General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Roast Update.

Started by skizi · · Last activity · 17 posts · 896 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
6 February 2006
Last activity
10 February 2006
Original author
skizi
Posts
17
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
896
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–17 of 17
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Hi,

    Thanks for the help with the roast. Unfortunately my internet did not get
    give me any replies until much later in the day. What I did was cover it in
    salt, pepper and garlic then bake it at 375 for an hour. I then turned the
    oven off for 30 minutes and again 375 for 30 to 40 minutes. This was one set
    of instructions, according to a Google search. The meat came out pretty
    good. My husband put in a meat thermometer in after the second baking and
    it was just under 140 so he said it should cook longer. But in the end it
    seemed too well done. I also did not get very much drippings. The roast was
    called a "round roast". It was surrounded by a stretchy netting, which I
    left on while baking. It was supposed to have a fat side according the
    recipe, but it only had a very small area of fat.

    I don't know how a thermometer would help if I had no general idea of time
    per pound. Is there a chart somewhere that says what temperature for medium
    rare?
    I think I would like to try this with a better cut of meat, but maybe my
    meat was fine it is just my method that was bad.

    Thanks again,

    Shari

  2. skizi said:

    Hi,

    Thanks for the help with the roast. Unfortunately my internet did not get
    give me any replies until much later in the day. What I did was cover it in
    salt, pepper and garlic then bake it at 375 for an hour. I then turned the
    oven off for 30 minutes and again 375 for 30 to 40 minutes. This was one set
    of instructions, according to a Google search.

    This is simply silly. Gimmicry disguised as cookery. Consult a reliable
    cookbook instead of an unexamined source like the internet.

    Quoted message said:

    The meat came out pretty
    good. My husband put in a meat thermometer in after the second baking and
    it was just under 140 so he said it should cook longer.

    What degree of doneness did you want? It was already at medium when you
    took the temperature. Your husband was guessing and you didn't know what
    you wanted, so you couldn't make any good decisions about it.

    Quoted message said:

    But in the end it seemed too well done.

    Of course. It was already well past what you wanted and you didn't know it.

    Quoted message said:

    I also did not get very much drippings. The roast was
    called a "round roast".

    Round roasts have very little fat, so no drippings. The other reason is
    that interrupted cooking business. You let the meat cool down (and
    sponsor bacterial growth) when you turned the heat off, so fat wasn't
    rendered.

    Quoted message said:

    It was surrounded by a stretchy netting, which I
    left on while baking. It was supposed to have a fat side according the
    recipe, but it only had a very small area of fat.

    I don't know how a thermometer would help if I had no general idea of time
    per pound.

    Um, you cook to temperature, not time. When it reaches the correct
    temperature, you take it out of the oven. Has nothing to do with time.
    Time per pound is completely unreliable. There are too many variables
    that skew it. The temperature of the meat, the accuracy of the oven, the
    shape of the meat, the desired doneness...

    Let me state it in the absolute: you can't cook by minutes per pound and
    get consistent results. Period.

    Degrees of doneness are technical terms to a chef. Rare means cold red
    center. Med-rare means warm red center. Med means warm pink center.
    Med-well means hot pink center in a narrow band. Well means constant
    color brown throughout.

    Quoted message said:

    Is there a chart somewhere that says what temperature for medium
    rare?

    Beef temperatures listed here are for when you pull them from the oven,
    not the finished temperature. Residual heat in the meat will make the
    temperature rise still further. The roast should be rested before
    carving - at least 15 minutes. Oven temperatures should be no more than
    325, adn they're better at lower temps. Read the stuff at the end of
    this note.

    rare - pull at 120°
    med-rare - pull at 125°
    med - pull at 135°
    med-well - pull at 150°
    Well - pull any time after 170°

    Quoted message said:

    I think I would like to try this with a better cut of meat, but maybe my
    meat was fine it is just my method that was bad.

    The method is just the sort of thing that ignorant home cooks think are
    reasonable culinary techniques. It's needlessly silly. Roasting is a
    constant-heat process, as virtually all cooking processes are.

    I think we've covered enough now. If you want to cook roasts well, you
    need to go do some reading.

    Here's a column I wrote a while back:
    ------------------------------
    Hey, cool down while roasting
    This whole business of what temperature to cook birds and meats at is
    very interesting. Suddenly we hear pronouncements that it’s not safe
    to cook at less than 325 degrees. They say it's hazardous. Right.
    Like it's a new idea, this low-temperature cooking. Some very old
    history in a moment.
    There seem to be factions that break out roughly like this: "Roasting
    at less than 325 degrees is dangerous because of the possibility of
    bacterial contamination" versus "roasting at lower temperatures like 250
    in a conventional oven and 205 in a convection oven results in the
    juiciest roast possible with no real-world hazard."
    Here are facts based on the laws of physics, our current understanding
    of microbiology, politics, and the general contrariness of the human
    race. Let's look at a few obviously connected statements. And some
    less so.

    1. Most surface-borne bacteria are dead by the time the food reaches
    145 degrees at the surface. No matter how the temperature got to 145.
    One complaint is that the meat remains in the "danger zone" of 40 to 140
    degrees too long and, thereby, promotes bacterial growth that could be
    harmful.
    Here's how I look at it. Maybe the bacteria do grow faster in the
    early stages of low temperature roasting. Maybe they do; that hasn’t
    been demonstrated that I know of. But they definitely die by the time
    that the temperature reaches 140. What does it matter if there are 20
    or 200 or 2 million bacteria if they all end up harmlessly dead?
    USDA recommends 145 internal temperature as safe for meats, and at
    least 325 as the oven temp; they're a government agency, you know. They
    do numbers, not flavors.

    2. Those old obsolete meat thermometers that you leave in a roast are
    wrong! Most of them say that 140 is rare. It isn't; it's medium. 125
    to 135 is the range for rare and medium-rare. We should cook meats to
    145 or higher to be safe, we're told. How many people die from eating
    rare roast beef in any given year? Exactly.
    For less than $10 you can pick up a "quick-read" or "instant-read"
    thermometer that you DON'T leave in meats. You poke it in, read the
    temp and take it back out. They're more accurate than the old-style
    leave 'em in thermometers.

    3. Trichina, the little worm parasite in pork and bear meat, among
    others, is dead at a temperature of 140 or more. This should be the
    CENTER temperature of the roast away from bone. At 140, the meat is
    cooked to a medium doneness. It is simply not necessary to cook pork to
    a well-done state unless that's how you like it. The lower the
    temperature after reaching a safe temp, the more moist and tender the
    meat. By the way, pork that has been frozen for a couple weeks is safe
    from trichina. They're dead.

    4. Only ground meats have significant quantities of bacteria inside
    them and that's BECAUSE they've been ground up, thereby exposing the
    surfaces of all the little pieces to contamination from any bacteria
    that may have been on the original meat surface and any that may have
    been in the meat grinder. Ground meats really should be cooked to at
    least medium or 145 degrees at the center.

    5. There are almost never any harmful bacteria within the muscle tissue
    of a reasonably fresh whole roast. Unless it's been punctured and
    bacteria carried inside.

    6. Cooking at lower than 325 degrees has a long, long, long history,
    like: stew, pot roasts and simmered meats (212 or less); steamed meat
    and poultry dishes (no more than 212 degrees); anything moist-cooked
    (braised, for you purists) in those old covered roasters (my mother's
    was black with white spots) and the currently popular clay cookers;
    anything done in a pressure cooker (up to 250); smoked meats and
    Texas-style brisket barbecue (180 degrees! All day long); spit roasting
    where the meat is constantly turned and has a chance to cool before it
    again faces the fire; country pig roasts in an old split oil tank where
    you put the pig at one end and the fire at the other (anywhere from 175
    to 350 degrees); planked fish and meats stood some distance from a fire;
    microwaved foods and probably others you could think of.

    7. There's a whole industry based on low-temperature cooking of meats
    and birds. Several manufacturers make what are called "roaster-holders"
    in the restaurant business. Two of them whose equipment I have used are
    Alto-Shaam and Addington. Most of the roast beef and prime rib you get
    in high-volume restaurants are cooked at less than 250 degrees and then
    held at 140 or less for service in the same unit.
    Restaurants that sell a lot of beef cook prime rib at 225 and hold at
    120. If you order it well done, they cut off a slice, drop it into hot
    beef juice to cook further and finish it on their grill. One of the
    standard ways in the restaurant business.
    Same business with chickens. Low temp roasts make for heavier, juicier
    birds that can be held for longer in the heat cabinet. Customers get
    nice moist chicken, the restaurant has a longer holding time. Everybody
    wins.
    The other main reason for low-temperature cooking besides taste is that
    you lose less of the weight of the meat this way; the "yield" is
    greater. Same amount of protein, just more moisture. Juice.

    8. We live in a society that is litigious; we fight, we call out the
    lawyers. Splash a container of coffee on yourself? Sue McDonald's
    where it was purchased and (incomprehensibly) win! Manufacturers,
    sellers and government agencies are justifiably eager not to be sued and
    will therefore offer the safest, potentially least troublesome
    instruction for the handling of products. Even if it results in a
    somewhat diminished product quality; at least they won't be sued by even
    the most far-fetched crank. Yes, I know. I don't have to like it, either.
    Enough of this. How to cook meats and birds; one man's way that has
    worked for decades and fed probably over 100,000 diners. If you don't
    like this way, why, don't use it. It's only lunch, not world peace.
    For roasts of beef, pork, lamb... you know, the chunks of meat to
    carve. And for roasts of birds. I do it either of two ways, depending
    on the type of oven.
    Conventional ovens, the ones found in most home stoves, I set to 250
    degrees. And I take the roast out at 125 degrees internal temperature
    because I like it on the red side. If you want it more done, just leave
    it in longer. Not exactly rocket science.
    Birds I cook until the temperature in the thigh is about 160. It's
    supremely moist and tender. There will still be a little pinkness at
    the bones because of how poultry is being raised and slaughtered these
    days. There’s nothing wrong with it; the birds are younger and that’s
    how it’ll be from now on. And if you brine them, they’re even better.
    Forget that business about cooking birds to 180 or even higher. It has
    no value for any safety issues and I guarantee it’ll dry out the meat.
    Let me repeat that: No value for any safety issue. The meat is
    perfectly safe at considerably lower temperatures. That old business
    about cooking birds to that very well done state most likely had
    everything to do with making sure the stuffing was cooked and safe. And
    not anything about moistness and flavor.
    I very emphatically try to discourage people from stuffing birds for
    one simple reason: if you cook it to the point where the stuffing is
    done, the bird is overdone. Instead, I suggest cooking dressing in a
    separate casserole or baking dish. That way, you can even have several
    kinds. Stuffing birds is a bad idea if you want the meat moist and the
    stuffing cooked to a safe temperature.
    Now, if you like a brown crust on roasts or birds, just finish it at
    325 for about 15 minutes or turn on the broiler (and stay right there
    and watch to make sure it doesn't burn. It doesn't add anything much to
    internal temperature, just browns the outside. The result is a roast
    with almost no pan drippings so your gravy needs to come from somewhere
    else. The moisture that would have ended up in the pan is still in the
    meat. This is juicy stuff.
    For a convection oven, I follow manufacturer's suggestions that you
    cook at lower temperature than conventional ovens. So instead of 250, I
    do it at 205. These ovens will give a nice, brown outside, even at
    these low temps. Still no pan juices to speak of. Let the roast sit
    outside the oven for at least 15 minutes before carving to let the
    juices redistribute themselves throughout the meat.
    In summary, then. Roast at low temperatures for tender, moist roasts.
    Use a modern, "quick-read" thermometer for accurate results. Make a
    good stock for gravy from old bones and trimmings or buy some. Enjoy
    yourself; you only get to try this life once.

  3. In article <[email hidden]>,

    skizi said:

    Hi,

    Thanks for the help with the roast. Unfortunately my internet did not get
    give me any replies until much later in the day. What I did was cover it in
    salt, pepper and garlic then bake it at 375 for an hour. I then turned the
    oven off for 30 minutes and again 375 for 30 to 40 minutes. This was one set
    of instructions, according to a Google search. The meat came out pretty
    good. My husband put in a meat thermometer in after the second baking and
    it was just under 140 so he said it should cook longer. But in the end it
    seemed too well done. I also did not get very much drippings. The roast was
    called a "round roast". It was surrounded by a stretchy netting, which I
    left on while baking. It was supposed to have a fat side according the
    recipe, but it only had a very small area of fat.

    I don't know how a thermometer would help if I had no general idea of time
    per pound. Is there a chart somewhere that says what temperature for medium
    rare?
    I think I would like to try this with a better cut of meat, but maybe my
    meat was fine it is just my method that was bad.

    Thanks again,

    Shari

    Join rec.food.cooking

    They know all about this stuff. :-)

    I'm still learning about meat thermometers myself......
    --
    Om.

    "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

  4. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Bob (this one) said:

    rare - pull at 120°
    med-rare - pull at 125°
    med - pull at 135°
    med-well - pull at 150°
    Well - pull any time after 170°

    Thanks for this!
    I will save it for myself as well.

    Will the 170 also work for pork roast?

    I like my beef rare, but pork needs to be at least med-well!
    --
    Om.

    "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

  5. Your roast "recipe" reminds me of the old "How to cook a salmon in
    your dishwasher". Seriously, its a true recipe but such a pain in the
    butt. The best roast IMHO is a well seasoned & slow roasted ( in an
    open pan) prime rib

    Laureen

    skizi said:

    Hi,

    Thanks for the help with the roast. Unfortunately my internet did not get
    give me any replies until much later in the day. What I did was cover it in
    salt, pepper and garlic then bake it at 375 for an hour. I then turned the
    oven off for 30 minutes and again 375 for 30 to 40 minutes. This was one set
    of instructions, according to a Google search. The meat came out pretty
    good. My husband put in a meat thermometer in after the second baking and
    it was just under 140 so he said it should cook longer. But in the end it
    seemed too well done. I also did not get very much drippings. The roast was
    called a "round roast". It was surrounded by a stretchy netting, which I
    left on while baking. It was supposed to have a fat side according the
    recipe, but it only had a very small area of fat.

    I don't know how a thermometer would help if I had no general idea of time
    per pound. Is there a chart somewhere that says what temperature for medium
    rare?
    I think I would like to try this with a better cut of meat, but maybe my
    meat was fine it is just my method that was bad.

    Thanks again,

    Shari

  6. not much fat in a ROUND ROAST.................................

    --

    rosie
    http://img58.imageshack.us/my.php?image=impeach9xh.gif

    "skizi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Hi,

    Thanks for the help with the roast. Unfortunately my internet did not get
    give me any replies until much later in the day. What I did was cover it
    in salt, pepper and garlic then bake it at 375 for an hour. I then turned
    the oven off for 30 minutes and again 375 for 30 to 40 minutes. This was
    one set of instructions, according to a Google search. The meat came out
    pretty good. My husband put in a meat thermometer in after the second
    baking and it was just under 140 so he said it should cook longer. But in
    the end it seemed too well done. I also did not get very much drippings.
    The roast was called a "round roast". It was surrounded by a stretchy
    netting, which I left on while baking. It was supposed to have a fat side
    according the recipe, but it only had a very small area of fat.

    I don't know how a thermometer would help if I had no general idea of
    time per pound. Is there a chart somewhere that says what temperature for
    medium rare?
    I think I would like to try this with a better cut of meat, but maybe my
    meat was fine it is just my method that was bad.

    Thanks again,

    Shari

  7. In article <[email hidden]>,

    OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    Bob (this one) said:

    rare - pull at 120°
    med-rare - pull at 125°
    med - pull at 135°
    med-well - pull at 150°
    Well - pull any time after 170°

    Thanks for this!
    I will save it for myself as well.

    Will the 170 also work for pork roast?

    I like my beef rare, but pork needs to be at least med-well!

    I like my pork at the pinkish end of beige and still juicy.

    Priscilla

  8. x-no-archive: yes

    Priscilla H. Ballou said:

    I like my pork at the pinkish end of beige and still juicy.

    Priscilla

    Pork is so lean these days, that I find anything above an internal temp
    of 155-160 gets dried out. Pinkish/beige works for me.

    Susan

  9. OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    Bob (this one) said:

    rare - pull at 120°
    med-rare - pull at 125°
    med - pull at 135°
    med-well - pull at 150°
    Well - pull any time after 170°

    Thanks for this!
    I will save it for myself as well.

    This assumes low-temperature roasting. If your oven is higher than about
    275°, drop these numbers a couple degrees.

    Quoted message said:

    Will the 170 also work for pork roast?

    I like my beef rare, but pork needs to be at least med-well!

    It doesn't *need* to be med-well. The only reason my mother cooked pork
    to a uniform grayness back in the 50's was to be sure that trichina,
    tiny parasitic worms, were killed. They're dead by the time the meat has
    reached 140° - medium at finished temperature. American pork is very
    safe nowadays, if a little too lean. Cooked much above 150°, it eats
    like styrofoam unless you lard and bard it.

    Pork cooked to 145° finished temp (pull at 138° or so) is moist and
    tender. Yesterday, while the ribs were cooking for the game, I also did
    a pork roast. Bought one of those wonderful boneless loins from Costco,
    cut it in half, pressed the two halves together and tied it into a
    roast. Did it to 135° and it rose to 147° before starting to drop.
    Marvelous.

    At the bottom of the container I chilled it in, there's a gelled bit of
    slightly pink juice. Everything we've all been told about cooking pork
    came alert the first time I did this - maybe 30 years ago. I was
    nervous. Called a food scientist I know and asked about it. He laughed
    at me. He said I *knew* that it was safe because the temperature said
    so. He invited himself over for sliced pork sandwiches. We ate together.

    Pastorio

  10. "Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    It doesn't *need* to be med-well. The only reason my mother cooked pork to
    a uniform grayness back in the 50's was to be sure that trichina, tiny
    parasitic worms, were killed. They're dead by the time the meat has
    reached 140° - medium at finished temperature. American pork is very safe
    nowadays, if a little too lean.

    On "Emeril Live" today (episode 126) it was pointed out that the last known
    case of trichinosis in the US was something like 60 years ago.

    --
    Bob
    http://www.kanyak.com

  11. Opinicus said:

    "Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    It doesn't *need* to be med-well. The only reason my mother cooked pork to
    a uniform grayness back in the 50's was to be sure that trichina, tiny
    parasitic worms, were killed. They're dead by the time the meat has
    reached 140° - medium at finished temperature. American pork is very safe
    nowadays, if a little too lean.

    On "Emeril Live" today (episode 126) it was pointed out that the last known
    case of trichinosis in the US was something like 60 years ago.

    Last known case of trichinosis *from commercial pork* was back then.
    Several since from wild meats - bears, etc.

    Pastorio

  12. "Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Um, you cook to temperature, not time. When it reaches the correct
    temperature, you take it out of the oven. Has nothing to do with time.
    Time per pound is completely unreliable. There are too many variables that
    skew it. The temperature of the meat, the accuracy of the oven, the shape
    of the meat, the desired doneness...

    Let me state it in the absolute: you can't cook by minutes per pound and
    get consistent results. Period.


    You can call me dence here, but if you don't have a time how do you plan
    dinner? If you want to eat at 7 and the meat has to come out at 6:45 then
    you have to have some idea about what time to put it in the oven. (Please
    don't pull your hair out for this one, nor yell obsenities) If I am cooking
    it at such a low tempreture, why not just coook it in a crock pot?

    Quoted message said:

    rare - pull at 120°
    med-rare - pull at 125°
    med - pull at 135°
    med-well - pull at 150°
    Well - pull any time after 170°

    Thanks for the chart.

    Shari

    Quoted message said:


    ..

  13. skizi said:

    "Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    Um, you cook to temperature, not time. When it reaches the correct
    temperature, you take it out of the oven. Has nothing to do with time.
    Time per pound is completely unreliable. There are too many variables that
    skew it. The temperature of the meat, the accuracy of the oven, the shape
    of the meat, the desired doneness...

    Let me state it in the absolute: you can't cook by minutes per pound and
    get consistent results. Period.

    You can call me dence here, but if you don't have a time how do you plan
    dinner?

    You plan it for a *range of time* rather than an exact time. Maybe start
    with a salad and some nice bread and butter. A little conversation.
    Glass of wine. Slow down and savor the food. Enjoy the company.

    Quoted message said:

    If you want to eat at 7 and the meat has to come out at 6:45 then
    you have to have some idea about what time to put it in the oven.

    Roasts should always rest for at least 20 minutes - and 1/2 hour is
    better - before carving. That gives you a margin of error from the time
    the meat is ready until it's time to eat it. If the meat you're carving
    is steaming, you didn't let it rest long enough.

    The food tells you when to eat, not the clock. If it's mandatory that
    the meat come out at 6:45, or any exact time like that, then I can't
    help you. You want something to microwave that tells you how much time
    to heat it.

    Having *some* idea is different than having an exact time. And that time
    estimate will still be subject to many variables. The temperature of the
    meat when you put it into the oven, the size of the roast, the shape of
    the roast, the desired degree of doneness, and the accuracy of your oven
    thermostat will all be variables. The only way to be able to estimate
    with any degree of accuracy is to cook in your kitchen they way you do
    it and see.

    Quoted message said:

    (Please
    don't pull your hair out for this one, nor yell obsenities) If I am cooking
    it at such a low tempreture, why not just cook it in a crock pot?

    I'm truly sorry here, and I'm trying to be gentle. You just don't know
    much about cooking. And my patience is about gone. Since you don't
    understand the difference between roasting in an oven and cooking in a
    crockpot, you and I don't really have common ground from which to
    discuss the subject, and I'm unwilling to teach you these most basic of
    culinary matters. My very sincere suggestion is to buy a good cookbook
    that includes a section on cooking techniques and read it.

    Pastorio

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    rare - pull at 120°
    med-rare - pull at 125°
    med - pull at 135°
    med-well - pull at 150°
    Well - pull any time after 170°

    Thanks for the chart.

    Shari

  14. Bob (this one) said:

    You plan it for a *range of time* rather than an exact time. Maybe start
    with a salad and some nice bread and butter. A little conversation.
    Glass of wine. Slow down and savor the food. Enjoy the company.

    You can't plan for even a *range* of times if simply told to use a meat
    thermometer. This person was a newbie to doing a roast and was just
    told to use a thermometer. I mean... she doesn't know if it's going to
    be 20 minutes or 12 hours.

    And you *do* need an idea what kind of timing, else you can't cook
    anything else with the meal

    It seems to me that it's perfectly appropriate to give replies in the
    minutes/lb range with the explanation of why to use a thermometer for
    best results.

    And it gives a rule of thumb for someone needing an answer *now* as
    apparently this person did, even if it isn't the *best* answer. I
    mean, while I like beef roasts medium-rare, I'd personally rather eat
    one well-done than no dinner at all.

    Amusing story... when I was in the OP's position, having just moved out
    on my own and having bought a roast, but not yet having a good
    cookbook... I called my grandmother, who always cooked the worst, most
    dried-out, overcooked roasts in history. I asked her how long to cook
    a roast, and she gave me an answer in minutes/pound. I cut the answer
    in half and got a perfect roast my first time.

  15. Quoted message said:
    Bob (this one) said:

    You plan it for a *range of time* rather than an exact time. Maybe start
    with a salad and some nice bread and butter. A little conversation.
    Glass of wine. Slow down and savor the food. Enjoy the company.

    You can't plan for even a *range* of times if simply told to use a meat
    thermometer. This person was a newbie to doing a roast and was just
    told to use a thermometer. I mean... she doesn't know if it's going to
    be 20 minutes or 12 hours.

    Agreed. She apparently has no cookbooks. And doesn't know how to Google
    for recipes, a few of which factored together could give her a wide
    range. Not immediately useful, but enough to get a sense of it.

    But she wanted it to be ready at an exact time to serve 15 minutes
    later. I told her that isn't possible if that same sort of exactitude in
    doneness is also a factor. So it's either exact time or desired quality.

    Quoted message said:

    And you *do* need an idea what kind of timing, else you can't cook
    anything else with the meal

    That's the point of my telling her to go read a bit about it. With *no*
    idea, *everything* becomes guesswork.

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me that it's perfectly appropriate to give replies in the
    minutes/lb range with the explanation of why to use a thermometer for
    best results.

    Perhaps, but the range is rather wide and not ever going to offer the
    precision she was looking for.

    Quoted message said:

    And it gives a rule of thumb for someone needing an answer *now* as
    apparently this person did, even if it isn't the *best* answer. I
    mean, while I like beef roasts medium-rare, I'd personally rather eat
    one well-done than no dinner at all.

    We don't agree on that. I'd rather eat earlier or later and have it at
    least close to I'd like it.

    But, more to the point, I wouldn't buy something I had no idea how to
    prepare, with a four hour, tight deadline, and *then* try to find out
    how to cook it. That's why I suggested she postpone it for another day
    and get more info. Her subsequent report on how it went certainly
    demonstrated that it would have been better to have done that.

    Quoted message said:

    Amusing story... when I was in the OP's position, having just moved out
    on my own and having bought a roast, but not yet having a good
    cookbook... I called my grandmother, who always cooked the worst, most
    dried-out, overcooked roasts in history. I asked her how long to cook
    a roast, and she gave me an answer in minutes/pound. I cut the answer
    in half and got a perfect roast my first time.

    Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. Has worked for me more than
    once.

    Pastorio

  16. Bob (this one) said:
    Quoted message said:

    And it gives a rule of thumb for someone needing an answer *now* as
    apparently this person did, even if it isn't the *best* answer. I
    mean, while I like beef roasts medium-rare, I'd personally rather eat
    one well-done than no dinner at all.

    We don't agree on that. I'd rather eat earlier or later and have it at
    least close to I'd like it.

    It depends on how hungry I am... and how far away the store with the
    meat thermometer is. 😉

    Quoted message said:

    But, more to the point, I wouldn't buy something I had no idea how to
    prepare, with a four hour, tight deadline, and *then* try to find out
    how to cook it. That's why I suggested she postpone it for another day
    and get more info. Her subsequent report on how it went certainly
    demonstrated that it would have been better to have done that.

    Well, not with a deadline, no. And today there is Google, unlike when
    I was 16 and trying to figure out how to cook a roast by asking my
    grandmother and adjusting her instructions by taking into account that
    her roasts were awful. 😉

    I bought a copy of Joy of Cooking shortly after that. I don't want a
    new edition, but my current copy has entirely disintegrated. I *keep*
    discovering new stuff in it.

    And Google is the greatest cookbook in the entire world. Still, I'd
    never give up my JoC, it's been with me for decades now...

    But I *do* buy things without any freaking idea what I'm going to do
    with them. I have an 18-lb tenderloin defrosted in the fridge now.
    When I bought it, I had no idea what the hell I was going to do with it
    - just that it was a really good deal that I couldn't pass up. We're
    not real big on pork around here, except the cured kinds. But... I
    figured I'd figure out what I was doing with it later.

    I found a nice collection of recipes to try via Google. And now this
    group has an entire thread on tenderloin going too... so tomorrow will
    be a mega-try-new-recipes-day for me.

    Heck, I sometimes buy things that I don't even know what they *are* - I
    love experimenting. I'd have never discovered portabella mushrooms or
    mesclun mix or radicchio otherwise - foods which have become some of my
    favorites - as I didn't grow up eating these things!

  17. Here's another recipe I make with leftover (already cooked) pork roast. The
    original recipe is for veal but it works very well with pork. I have added
    the nutrition information.

    VEAL GOULASH

    4 cups diced leftover veal 1296 cal, fat 80g, prot. 144g
    2 cups thinly sliced onion 122 cal, carb 28g, fiber 6g, prot. 4g
    1/4 cup butter 400 cal, fat 44,
    1 T paprika 20 cal, carb 4g, fiber 1g
    1/2 t thyme
    1 t Kitchen Bouquet, 4 cal, 1 carb
    2 cups beef bouillon 4 cal, 1 carb
    1/2 cup dry white wine 4 cal, 1 g carb
    Guar or Xanthan gum to thicken (original was 3 T flour)
    (hot buttered noodles for non-lowcarbers)

    Saute onion in butter for 5 minutes. Add veal, paprika, thyme and
    Kitchen Bouquet. Cook for 10 minutes, stirring frequently. Mix bouillon
    and wine with flour and add slowly to veal mixture. Cook, stirring
    constantly, until thickened. For gum substitutes I add the liquids, then
    sprinkle on gum and stir until desired thickness. Serve over noodles or
    desired substitute. Serves 4-6.

    Total for recipe, 1864 cals, fat 124g, carb 35 (less fiber 7-net 28),
    protein 152

    In news:[email hidden],
    [email hidden] <[email hidden]> stated

    | Well, not with a deadline, no. And today there is Google, unlike when
    | I was 16 and trying to figure out how to cook a roast by asking my
    | grandmother and adjusting her instructions by taking into account that
    | her roasts were awful. 😉
    |
    | I bought a copy of Joy of Cooking shortly after that. I don't want a
    | new edition, but my current copy has entirely disintegrated. I *keep*
    | discovering new stuff in it.
    |
    | And Google is the greatest cookbook in the entire world. Still, I'd
    | never give up my JoC, it's been with me for decades now...
    |
    | But I *do* buy things without any freaking idea what I'm going to do
    | with them. I have an 18-lb tenderloin defrosted in the fridge now.
    | When I bought it, I had no idea what the hell I was going to do with
    | it - just that it was a really good deal that I couldn't pass up.
    | We're not real big on pork around here, except the cured kinds.
    | But... I figured I'd figure out what I was doing with it later.
    |
    | I found a nice collection of recipes to try via Google. And now this
    | group has an entire thread on tenderloin going too... so tomorrow will
    | be a mega-try-new-recipes-day for me.
    |
    | Heck, I sometimes buy things that I don't even know what they *are* -
    | I love experimenting. I'd have never discovered portabella mushrooms
    | or mesclun mix or radicchio otherwise - foods which have become some
    | of my favorites - as I didn't grow up eating these things!

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.