Pellet Fan
All Things Considered => General Discussion--Food Related => Topic started by: LowSlowJoe on September 22, 2017, 07:18:16 AM
-
Bentley,
From my own attempts to performance test grills that I have owned, I know that temperature probe placement can dramatically effect the readings recorded. Can you speak directly about how you go about choosing your probe placement when you do your tests? and would you consider giving measurements that show how far from the front/back/sides the probes are located when your tests are conducted?
-
I always tried to cover the sweet spot of the grill, that was usually 4 inches in from the 4 corners. It is also difficult to show a units Performance when the unit is designed to have "something" in it. Air and heat do different things when they meet obstructions. It was suggested once that we use a pan of water for a load, but Larry was a trained engineer at the beginning of his career, so it was decided to do it the way we do now. One of the reason we cooked too, is to show that usually a 15-20° difference has no bearing on a cook.
-
I think what you have done has fairly represented the situation on the grills you've tested in the past. And it is done consistently. .... I mean this could get out of hand, and is there really a need for it? Your biscuit test was good enough for me, and as stated, a 15-20 degree difference has no bearing on a typical cook. But, capacity and capability I think are more important to most people.
-
I think what you have done has fairly represented the situation on the grills you've tested in the past. And it is done consistently. .... I mean this could get out of hand, and is there really a need for it? Your biscuit test was good enough for me, and as stated, a 15-20 degree difference has no bearing on a typical cook. But, capacity and capability I think are more important to most people.
Before I knew much about cooking on a pellet grill, I used to think that 15-20 degree swing difference in temps was a big deal. But, I was only looking at the controller temp too, and did not have a grill grate temp being measured. In fact, the consistency on performance tests of other grills led me to buy 2 of them.
I'm not saying it is right, wrong, or indifferent. I guess I am saying that depending upon one's length of experience using a pellet grill to recognize it doesn't matter, it could be perceived there is a benefit to consistent temps or a negative for swings in temps or a benefit to swings in temps because it is perceived it creates more smokes.
-
Bar-B Lew,
My point was that testing a cooker IS a lot of work for Bentley. And, respectfully to the poster, when I see
"Can you speak directly about how you go about choosing your probe placement when you do your tests? and would you consider giving measurements that show how far from the front/back/sides the probes are located when your tests are conducted?"
I think the request is way off base and time consuming. The exercise isn't about "How would you conduct a test of a pellet grill." .... it's about testing the grill itself, and that includes more than the temperatures 1" from the corners of the unit. The biscuit test should answer a lot about how even it cooks. People are more interested in things like capacity, durability and features in an effort to make an evaluation and a buying decision. .... And I believe that is why the manufacturer supplied the unit to be tested. .... But then again, maybe that's just me.
-
Bar-B Lew,
My point was that testing a cooker IS a lot of work for Bentley. And, respectfully to the poster, when I see
"Can you speak directly about how you go about choosing your probe placement when you do your tests? and would you consider giving measurements that show how far from the front/back/sides the probes are located when your tests are conducted?"
I think the request is way off base and time consuming. The exercise isn't about "How would you conduct a test of a pellet grill." .... it's about testing the grill itself, and that includes more than the temperatures 1" from the corners of the unit. The biscuit test should answer a lot about how even it cooks. People are more interested in things like capacity, durability and features in an effort to make an evaluation and a buying decision. .... And I believe that is why the manufacturer supplied the unit to be tested. .... But then again, maybe that's just me.
Queball, perhaps, you misunderstand my questioning... What I was trying to ask, is there a method to choosing the distance... Like does it vary depending on the size of the cooking surface, ( some percentage of the total grate surface , or always a fixed number ). All I want is clarification, and I don't think this is a unreasonable question. I thought one of the points of these, were to try and get some consistency in the testing methods, etc...
In all honesty, I'm very offended that you suggest my question was or is way off base.
-
Don't be offended LSJ .... Life's too short. My point is that the point of testing the cooker, is to test the cooker, not to get absorbed in technical methodology. You're into all of that. .... As an average buyer, do I care where the probes are? ... No. .... Do I care that as a potential purchaser that the unit cooks fairly evenly.... Yes. ... and a simple biscuit test should give some indication of that. .... To me, that type of inquiry, which you're interested in, is better served in a post about "Ways and methods to test a pellet grill" and then those that want to have that discussion can do so..
-
Queball, I don't disagree with your rational. I guess what I was getting at is that there is no scientific way to test the grills to my knowledge. I feel it could be very subjective (the type of test that could be run) and the interpretation by someone reading the results may differ from person to person. Like my interpretation of the performance of my Traeger versus test results of a Memphis and a MAK.
At the end of the day, consistency from test to test across pits is all that I am interested in seeing, and I feel that Bentley bends over backwards to try to ensure that happens. I applaud him for that.
I am also interested in grill features and controller features. Bentley does a great job identifying them, and I think the members of the forum do a great job of asking questions too.
I think as long as the standards established for the tests are identified by Bentley and that they stay consistent from pit to pit as best as they can are what is important. I feel that is being accomplished here.
Now...I am looking forward to seeing the cooks. :bbq:
-
Bar-B-Lew,
Couldn't say it better myself. ...... I also am looking forward to when the cooking starts. ...... I just wonder if there will be a "Bar-B-Que-Lew-Ball method" cook included in the field test? .... That should put the test over the top!
Hope all is going well in Chicago.
-
I'm a technical guy, I like data, I like to know methods and procedures, I like consistency and things that resemble science. Even with my cooking, I often treat it like an experiment. So I sometimes like to ask for technical information.
-
I'm a technical guy, I like data, I like to know methods and procedures, I like consistency and things that resemble science. Even with my cooking, I often treat it like an experiment. So I sometimes like to ask for technical information.
There is nothing wrong with that approach. But this subject has two sides. We received a message from a very experienced pellet cook who has great posts and insights and is no slouch in knowing pits and cooking on them. He encouraged Bentley to get away from trying to be objective and technical. In essence, his point was there was a lot of that type of info available on pits if people wanted to search it out and these tests should be more subjective and, I think, sexy (not his term, mine).
Bent doesn't really want to be subjective, and wants some technical aspects. But I think also that there are a lot of folks who are not as into technical detail and want a bit of a different view (kind of like the car thread -- there are guys on that speaking another language that makes my eyes glaze over and then there is a picture and I perk up and say "Oh, what a pretty red car!"). So, it is a balance that probably doesn't meet all needs, but I think checks a lot of boxes for most folks.
-
This was Larry's idea and I always hated it. Larry was a very good man, but he had just the slightest bias towards Cookshack, for the most part, it never showed, I mean I think he never used the site publicly to profit...what happen in Private, I have no idea, I hope he made a boat load...But back to bias...JaJaJa
I remember after a few PT seeing that Cookshack was in 1st position, no problem, it had been like GMG, Memphis, Louisiana Grills...Then came Blaz'n...I put it above Cookshack...Negative, that was changed and I got the message!
The biscuit test...and you two have a PG500, so you will get this. It was as if he was going to show that the other units would not cook like a 500 or a 1000. He would take them biscuits, put them all over, but make sure that you get some in that gap between the front and the back and that grease tray...Well, what do you think is gonna happen to those biscuits? Was never a test I appreciated, but will be happy to do it as long as members & Gusest understand, I aint cookin any in the gap!
Your biscuit test was good enough for me...
I do not think it is, but I do not know. This stuff is way past me. Kristin has informed Camp Chef that there are question being asked we cannot answer...will see if they come on to answer them?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the Camp Chef controller is PID based setup... But maybe I should ask Bentley directly... Does the Camp Chef Woodwind control the output of the combustion fan depending on temperature fluctuations, or is the fan on constantly?.
The end of December 2009, right before I started to Performance Test that Daniel Boone, I would have laughed at you if you would have said this...Man, I was as good as any Underwriters Laboratory, and you were about to see it...Well, about 2 PT latter I realized it could be a scientific test, but I was not a scientist and I did not have a multi-million dollar research facility. That is when I tried to make the tests as Objective as possible, run them in as controled an environment as I could and try and do it like an average Joe like me was gonna use it!
I guess what I was getting at is that there is no scientific way to test the grills to my knowledge.
-
I've never seen anyone else on the Internet performance test a pellet grill, or any other grill as throughly and unbiased as Larry and you. I like the balance of technical and cooking... pút it all together and people can make up there own mind what to think. To me, consisitncy is good... do it as close to the same way as possible each time. That's why I like that you've been standardizing the temperatures being tested and such.
-
I'm a technical guy, I like data, I like to know methods and procedures, I like consistency and things that resemble science. Even with my cooking, I often treat it like an experiment. So I sometimes like to ask for technical information.
There is nothing wrong with that approach. But this subject has two sides. We received a message from a very experienced pellet cook who has great posts and insights and is no slouch in knowing pits and cooking on them. He encouraged Bentley to get away from trying to be objective and technical. In essence, his point was there was a lot of that type of info available on pits if people wanted to search it out and these tests should be more subjective and, I think, sexy (not his term, mine).
Bent doesn't really want to be subjective, and wants some technical aspects. But I think also that there are a lot of folks who are not as into technical detail and want a bit of a different view (kind of like the car thread -- there are guys on that speaking another language that makes my eyes glaze over and then there is a picture and I perk up and say "Oh, what a pretty red car!"). So, it is a balance that probably doesn't meet all needs, but I think checks a lot of boxes for most folks.
Not sure if you were referring to my comments in this thread or you got another message
https://pelletfan.com/index.php?topic=239.msg1699#msg1699
I do think that the hard data is what sets you apart from the average Joe doing reviews, so definitely wouldn't change that. I would just like to see a little personality infused into the final judgment. After 15 or 20 performance tests, we all just kind of start to look like...
(https://i.imgur.com/RqUecUol.png)
-
Your comments were posted before his FMT, so maybe inspired him. But the sense I got is that folks like to see how a pit cooks. Now pictures can only show so much, but its like the picture of the red car for me, I am just more drawn to it. Bent, on the other hand likes the lift thing so he can change the oil!
-
Well, here ya' go, Kristin.
I don't agree. I don't think Bentley should move away from objectivity and technical aspects in his evaluations and be more subjective and sexy. I'm not particularly interested in opinions. I think that you're just another person with an opinion if you don't have data, and opinions don't really prove anything.
Now—if he would say, "Based on the stellar performance in the XXX test I think that this pit is your best choice if you primarily bake breads and soufflés or cook Beef Wellingtton" then that's an opinion that I'll consider.
I always preferred Bentley's objective performance evaluations. He would write, "Here's what that pit did on the XXX test. Here's what it did on the YYY test." Then someone would ask, "Do you think would...?" Bentley would answer something like, "That's an opinion. I'm not publishing opinions. I'm publishing test results, you can form your own opinions."
Bentley, don't move far from that position.
-
I believe you need to decide who your target viewer is, and focus your presentation in that direction. If you're making this evaluation for a group of highly experienced pellet grill owners who have multiple , high end units, who already understand what are the critical operational elements of a cooker ...... Then you are succeeding! ..... Now, if you are attempting to illustrate the pro's and cons of this manufacturer's cooker to a bunch of lurkers out there that are currently cooking on gas or charcoal, but are considering moving towards pellets, ... well that's another story. I was a "Nubie" once and had no knowledge or experience. I looked at cooker reviews to see what would work for my situation and needs. But I also looked for input from an experienced person. ..... "I'm not publishing opinions, I'm publishing test results. You can form your own opinion". Well, that's great! for the group mentioned above, except, if you are a novice and know nothing about it, you might value the opinion from someone who does. And opinions aren't bad, if they are based on fact and experience, unless you're afraid you're going to upset the manufacturer by something you said. If that's the case, why do a review. To me, a review, based on fact should put the viewer in the picture of using the machine. .... Much of that critical information is located on the first page of the review. Do I need to see 3 graphs of pellet usage , or do I need to know, that at the set points listed in the review, that the pellet consumption is x,y, z. AND more importantly I need an opinion, based on the reviewers knowledge, as to whether that consumption is good or average, or bad for that class of machine. Again it all depends who you are trying to reach or who you are trying to amuse. If you are looking to bring new people into pellet cooking then put the viewer in the picture. Kristin calls it sexy, FMT says add personality, basically bring enthusiasm and interest to the presentation. You are a respected voice and you have the podium. ... Why not use it.
-
+1 Queball
-
Pmillen, I don't see it as moving away from objectivity, but adding a different layer. But that could be my training. As a litigator, you are taught you gather the facts. Whether presenting the facts to a judge or a jury, you present everything -- good, bad -- because you don't want them to find out about the bad fact from someone else and lose your credibility. You also need to know the law, i.e. the technical stuff. But then you take the facts and the law and argue your case -- this is the persuasive element and how a good lawyer wins.
Do I recognize a difference in these tests? Yes, there is no client, there is no winning or losing.
But Queball has a valid point about some of the tests. His example of pellet consumption is a good one. Ex. --fact, X pit consumes 1 lb an hour at 350 degrees. Great. That is a fact. Now is that good, bad, average? I don't know. I have never paid attention. It might be nice to know. If Bent says, that is average consumption based on my experience that is an opinion. So some would say, in an objective test, he should not offer that opinion, let the reader form their own. But, even though I have been around these tests for years, I could not tell you if that would be good or bad or average, so some guidance would be nice and not out of line. Will it make a difference in whether a person buys a pit? Maybe. But on the other hand, I understand Yoders can be pellet hogs and that does not deter people. They just have that info and factor it in.
Let's just say Bent posts the salmon cook with the pic and the basic of how he cooks it. It looks bad. It tasted bad. It was not what he normally does with salmon. Say he doesn't make his posts about how he thinks maybe he did something wrong in how he cooked the salmon and gets some feed back. Along comes someone like me and looks at that picture and doesn't understand the whole cooking process and that things were done different this time and I think one of two things "That guy doesn't know how to use a pit, why pay attention to anything he does" or "Man, what an awful cook, that pit must not be good for certain foods". It is Bentley's subjective comments on how he cooked the fish that give some context.
So, like I said earlier, to me, it is a balance.
-
Food for thought... is pellet more consumption good or bad? I've heard at least one person argue that more pellet consumption means more smoke... and more smoke flavor.
-
Nothing wrong with your discussion, it is quite good! You were just messing up my gig and I could not have that!
-
good idea this thread should stand on its own
-
Food for thought... is pellet more consumption good or bad? I've heard at least one person argue that more pellet consumption means more smoke... and more smoke flavor.
You make a good point -- so maybe the terms aren't good, bad, average but high, low, average. People can make a determination if high consumption is good or bad.
-
Food for thought... is pellet more consumption good or bad? I've heard at least one person argue that more pellet consumption means more smoke... and more smoke flavor.
You make a good point -- so maybe the terms aren't good, bad, average but high, low, average. People can make a determination if high consumption is good or bad.
Thanks for splitting this off from the Camp Chef performance test discussion...
Kristen, your comments inspired my thinking on this... I honestly don't know if more pellet consumption is good or bad... or just the way it is on any particular grill. But if the facts are laid out in a reasonably well controlled test, data is gathered and presented well... i, or any grill buyer can decide for ourselves what to think of it.
I love the pellet consumption and graphs combined... I asked the original question about probe placement information, for more context with regard to the data. To me probe position is valuable information in conjunction with the rest of the test data.
Bentley had mentioned the biscuit test and how Larry like it.... I too love the biscuit test. Similar to the temperature graph data, positions of the biscuits can play a big role in what the results look like. One person might argue burnt biscuits near the parmeter are misleading about the overall performance of that particular pellet grill... still others see it as valuable information about how evenly heat is distributed. My feelings are the later and as long as the biscuits are distributed in some reasonably well defined way, it's all useful information.
I myself have cooked stuff that looks great but doesn't really taste that good, and vice versa. So for me... pictures of a cook in general are not useful... but I wouldn't argue to not do cooking of food and provide photos... others may very well see that information as highly valuable.
-
LSJ - quit posting here and give us some pizza cook pictures. ;)
Whatever happened with that pizza oven you bought?
-
My opinion?
I'm a technical guy, and for me to truly understand something, I need to know the hows and whys.
A pellet smoker just isn't that difficult to comprehend. It uses wood for heat. Electricity, gas, charcoal... all do the same thing. They create heat.
So what's the other defining matters any particular grill has to offer? Size, build quality, add-ons... All pretty straight forward and most likely easily assimilated by the average consumer.
I'm by myself, so I have a Traeger Jr Elite. It took me a while to get used to cooking on it. I'm not convinced this learning curve doesn't apply to all pellet smokers. Folks simply have to know that it's not quite like the regular oven in yer house. I have an $800 convection oven in my home with that fancy glass stove top. I haven't used it in 4 years. It does have an advantage over a non-convection type, but that's about it.
Pellet consumption never crossed my mind, but's a nice thing to know. If yer buying yer pellets right ($.50/lb), that equates to 3 bucks for a 6hr cook.
Funny thing is, a LOTTA folks don't mind going out to dinner and spending $50.00 for two on a meal. What could you do with that same 50 bucks and a pellet grill?
I digress...
In short, I think there's a balanced approach that needs to be applied. Pros and cons concerning the 'mechanical' qualities of the unit, and actual cooking samples with a few notes thrown in. Biscuit test? Meh... Just stay away from the edges. Simple. Pizza that hogs up the grate area? Make sure you rotate it on occasion.
Obviously, the larger more expensive units have more to offer in cooking aspects. Those are easily addressed as well. All should be explored as everyone's needs are different.
It's like football. If yer going to win consistently, you need a well balanced game plan. Offense (design/build quality), defense (functionality/ease of use), and special teams (food prep and execution).
That's all I have to say about that.