I think one childish outburst in reaction is understandable, lol) I'd allow at least five....Go for it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curly Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 1 hour' date=' 18 minutes, 340 degrees. I'd say this cooker keeps the heat in.[/quote'] Well, did you ever close the vents? What was the outcome? Who cares? (Just kidding, you know how we are about official TNW stuff ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanny Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Head scratchin I'm still trying to figure out what the goal of the test is. Testing lump? Testing heat retention in the cooker? Just playin at setting things on fire? Waving red flags at bull, to see who pokes at you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curly Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Re: Head scratchin I'm still trying to figure out what the goal of the test is. Testing lump? Testing heat retention in the cooker? Just playin at setting things on fire? Waving red flags at bull, to see who pokes at you? We are never, NEVER to question any of these official tests. We don't have our PHD's in Lump or Ceramics, only the Whiz does. And I think RJ may have an honorary one (But secretely I also wonder) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanny Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Re: Head scratchin We are never, NEVER to question any of these official tests. We don't have our PHD's in Lump or Ceramics, only the Whiz does. ... (But secretely I also wonder) Well, yah, I guess you're right. Never meddle in the affairs of dragons... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trish Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Sanny writes: I'm still trying to figure out what the goal of the test is. It is my impression that there is as much difference in coal characteritics as there are in BBQ characteristics, not just in price, but performance and overall quality. Marketing and labeling are very misleading. Some coal is better for low and slow while other is better for hi-temp grilling. Sometimes you just get a lot of little pieces that are almost useless and a waste of money. I have had the aggravation of buying lump and have it spark like crazy and leave a lot of ash residue on the food and my BBQ. Firewood is rated by its BTU, cost and duration. It makes sense to evaluate the coal we are cooking with so we can purchase for the features we are looking for. While the methodology admittedly is not of the greatest scientific standards, the testers' experience level is significant. Not to mention when TNW gets a result he questions, he repeats the test. TNW is providing experiential opinion on products backed up by usage and standards he has identified as highly relevant. Wine critics are equally subjective opinions based on established evaluation criteria. Food critics are even more subjectively opinionated...not to mention movie critics, but those with reputations have great influence over the product purchases and consumer acceptance. When I read about the structural issues facing the space shuttle Endeavor, I can't help but wonder if RJ has worked on that project. It reflects his special touch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNakedWhiz Posted August 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 The test was comparing in a visual and side by side way, the ash produced by 2003 EC vs 2007 EC. I was just struck that the cooker could get that hot from only 9 pieces of burning EC. And I have a WhD, not a PhD, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firemonkey Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 When I read about the structural issues facing the space shuttle Endeavor, I can't help but wonder if RJ has worked on that project. It reflects his special touch. Which part would he have been involved in?? The sabotage of computers?? The leaking seals?? It surely wasnt the heat shield tiles...they seem to stay attached at far too high of a rate for him to be involved! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trish Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I'm guilty of only half listening and reading....I heard a newscaster mention tiles falling off due to heat issues but I did not listen for temps although I know they must be incredible. I just made this instant association and had a chuckle to myself. Then I spot read an article mentioning crumbling on the underbelly and the words were so close to what someone had written about their kamado that again I had to laugh. Technically there is no real comparison, but the commonality of the issues made me laugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trish Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 After reading TNW's response to Sanny I think I mis-interpretted her question....Sorry Sanny I thought you were questioning the point of testing/evaluating the coal not just the 9 piece test. I need to focus better....especially with the attorney...she might destory me with the cross exam! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porkchop Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 ...she might destory me with the cross exam! i propose a pillow fight! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanny Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 After reading TNW's response to Sanny I think I mis-interpretted her question....Sorry Sanny I thought you were questioning the point of testing/evaluating the coal not just the 9 piece test. I need to focus better....especially with the attorney...she might destory me with the cross exam! My question was what was he testing! Couldn't figger out what he was doin. Now I understand, he's comparing the lump from one to another. Makes sense. Just give me chocolate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trish Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Maybe we can get a chocolate comparison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
