A noble effort!
But it sounds like adjustments are needed.
What do you think? Higher temp to start with? 400 degrees maybe? 425?
Then add the potatoes for a shorter time?
This technique is too intriguing to just to “backburner” the device.
But the can of liquid was not hot. That is part of the problem, it seems. The heat is not reaching the inside of the bird but I cannot figure out why that would happen unless the aluminum “plate” is blocking the flow of air and heat. Maybe lift the bird up off the plate further and allow for the heated air to move more freely? Not sure.
Good luck!
I was hoping you’d respond.
I think maybe I should have set the pan directly on the ConvEggtor, rather than put the wire grate in between the two–this probably kept the can (and the whole shebang) too cool.
Which position for the ConvEggtor do you use, and does your drip pan go right on top? What temperature do you set?
Thanks.
1 Like
You can’t see it in the photo, but the bird stands off the liner plate by about an inch. But you’re on to something–cozying the potatoes around the bird probably blocked some heat and air circulation.
So, from the ceramic upward, there were:
–the wire grid
–the drip pan bottom (directly under can)
–about an inch of airspace
–the liner bottom
–the suppository
Too far removed from the ceramic, I now think.
1 Like
Like I said before: parlor trick.
We’ll see. Charlie thought the same of the BGE…
As Thimes has written, there are advantages to perching the bird in the air, independent of whether liquid in the beer can contributes anything. Even browning, no need to turn, no torn skin, nothing to stick to or make marks, etc.
1 Like
I did say that the vertical position of the chicken is an advantage - it does make for a evenly cooked, pretty bird. The whole “beer can” thing is the parlor trick. Adds nothing, wastes beer (or other liquid). I remember somebody once recommended to me piercing a jalapeno in a few places and placing it in the neck opening of the chicken to infuse some spice as the pepper steams. All I got was warm but still raw jalapeno.
I hear you, Steve, but the pierced lemons in 2 Lemon Chicken seem to add a good deal of moisture and a little flavor to the baked chicken, so there is that.
I am not a good cook but I ended up with a good bird using the 2 Lemon recipe.
I am curious to see how this works out. It may be a trick but some cooking tricks turn out to be useful. Others are just fun to try. 
And no, that chicken was not one legged when I cooked it. I got kind of carried away and took a bite before I remembered to take the photo.
5 Likes
Yes, so you keep saying.
It should be clear to all that seasoning and stuffing a carcass with various things does indeed add flavor to roast chicken. The key question here is: In addition to the other advantages of the BCC method, is there internal steaming that happens, and to what effect?
I need to use the method more before I conclude there isn’t steam being made or there is no flavoring or moistening effect.
Common sense and my experience tell me if the beer can receives enough bottom heat for long enough, there will be some steam, even if the carcass interior stays cooler.
Again, we’ll see.
So, it turns out that my buddies at Thermoworks have made a run at testing what happens with BCC. Here’s their results:
Cooked at 325F, the can liquid never rose to more than 187F. So it definitely wasn’t boiling. However, they acknowledge that temp is high enough to cause water vapor.
Surprisingly, the roasting ADDED liquid to the can.
Query whether the same results would obtain if the cooker had been set at 400 or 450F.
Interesting. More so had they tried assessing whether the bird takes on added flavors.
1 Like
Haven’t tried it myself (roast chicken in general is an OK dish but nothing special for us) but found these thoughts interesting
This article seems largely premised on starting with a cold chicken and beer can, as in straight outta Frigidaire. I dispute that no steaming is possible if the can is on direct heat.
FWIW, Meathead is pretty doctrinaire about a lot of grilling. He likes to be loudly contrarian. For example, he rails against cast iron grates for steaks, apparently for no other reason than he doesn’t like to see grill marks. So you have to take his take on anything with a grain of Himalayan pink.
I think too many people–BCC fans and haters alike–focus on the beer can itself. Too small a hole, too tight a fit, too tippy, etc. Still, the concept itself is sound.
There may well be an unthinking cult of BCC, but there’s plenty of other culinary fads and cults, notably including sous vide, air frying, and instapot. And, as you know, grossly distorted beers. That doesn’t make them hoaxes.
1 Like
I liked the method. I bought the tool to hold the beer can . Used a half can of beer with fresh aromatics. Chicken upright and seasoned.
Sure I had to put some I’ll call them shims to raise the grill top on my small weber . I would turn the chicken towards the heat every 10 minutes or so .
Best whole chicken I have ever had come off a grill . Crispy skin with moist meat .
2 Likes
You’re not alone and are in good company.
Tonight I was in a store that carries a wide selection of grill accoutrements. I noticed that Weber makes its own purpose-built BCC pan. It looks smaller than the Napoleon, which might be a good thing.
The method is not a hoax. There are too many analogues in other cuisines.
Do you believe the aromatics flavor the chicken?
1 Like
This looks like a solid, stable unit. Heavy gauge. And it appears to give the can space within the bird’s cavity, which was one of Meathead’s bitches.
If your setup is giving aromatic flavor to the chicken meat, that’s another disproof of the method “doing nothing”.
I think that could be only evaluated by a double blinded taste test - otherwise there will be an obvious potential bias by any cook who uses the method
I place aromatics in the half can of beer . Purchased from Amazon. Under ten dollars for the beer can holder
Not really. If the only possible source of aromatic flavor is in the can, and it’s detectable in the meat, that’s a disproof of “does nothing”.
But I find it interesting that you think the detect-ability would be subjective or outcome-based.
That is a well known phenomena that people think that they recognize certain flavors because they expect them to be in (as they might have put certain ingredients into it). One example I remember (but can’t find a link in the moment) is that a number of people claimed it is important to heavily roast the pine nuts in a classical Genovese pesto as it gives it a certain additional flavor component. A research team than prepared different versions (with and without roasted pine nuts) and did a double blinded test and none of ~20 people who claimed that they could taste the difference went beyond random chance %.
Emglow expects that he tastes aromatics in the chicken because he put them into chicken preparation but I would love to make a double blinded taste test to see if it is indeed true or just expectation bias
If you like it do it . If you dont . Then dont . Im not expecting anything. I do it because I Iike it .
4 Likes
