# Chuck Roast first timer



## john pen (Feb 7, 2005)

Well, I think Im gonna try a chuck roast this friday. From what I find here, I assume Im gonna treat it the same as cooking a brisket ? I'm not going to foil till resting time, so when should I pull it out (what temp?)

As far as a rub goes, I was thinking just s/p and garlic. Any other suggestions to add. Im going to use the meat for fijitas I think. Also can I slice it like a brisket or should I plan on shreading ?


----------



## Shawn White (Feb 7, 2005)

I would try to get it to at least 200º internal before removing and I'd shred it. If you want to slice it, I guess somewhere around 170ºF but I  wouldn't do that with chuck myself, too much fat.

You might wish to foil it at some point after 160ºF but personally I don't care for it, I find the meat just too greasy/fatty that way.


----------



## LarryWolfe (Feb 7, 2005)

John,
       Don't wait until resting to foil.  The few I've done have been foiled around 165 with good results.  I've seen a few folks not foil until the meat hit close to 200* and they said they were a bit dry.  Keep in mind that the chuck is a fatty/greasy cut of meat, which is very flavorful but a little on the greasy side.  The next CR I do I will foil closer to 180, to see if it cuts down on the greasiness without drying out too much.  The ones I have done were good, but I think they could have been a little better.  Plan on shredded vs. slicing.  If you are looking for sliced beef, go with a bottom round roast vs. chuck roast.  

I have a couple suggestions for seasoning for you.  I have been using two parts montreal steak seasoning to one part turbinado sugar for CR's and have bee very happy with the flavor.  There are several guys that I have seen use taco seasoning for their CR's for mexican dishes.  I haven't tried that so I can't vouch for it, but it sounds good to me!  Good luck and let us know how it turns out!


----------



## john pen (Feb 7, 2005)

thanks guys...sounds like the general idea is to foil, so I wont fix what isn't broke. 

Anyone ever use Dr. Pepper in any of their cooks ? I thought about it when i read that Jeff said he adds beef broth when he foils. I cooked a prime rib in the oven for hunting camp a few years back (see disclaimer below) and the butcher suggested a blend of Dr. Pepper and beef broth in the bottom. It was excellent. Didn't taste the DP at all, but had great flavor. Thought maby of adding that to beef broth when i foil...

Disclaimer  - the oven was used prior to my smoking habit (or addiction if you ask my wife) and I had no knowledge of the benifits of smoked animal flesh.


----------



## Shawn White (Feb 7, 2005)

> The next CR I do I will foil closer to 180


 that sounds like a good idea Larry, I might give that a go too.

My last CR was over 20 lbs then split in three, unfoiled on for 25.5 hours if I recall right (it was doucmented on this forum but SOMEBODY deleted the thread I think ) and the end result was good but dry. It was cold out and I had some internal temp setbacks. I think it was dry because it was on too long, not for lack of foil. But I will have to do another one unfoiled to be sure.

That gave me the idea to reduce my target temp by the number of degrees lost (to some as yet undetermined maximum). My reasoning is that one has not lost the EFFECTS of the cooking to that point.

I hate opening my WSM to manually check especially when it is cold out so adjusting target temps might be a good way to use the remote therms. I've used the trick twice now and it has worked well.


----------



## Finney (Feb 7, 2005)

I have only done Chuck Rolls, not Chuck Roast... But.  I took them to 200 - 205, then foiled and rested.  There is SOOOO much fat in these things my pan was almost overflowing with fat and more came out during resting.


----------



## Greg Rempe (Feb 7, 2005)

I haven't been all that impressed with the Chuck Roast...not so tasty and a lot of fat!  Would rather do a brisket or a chuck roll instead!


----------



## Woodman1 (Feb 7, 2005)

I never have cooked one either, but it brings a tear to my eye to see you guys all acting mature and workin together! :smt022


----------



## Shawn White (Feb 8, 2005)

Well, ain't that the pot calling the kettle black, eh Christie?


----------



## Finney (Feb 8, 2005)

Shawn White said:
			
		

> Well, ain't that the pot calling the kettle black, eh Christie?


Shawn, Had to read that a couple of time before I got it... :?


----------



## Greg Rempe (Feb 8, 2005)

How disappointed I was to see someone try to turn the thread ugly.  Almost made it!! :roll:


----------



## Finney (Feb 8, 2005)

Greg Rempe said:
			
		

> How disappointed I was to see someone try to turn the thread ugly.  Almost made it!! :roll:



BAD... Bad Susan.   Now we'll have to spank you.  :twisted:


----------



## Greg Rempe (Feb 8, 2005)




----------



## LarryWolfe (Feb 8, 2005)

Greg Rempe said:
			
		

> I haven't been all that impressed with the Chuck Roast...not so tasty and a lot of fat!  Would rather do a brisket or a chuck roll instead!



Greg,
       The Chuck Roast is a smaller piece cut off of the Chuck Roll.  So if you don't care for the Roast you're prolly not gonna care for the Roll!  :-D


----------



## ROB O (Feb 8, 2005)

My 2 cents here I prefer the roast.   Much less fat.


----------



## LarryWolfe (Feb 8, 2005)

Yeah, I've never done an actual Chuck Roll, but the Roasts I've done have been pretty fatty and is much smaller than the Roll.  So I could imagine the roll would be quite fatty.  IMHO, the only advantage to doing the Chuck Roll vs. Chuck Roast is the Roll is much cheaper.


----------



## Captain Morgan (Feb 8, 2005)

I'll be happy to eat your leftover fat if you'll send it to me.


----------



## Finney (Feb 9, 2005)

The roll is much cheaper.  And if you are doing multiple roasts, you will have the same amount of fat.  Or close, anyway.


----------



## Nick Prochilo (Feb 9, 2005)

I've only done 1 of each. The roll was much fattier. They were both good eats. The roll was also a shit load of food, started at 18.75 lbs. The roasts were 7.75 lbs.


----------



## Finney (Feb 9, 2005)

Nick Prochilo said:
			
		

> I've only done 1 of each. The roll was much fattier. They were both good eats. The roll was also a shit load of food, started at 18.75 lbs. The roasts were 7.75 lbs.



But was it more than 2.42 times fattier than your 7.75 lbs roast? :?


----------



## Shawn White (Feb 9, 2005)

Chris Finney said:
			
		

> [quote="Nick Prochilo":1cl30gh8]I've only done 1 of each. The roll was much fattier. They were both good eats. The roll was also a shit load of food, started at 18.75 lbs. The roasts were 7.75 lbs.



But was it more than 2.42 times fattier than your 7.75 lbs roast? :?[/quote:1cl30gh8]

I'll suggest to you guys this is where cutting the chuck roll up allows more to escape from the smaller chunks ,though you may have started with the same amount of fat.


----------



## LarryWolfe (Feb 9, 2005)

Shawn White said:
			
		

> [quote="Chris Finney":272kpri7][quote="Nick Prochilo":272kpri7]I've only done 1 of each. The roll was much fattier. They were both good eats. The roll was also a shit load of food, started at 18.75 lbs. The roasts were 7.75 lbs.



But was it more than 2.42 times fattier than your 7.75 lbs roast? :?[/quote:272kpri7]

I'll suggest to you guys this is where cutting the chuck roll up allows more to escape from the smaller chunks ,though you may have started with the same amount of fat.[/quote:272kpri7]

Shawn has hit the nail on the head!!   :bow:


----------



## Nick Prochilo (Feb 9, 2005)

Chris Finney said:
			
		

> [quote="Nick Prochilo":1a00dcdv]I've only done 1 of each. The roll was much fattier. They were both good eats. The roll was also a shit load of food, started at 18.75 lbs. The roasts were 7.75 lbs.



But was it more than 2.42 times fattier than your 7.75 lbs roast? :?[/quote:1a00dcdv]

One of these days I'll stop and weigh the fat when I'm done. It was a considerable amount more fat, but it was still good.


----------



## Shawn White (Feb 9, 2005)

I remember my first 20+ lb CR. Foiled as per TVWB instructions. Removed from cooker and it was DROWNING in liquid fat. Drain, rest in foil. Open it up, another pool. Squeeze then start pulling, board knife and gloves covered. Meat was all greasy.


----------



## Finney (Feb 10, 2005)

That's why I'm not foiling until it is resting.  Internal temp to 200-205*, off the cooker, into foil.
Still have some in the foil doing it that way.


----------



## Greg Rempe (Feb 10, 2005)

I am wondering to myself if I will actually ever do a CR with all the "greasy" comments here.

Perhaps I will just stick to full packers and have that instead of a roll or roast!  What do you think Woodman!?? :?


----------



## Nick Prochilo (Feb 10, 2005)

Hey Greg, You're gonna be missing a great tasting piece of meat. Much different taste than a brisket. I'll do chuck roasts from now on instead of rolls, much less fat and still great taste. I'll keep doing briskets too, love them also.


----------

