Hacker News Reader

Comment by bradleyjg | Hacker News Reader

If you haven’t heard the good news about the reverse sear yet, today is your lucky day.

https://www.seriouseats.com/reverse-seared-steak-recipe

100%. I've done just about everything you can do to a steak, and for the past year or so my bulletproof standard method has simply been "set toaster oven to 250, cook steak for 20 minutes until it's 110-115, then take it out and sear it". It's better than the circulator steaks.

>set toaster oven to 250, cook steak for 20 minutes

That seems really fast, at least compared to the time I get with a regular oven. Either you're using really thin steaks, or your toaster oven's temperature is way off.

I'm cooking to temp, not to time; I pull them when the Thermapen says the steak's near 115. But I set the timer on my toaster oven to 20 minutes (after preheating, starting immediately when the steaks go in) and watch out of the corner of my eye for the display to go blue when the timer expires, which is when I check the steak temp the first time. I guess every once in awhile I end up giving it another 5 minutes, but it's pretty reliable.

Two things:

1. The toaster oven is probably more efficient than your regular oven (put an electronic grill thermometer in your oven and watch the temperature fluctuations; do the same with a toaster oven, compare).

2. I've usually got the convection thingy on in the toaster (I just forget to turn it off).

It doesn't much matter either way, though: the point is, it goes in the oven and comes out when it reads ~115 when I stick it. :)

>It doesn't much matter either way, though: the point is, it goes in the oven and comes out when it reads ~115 when I stick it. :)

But shouldn't the oven temperature matter? The hotter the oven is, the hotter the outside of the meat will get, even if you pull out the steak at 115 exactly. If you want the steak to be as even as possible, you want the oven temperature to be as low as possible.

If you read Kenji's reverse-sear guide, I think you'll see that I'm right in the middle of his suggested temperature range. I've also triangle-tested steaks against circulator cooks; I'm confident I'm getting even cooks. :)

I just double checked, and not only is my temp right, but my timings are just about his timings too. I'm getting his mid-rare result 5 minutes faster than he does, but again, I'm cooking in a convection toaster oven, and I'm guessing he tested in a "real" oven.

I'm jonesing to get my hands on a countertop combi oven like the Anova.

You could automate this entire process with much better temperature control and an internal probe to get the timing right. I've done engineering on professional combis and what you can do with those is pretty awesome.

Anova won't be the one to make it in the mass market but eventually one of them will step up to kick off the next air fryer craze (since combis can do that too)

I am too, but I assume countertop combis are going to do the same thing circulators did and cost and arm and a leg now and then like 1/3rd as much 2 years from now for much better products.

The Anova is $600 so it's already reaching the asymptote. I don't know if I want an oven built much cheaper.

The one thing I wish the APO had was a controllable vent to purge the steam but it gets by with quick temperature swings.

I really enjoy my APO, but honestly, for steaks, between it, reverse sear, and the circulator, I still go for the circulator most of the time. I generally will be juggling a variety of things trying to get them all to finish at the same time, so being able to hold the steaks there if I get behind is nice. The APO could do it too, but it's generally handling something else for the meal that would suffer from being bagged.

I have used the APO's psuedo vide mode for steaks using the probe and it does work very well and is quite quick. It's also killer for bread - way easier and (for me) better results than the dutch oven methods.

Now that the APO has a new tank design it solves the only real complaint I've had it it though, so I do highly recommend it. Between it at my Breville SOA I haven't used my regular oven in years.

Quality convection makes a big difference. Think about the experience of a sub-freezing morning with still air vs. a strong wind and the thermal dynamics become obvious.

I too think that sounds shockingly fast, but maybe I should re-visit my approach for oven temp. I throw steaks into a regular oven at 200F and I might wait 70+ minutes for a ribeye to hit 120F.

Seventy minutes?! Turn your oven up. Wow.

How thick are your steaks and what temperature do they start at? My steaks take almost two hours following the Kenji method D:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4ez9pz35wrn7j1o/steak.png?dl=0

Assume a Whole Foods ribeye as the reference steak here. They should not take anything close to 2 hours (you'll note that Kenji's guide agrees). Turn your oven up!

I will give it a shot! Always excited to up my steak game.

If you have a toaster oven, I strongly recommend the toaster oven. They come up to temp fast, and they have a much tighter band of temperatures than an oven, which is always +15/-15 from your set temperature. Holding a tight, low temperature is all you're asking from the oven, and toaster ovens are built to do that (ironically, they fucking blow at making toast).

What are the reasons traditional ovens have such a wide band here? It seems like with modern technology one ought to be able to cut that down a bit. Is it just physically infeasible based on the size of the space to be heated? Or is it tremendous cost pressure for consumer goods? Or something else?

A variety of things. More space is definitely harder to heat evenly, especially without airflow coming from something like a convection oven, or keeping relative humidity very high, such as in a combi/steam oven, but a lot of it is cost pressure. If you go far enough up market to Miele, Wolf, etc., you can find ovens that will keep a much more consistent temperature.

Does the steak actually come out worse if it takes that long or is it just a question of not wanting to wait?

Have you tried measuring your oven temp? Maybe it runs cold.

Amusingly, having not tested it, prior experience would indicate that my oven runs hot. Will throw a probe in there the next time I bake something.

All this being said, other than requiring a bit of extra planning, I have been quite pleased with the results of this slow cook. Maybe try a small temperature increment the next time I do it.

I'm going to try this one night when I'm on my last 2 beers. Might just time out perfect!

Lets see what Cook My Meat says about it

http://up.csail.mit.edu/science-of-cooking/

  3cm Steak starts at 72°F
  250°F and 250°F for 20:00
  72°F and 300°F for 4:00
  300°F and 72°F for 4:00
  72°F and 72°F for 5:00

Prior to searing, 250F at a 3cm thick steak takes 17 minutes to get to an internal temperature of 200°F.

The transition from medium to well at the innermost part takes place at just over 10m when cooking at 250°F for the 3cm steak.

If, however, the steak is 5cm thick, that the 115°F in the inner part isn't until 16m.

Your method may need to be adjusted for the size of the cut, though if you're ordering the same thing it probably does work for you.

Only chumps eschew an in-oven thermometer.

Why rely on calculated estimates when you can just measure the internal temp?

Mostly because you can run experiments on simulation to see "how much does it change if I do..."

The difference between a 5cm thick and a 3cm thick was rather surprising to me that it changed it that much for what a 250°F cooking does for some duration.

It also provides a "cooking for 70 minutes says it should be X in simulation while the oven is providing Y" that something is off between the simulation and (unmeasured) reality and one of the assumptions of either the simulation or reality is off.

mixing cm and F is evil.

TFA blithely mixed F and grams. I guess we should be happy the North Americans are slowly catching up with the rest of the world.

This guy gets it.

The thickness appears to be constrained to measurements in cm. The thread was working in °F - so I kept the same units as the thread where possible.

I haven't tried reverse-searing yet, but will give it a shot soon. I only recently started getting more into cooking, and bought a sous vide a few months ago.

Out of curiosity, what do you use the sous-vide for? Steak is the "typical" use case but you seem to think it's not as good for that.

The sous vide glazed carrots recipe on serious eats is incredible.

I’ve also used my circulator to make diy duck confit which is fantastic.

There is no better way to do duck or pork confit than a circulator.

Having compared the methods in my own kitchen, I'm also coming around to the idea that the reverse sear is a better method than sous vide, because I seem to get a better crust on the steak (likely because the steak is dryer than what I can remove from the s-v'd steak with paper towels). But, I find this only holds true for really nice cuts like filet mignon. If I want to cook a cheaper steak like a NY strip, I think the sous vide method produces a much more tender piece of meat, probably because I can cook it longer without overcooking it.

Haven’t yet gone down the SV road myself. I intend to buy the equipment and start playing around some time this year.

I've done the same tests with ribeyes and strips and, in a triangle test, you can't tell the difference between a circulator cook to 54c and a toaster oven reverse-sear cook to 45c (both followed by a hard sear). I really can't see much reason to circulate steaks anymore; there isn't even really a convenience win to it.

Hard disagree on convenience: Timing hot steaks with hot sides is virtually effortless with a circulator

Not really. You have the same problem either way, because you've gotta sear both steaks. If you're going to need to hold the cooked reverse-sear steaks, bring them up to 120-124 (your final target temp is 128-132) instead of 115.

I get what you're saying (I've got like 4 different circulators here, I'm not against them!) but the reverse sear is forgiving and flexible enough that I don't really even get a convenience win from it.

(For calibration: my modal steak is a Whole Foods ribeye or strip, unmodified except for being salted ahead of time).

For me the convenience factor has to do with the fact that I can vacuum seal and freeze a bunch of meat at once, then it's just a matter of tossing the vacuum sealed bag in the circulator a few hours before dinner. Then I just need to pull it out, hit it with the torch, and we're ready to eat. I suspect the longer cooking time to account for the meant being frozen helps with fat rendering.

We buy half a beef every six months or so (split with my parents, so I guess it's technically 5/7th's of a half? 5/14th's of a cow?). For a few hours on a weekend doing some prep/portioning, I can dramatically reduce the workload for several week's worth of meals.

Obviously there's other tradeoffs involved and different personal circumstances to consider, but for me the circulator wins out from a convenience perspective.

Likewise, I’m 100% not against a pure reverse sear. I just prefer to focus on getting the sides prepped and done, knowing that whenever they’re ready, the meat’s only a few minutes out.

I fail to see how a circulator is more convenient or effortless. For starters you need to prep a bag and a pot of water if you're using a circulator. On the other hand with reverse sear all you need to do is stick a thermometer in, throw it on a pan/rack and put it in an oven. After you're done with the circulator you have to wrangle with a wet bag full of beef liquid and dry off the steak (otherwise your sear will be impaired). With reverse sear you can take it directly from the oven to the pan. During the sear stage, the timing you need is minimal for both. You only need to get the pan as hot as you can get it, and sear both sides until it's charred to your liking.

I don't really understand how you can "fail" to see the convenience. The convenience comes from the ease of getting it right. I consistently over-cooked steaks with the reverse sear method. Maybe half the time. With sous vide, I never---literally never---overcook a steak.

That's the convenience. I don't have to worry about the temperature. I drop it in the bath and I take it out at my convenience.

I'm interested in what tended to go wrong for you with the reverse sear. One tricky thing is that the temperature increases nonlinearly, so if you take a couple readings and get a mental trajectory of when it's going to hit 115, you're likely to be wrong. The flip side though is that cooking at 250 (or, sheesh, 200, as they're doing across the thread) gives you a _real big bulls-eye_ to hit.

Nobody's gonna say that a circulator steak is bad. It's the second-best way to cook a steak. :)

>so if you take a couple readings and get a mental trajectory of when it's going to hit 115, you're likely to be wrong

I just keep a thermometer in for the entire duration of the bake time. Someone in this thread posted a screenshot of them doing the same thing with some sort of bluetooth thermometer.

It's been years since I tried it. So I don't remember precisely. I'm not a good cook. :-) It was just very easy for me to overshoot it.

For me, the convenience is that you can prep the bag and pot long before doing anything else. It’s not necessarily less work, just better distributed IMO

If you buy whole or fractional cow, the butcher will typically hand you boxes of separately vac-sealed cuts. At that point, it's really hard to beat the convenience of "grab one, throw it in the circulator". You don't even need to defrost it.

>probably because I can cook it longer without overcooking it.

how long are we talking here? 1 hour? 2 hours?

A strip is not a "cheaper" steak than a filet. Filet mignon is a fine cut, it's low in flavor but very tender which means that it tastes better when it's extra rare. Well marbled cuts of steak are usually better at mid-rare b/c the fat melts a little.

I do like sous vide for very thick steaks with some marbling—so a strip is a pretty decent one for the dip. However, I've found ribeyes come out spongey when you sous vide them and are better off being reverse seared.

Edit: if you're shopping in the supermarket, filets will usually be more expensive. If you're buying prime dry aged from a butcher, it's a different story, mostly because filets aren't usually dry aged. Check Pat's steaks for reference: https://shop.lafrieda.com/collections/dry-aged-beef

I typically see strip steaks for way cheaper than filets per pound at the market (US).

Since it's so tender, I've always felt filet are OK to cook a little more well, and you solve for the flavor with sauce, seasoning, or marinade.

Strips and ribeyes are much more forgiving than filets because filets have very little intramuscular fat. Strips are ribeyes also taste much better than filets because filets have very little intramuscular fat. Don't buy filets. :)

>A strip is not a "cheaper" steak than a filet.

But objectively speaking a strip steak is cheaper. Based on my observations of supermarket sale prices, the ranking goes:

fillet > ribeye > strip > others that I don't bother with (sirloin/round)

You are missing out on some truly excellent steaks: the hanger is like a cross between the ribeye and the skirt; the skirt is no slouch either! and if you've got some Activa RM handy, you can make a triple-thickness skirt, which is incredibly good; the spider steak (compare to the "oyster" of a chicken leg) is maybe the world's greatest sandwich steak; the tri-tip, which takes a marinade far better than any of the expensive steaks, and which the circulator will make just as tender as a fillet; and the picanha, which is the single greatest grill steak --- I would trade 2 ribeyes for 1 picanha if I was planning to grill.

Another fun rather obscure cut is the Newport steak, which is a different cut of the tri-tip. It's a cheap steak, but surprisingly good. NY butchers tend to have them for pretty cheap, 8-12 bucks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ubaldi

Supermarket steaks sure, but a good (dry aged) steak is expensive and they don't often dry age filets. Check the price differential for Pat's dry aged vs prime:

https://shop.lafrieda.com/collections/dry-aged-beef

I went to Costco a couple days ago with the intent of getting some ribeyes, but they were even more expensive than filets if I'm remembering correctly. Probably one of the first times in my post-college life I've balked at the price of a grocery store item. I got a package of tri-tip steaks twice as large for a bit less, and they were delicious.

Consumers have finally started to realize that cuts like ribeye or flank are much better than filet. So prices have started to reflect that.

Filets absolutely can be and are dry aged. They're again just even more expensive than a dry aged strip steak.

A filet is almost always more expensive than a strip, in the supermarket, at the butcher, or in the steakhouse.

>Filets absolutely can be and are dry aged. They're again just even more expensive than a dry aged strip steak.

Even as someone that has a dedicated dry aging unit, I don't know that I would recommend dry aging filet. I don't count the pellicle as waste, since I make use of all of it, but you do have to cut off a decent chunk - it's too tough to eat on the steak itself. The end result is that you just don't have a whole lot of steak left over.

You might see "dry aged" stuff for 2-3 weeks, and there's significantly less pellicle, but it's not nearly the same thing as something that goes for 60+ days.

I didn't know people could reuse the pellicle. I thought it has bacteria and sometimes molds on it? Because of the fermentation.

If the pellicle has the type of bacteria or mold on it that would prevent you from eating it, you should also generally not eat the rest of the meat. Not all mold can be told apart by appearance, so please do not take this comment as gospel on what is a "safe" mold, but the general consensus is that white mold is usually OK. In this case, I would not reuse the parts that were moldy, however.

I have a dedicated dry aging setup that I truss my subprimals up in, and then it recirculates air, including through a UVC light. I've never had any mold form, even on 120+ day dry ages. I haven't gone much higher than 120 days, though - I enjoy 240 day dry ages, but not in large quantities, and I also lack the patience, so you might see more going to that length. But in the 60 to 120 day range, however, I have never had mold form in any quantities large enough for me to notice.

Oh that's fascinating, I've only read a seriouseats article that uses a minifridge and fan. But UV sounds like a good idea for doing this, is your setup based on amazingribs or can you recommend another resource to look into?

Got a link to a place that does 45+ day dry aging with filets?

I was a professional chef for many years before I got into coding and I very rarely use a sous vide at home.

The practical advantages of it have a lot more to do with timing, prep dynamics, and consistency than they do with final quality.

There are some things that it makes possible or easy that are otherwise nearly inaccessible to home cooks and that is cool if you want to play around with it. Or if I'm cooking 6 steaks for guests or whatever but that's not a problem I've been having recently. But otherwise I don't find too much value in it personally.

Not a chef but I also found sous vide to cause more problems than it solves for cooking steaks. The biggest problem I have with it is that the fatty marbling does not render to the extent it does on a grill, because I can't afford to sear it as long as on the grill to avoid overcooking it. So I end up with a nice brown sear only on the surface, but then as soon as you bite into it you're met with almost raw fat. It's gross :)

There's a very simple fix for this problem, which is just to hold the steak for an hour or so to lower the temp (and give more breathing room for the sear) before you sear it off --- which also dries the exterior of the steak and improves the sear.

That's an interesting idea, thanks. I can see continuing to SV for cuts of meat that really need it, e.g. a whole tenderloin. Otherwise I still find it more work for less result than a charcoal grill.

Speaking of which it's annoying to reverse sear on a grill because covering it first for 10 or so minutes cools it down enough that the sear is not as nice as when it's done on the higher heat achieved without a cover.

Definitely agree with the "cooking 6 steaks for guests". This is my secret trick at barbecues: I pre-cook a bunch of steaks that I keep warn in an ice-chest (with no ice, obviously), then as guest comes and goes, I sear them, which takes a few minutes only. Every group of arriving guest gets to eat a nice perfectly cooked steak, straight out of the fire.

My other secret trick is to sous-vide chicken wings, so I don't have to fear about contamination of my tools, people being like "is it cooked enough? It looks pink". After sous-viding, I leave them on a cold side of the barbecue until they turn golden brown: the meat is soft, moist and almost candied. It's fool proof as they'll never really have a chance to burn and they always come up perfect.

Non-chef but fairly advanced home cook here. When it comes to steaks I agree about the sous vide use. I have yet to be wowed by a sous vide steak I've made versus non sous vide. However when it comes to pork - sous vide is AMAZING. Pork chops come out better than non sous vide. You want a simple/easy/magical enternaining dish? Sous vide a pork tenderloin - your serving windows is 1-4 hours. You can't mess it up. Just put it in the water bath an hour before people arrive then whenever you want to eat - just pull it out, pat it dry and quick sear for a minute on all 4 side and voilla!

Yes that is exactly the sort of thing I mean by timing, consistency and prep dynamics.

Weirdly, while I totally get what people love about circulator steak, I have never had a good circulator pork chop experience. The two tricks to pork chops I've discovered are to dust them with sugar and salt as far ahead of time as possible, and then to treat them precisely as you would a mid-rare steak. There's something about sugar and pork, I don't pretend to understand what it is, but it's pretty miraculous.

The one routine thing I make that the circulator is unimpeachably excellent for is sausage. Bring sausage up to 145-150 or so, and then toaster oven on the broiler setting for like 7 minutes.

I agree with you, and I’m not entirely sure why, because I think it involves more than just the crust. It has something to do with the interior of the meat as well.

I own a small Breville oven, and since it’s PID controlled, I set it at a very low temperature like 160 F and then put a separate probe in the meat to pull it at just the right temperature (takes a few hours). I end up with edge to edge evenness and a nice crust as well. It beats the Joule every time I’ve tried it.

I will say that I haven’t found anything that beats sous vide for chicken and duck though.

I do this in a smoker sometimes. Smoke to 100*, rest, and then sear on grill or in pan. Don’t use much smoke.

Can be a really killer way to do ribeyes and porterhouse.

Yep yep yep. And I’ll also echo don’t use much smoke - I went way overboard with some mesquite to see what it would be like, and it was fine but definitely detracted. A light smoke then a char is chef’s kiss though.

What’s your favorite wood? I used peach recently and it was nice, but I’d be open to try anything.

I do a decent amount of smoking (not steaks, too often, though sometimes) and I tend to mostly avoid mesquite, or use it very sparingly. It's STRONG.

I'm not afraid to use a good amount of post oak or cherry when smoking anything, including steaks, though.

That's what I do (but I got it from the first episode of "Good Eats Reloaded"), except that I go until the temperature near the center is the temperature I want for the final temperature rather than the 15℉ below that which is what that article recommends. I'm using a 200℉ oven (well, that is what it is set to...I don't know how accurate that is), and found it heats the steak gently enough that the center temperature doesn't really rise much after it is taken out.

The searing is on the hottest my stovetop can make my pan, which is about 500℉. I do 45 seconds on each side. That doesn't seem to be long enough to have much effect other than near the surface.

Here's some graphs of temperature changes during sears (also bearing in mind that the steak keeps increasing in temperature for a couple minutes after you pull it from the oven).

https://genuineideas.com/Assets/imageassets/Reverse-Sear.jpg

Taking it up to 115 also gives you some wiggle room if you want a really intense sear, or if you want to baste (I usually throw a handful of thyme in the butter while I sear).

While we're (or, ok, I'm) nerding out on this stuff, let me put a word in for the idea that this is how you should cook a pork chop too. Like, exactly like a steak; maybe the only difference is that a pork chop likes a little big of sugar with the salt you apply an hour before cooking.

Maybe take a chop to mid-rare instead of Pittsburgh blue rare, but otherwise: just like a steak. Kind of a revelation the first time you do it.

Most definitely.

For me one of the biggest revelations for cooking damn near everything was "of COURSE moisture ruins the ability to get a good sear, how did I not realize that before"

So many things come packaged wet, or at least moist, and then I'd get a pan ripping hot... and still have a mediocre sear.

It's something I learned for cooking steaks but has been pretty universally applicable.

Reminds me of the Chinese technique for cooking cuts like pork belly: boiling in water first then pan searing. Works well with sauces that caramelize.

That doesn’t seem very useful for day-to-day cooking. How often do you cook steaks that are so thick? A typical home meal will be more around half an inch.

There are also probably 9,999 others like you.

https://xkcd.com/1053/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com