![steak[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/exrCH1G.jpg "steak[1].jpg")
Does /ck/ agree on a method to cook the perfect steak?
>>7580187
Well done or take it back. Good when dipped in applesauce, BBQ sauce, honey, or ketchup.
Baked in the oven at 300 for an hour. Top with cheese and BBQ sauce and broil for the last 6 minutes.
>>7580201
This man knows his steak.
>>7580201
>well done
Yeah, cooking steak past medium should be illegal. Cooking it to well done should be punishable by sterilization.
>>7580236
>t. 9gag
>>7580187
/ck/ is populated by thousands of anons from all over the world. Of course we don't all agree on a single method to cook steak. Congratulations for making it to the front page though
>>7580187
Marinated in ketchup and cooked extra well done.
Sous Vide Rare is my preference
Pan. Medium-High.
Steak. Salt and pepper.
In to pan. Five minutes.
Flip. Four minutes.
Rest. Serve perfect.
>>7580207
Ah, of course. Boiled over hard
>>7580187
no
for me it's sous vide followed by searing, though
>>7581281
>cooking time is irrespective of cut thickness or meat fibre type
This fucking board...
>>7580201
Dank
Never tried sous vide. But i do reverse sear on charcoal grill. Mesquite lump.
>>7581330
I know it's sort of turned into a meme....but I honestly don't think I'll ever eat a steak that isn't sous vide again if cooking at home
>>7581335
ehh
thin cuts aren't worth the trouble
I don't have the facilities for sous vide. Would baking the steak at like 200 or something like that for a while cook it evenly enough? If so, how long would I do it for medium rare if I want to sear it afterwards? Only ever had steak in restaurants.
>>7581279
this guy gets it
but I dont have a sous vide machine, so I usually aim for seared in a cast iron pan and tossed in the over for a couple minutes each side, assuming the steak is thick enough
Daily reminder that if the way you like your steak doesn't have "medium" in the title, you are the personification of plebeian. The only think more sub human than eating burnt tires is eating bloody undercooked flesh.
>>7581527
>this guy gets it
>but I dont have a sous vide machine
Here is a DIY I built for 35 bucks to cook what is in the pic:
imgur.com/gallery/c6VW2
>>7581533
are you just splitting the current and close-looping the ground? Without knowing too much about the device, this seems dangerous.
Sous vide would be awesome if it didn't take 3 hours to cook a rare steak.
Learn how to grill.
>>7581552
It's not closed loop, only one path to ground. A simplified schematic would basically be putting a relay on one live wire
>>7581563
>3 hours to cook a rare steak.
40 minutes is plenty for a 2inch filet or strip.
I can sous vide a steak quicker than you could light a charcoal grill and grill one; gas would win in speed though
>>7581514
no. no. no.
1st, for ghetto sous vide you just need a pot, a sealable bag, a thermometer and Korean F2P MMO player-tier patience
2nd, reverse sear is what you're after, where you sear meat in a pan first, for like a minute, then finish it in the oven for an approximation of a good steak. again, a thermometer is needed
>>7581563
but it doesn't
the huge cooking times only come in when you want to also pasteurize your food, such as when serving the very young, or the very old, or the very sick, or planning on freezing what you made
>>7581594
Oh, okay. Was just making sure you're not burning your house down, or encouraging others to do the same.
>>7581625
Thanks. I'm a big fan of safety.
Also, my background is in Physics, not EE or even Electrician level. I thought ground looping only mattered in very high power situations such as many thousands of watts. I may be wrong obviously
>>7581640
You're not technically wrong, but for electrical safety, it's all about assuming the absolute worst happening.
Your thing should be fine if nothing abnormal happens or if you don't overload it. But the thing about electrical work is that you should always assume the worst when working with wall receptacles.
If you run it and it feels really hot, I'd stop. Obviously you don't need to worry about arc flashes, but electrical fires aren't fun.
I'm a 3 year EE student, so I can't say I'm definitively right, so grain of salt and all that.
>>7581775
sorry for repeating myself. First post got deleted and had something ctrl+c'd.
Also day-drinking.
season w/ salt & cracked peppercorns. then sear in pan 30 sec each side. put in the broiler 2 min on each side. wrap in foil. let it rest for 5 min.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLWsEg1LmaE
what to fuck
>eating beef steak when you can eat delicious swordfish steak
>>7581531
Someone with no taste for sure.
>>7583366
>wanting mercury poisoning
Lol k
>>7581531
>I can't cook
you fit in well around here I see
>>7580187
We managed it with carbonara, but not steak yet.
>>7584275
People still argue about bacon/guanciale and parmesan/pecorino.
>>7580206
>300 for an hour
Bro how done do you get your steaks?
>>7580187
Those look like grill marks from a stove top grill pan. The light color around the marks triggers me. I'd rather have an even sear than grill marks that look pretty on pinterest.
>>7580207
only acceptable answer
>>7581616
That's not a reverse sear that's just the regular way to cook a steak. Reverse searing is when you start in the oven until you get the internal temp you want then sear it at the end.
>>7583364
Seems good but just thinking about cleaning up all that splatter makes me wince.
Medium well or well done are the only acceptable options.
Fags that ask for bloody meat bought into a meme.
>>7581616
you do not know what you're talking about
>>7580201
Im Gordin Ramsey
I approve of this
>>7580201
First post best post
>>7583364
'murga
>>7581533
>imgur.com/gallery/c6VW2
great, did you post that on reddit to? Many upboats and gold to you good sir
cooking steak is an art and requires a lot of experience
anyone who recommends certain temps and time lengths is a total pleb who really has no idea what cooking a steak is like.
every steak is different. i do mine on a charcoal grill I get super hot, then sear both sides on direct heat then move to indirect heat until I can feel it is getting to medium rare
it all depends on the cut and how thick the steak is
most people's experience here of cooking "steak" probably amounts to putting a round steak on a non-stick pan on their electric stove. it's fucking shit.
>>7583339
This is correct. I don't use foil to rest, though. Also I cut my rib eyes to a 2 inch thickness so I increase oven time by 30 seconds each side.
>>7585917
>calls others plebs
>literally cooks his steak on a grill
>>7581279
This or blue rare
>>7586146
>blue rare
wow my man you sure have a refined palate :^). color me impressed :)))
>>7580201
This.
>>7586576
Never claimed I had one, I just enjoy raw steak. Cooked is fine to with thw right seasoning, but I don't get to have meat very often-it's a treat, so when I do have it, I like it how I like it.
It's like if I only got to eat fish once every three months and I had the option of some delicious sashimi, or baked fish. I'm going to pick the sashimi 9/10
>>7586876
You fucking cunt. There's literally no reason for liking different things than I do other than being a pretentious fuckboi.
>>7586913
Fuck off Matt, to bed with ye jiggly ass!
>>7584282
I was being ironic, but don't worry about it.
Guanciale and 50/50 Parmesan and Pecorino Romano all the way! Whole egg, no fucking cream, onions, mushrooms!
>>7587097
Where is your Knorr Chicken Stock Pot?
I don't have a sous vide. I posted this in the last steak thread we had, but it's just done in an iron skillet with butter and oil, flipped every minute for about 4 minutes and rested properly.
Also I wrap the meat and let it warm up close to room temp before I cook it. That's probably a huge health violation but whatever.
>>7587122
Oh yeah, I forgot about that.
Pro tip: don't be a pleb and add it to the sauce. Cook the pasta in the stock.
>>7587236
You burnt your butter bro. enjoy your cancer and e. coli.
>>7581563
still quicker than that English 3 star chef who wants you to cook a steak so slow you cant eat it till the next fucking day..
>>7581616
Funny that's what you call reverse sear. I always figured that cooking a steak to a good temp in the oven and THEN searing it for 90 seconds on each side was overcooking, not forwards searing.
I cant really do my meat any other way than sous vide.
I just cant get enough of all that juicy pink.
I just cant...
Help... Im a slave to the pink juicy meat...
Vat of catsup with sliced up well done steak on the side, with a side of mayo
>>7580187
Three fourths.
>>7580187
This is the internet. We don't agree on anything
>>7585917
get a load of this faggot
>>7586913
kek'd
>>7589412
Damn, that looks good. How do you get the sear? Blow torch?
>>7581271
>front page
t. reddit
>>7581271
>Congratulations for making it to the front page though
You seem to have confused this with reddit
>>7580187
let the steak come to room temperature
pat dry with a paper towel
lightly sprinkle both sides with salt, pepper, brown sugar
sear both sides on a screaming hot cast iron skillet
finnish is a 250 degree oven for 15 minutes
>let steak soak overnight in a bowl of water
>season with garlic powder and pepper until dry
>cook at 108 degrees celcius for 4 minutes on each side in the same grease you cooked your eggs in
>(always cook eggs first, they need time to sit)
>garnish with a pinch of sauerkraut
>BONUS: dip your steak in egg yolk instead of using A1 sauce, it's practically the same thing
>>7590521
With a cast iron pan. So hot I didnt dare to touch the handle. I also believe I only seared it afterwards, not before and after like I usually do.
>>7580187
Rub a little salt and pepper on it, and cook it for 3 minutes on either side on a griddle pan. Simple.
>>7590529
>sugar
WOH lad easy there with your foolishness
>>7589094
don't rag on the heston m8 24 hour steak was one of the first things i ever cooked and it was legittttttt
I like my steak still twitching.
>>7590731
I always thought cast iron was a meme, so have dismissed it. I've got copper and can't seem to get the crust that thin. I would have thought that cooper's superior conductivity would give a better sear. Might look into getting a cast iron pan (I only have a griddle, at the moment)
>>7591083
>I always thought cast iron was a meme, so have dismissed it.
kill yourself
>>7591083
>i spent more on a copper pan and it sucks
Cook it on medium heat in my non-stick pan so that it doesn't go tough.
>>7580187
with a lightbulb
>>7591148
Grow up. I assume this isn't your first day on /ck/, so you know full well that cast iron pans, when used almost exclusively in favour of all other pans by people who constantly go on about how great they are, are considered meme-tier around here. You also know that copper pans are the preferred pans by chefs and that, all round, they are superior. I was being nice to anon, and a little self-deprecating in what I said. I thought I'd give his method a go. However, if I had to choose one pan to use, it would be copper. You would to, if you could afford it. And that's the difference: I choose to use copper pans over cast iron, you don't have a choice, because you can't afford that choice.
>>7591152
Same goes to you, dick head, I never said it was inferior, even a novice knows how much better copper is. Maybe when you can afford to get some good pans you won't feel the need to post this kind of crap.
>>7592462
Tinned copper is not generally ment for frying. What pan is this?
>also buying the iron is meme-meme and taking it literally
>>7592462
>muh copper
Copper is poisonous and copper pots and pans have to be tinned. Tin has a melting point of 230°C, and frying is generally done in the 170-200° range - hard and shallow searing even higher. That's why there are no copper frying pans, and you literally don't know how to fucking use the tools you bought, or even how to buy the tools you need.
But I'm sure they were expensive. This seems to be important to you.
>>7592462
Copper is quickly becoming the new meme around here. This faggot right here is case in point.
>>7592536
Retards are the meme around here. Tinned copper is great, just like cast iron, non-stick teflon and stainless steel.
It's the complete inability of some people to use their different properties in- and understand the appropriate context that is infuriating. 'Right tool for the job' should be common sense, but for some reason this board is full of raging retards, M/ck/Donalds foamers and hurrdurr-meme trolls.
.t Cast iron shill
>>7580187
>Does /ck/ agree on...[anything]?
No.
Sous Vide medium rare
>>7586146
>blue rare
Pretentious show off twat
>>7580201
is it even safe to eat steak with pink in the center?
>>7580187
Depends on the cut.
>>7580207
Delicious!
PAN
NICE AND HOT
an oven and a cast iron skillet heat to something like 400 degrees then cook on each side for 2 minutes but before that sear each side in the pan.
>>7592462
>considered meme-tier
Anyone who describes ANYTHING as "meme-tier" or "a meme" is a worthless faggot whose opinion isn't worth as much as a turd in a bucket.
>>7592510
I use Falk, retard.
>>7580187
just fuck shit up
>>7592564
Just to clarify, I was being perfectly polite and enquiring about a person's technique. I replied to the trolls in the manner they spoke to me. Sure, this is taking the bait, but I felt like annoying some idiots. I fully believe in the right tool for the job. As stated, I do have a cast iron griddle. I choose copper because it is particularly responsive. I haven't chosen cast iron because of its lower conductivity, which is a crucial aspect of searing. As you can see from my first post, I was happy to give it a go. Probably shouldn't have used the word meme, but it's a colloquialism around here. Definitely shouldn't have fed the trolls. Apologies for the slight derailment and for >>7593810
>>7593824
Copper has a high thermal mass and is unresponsive you dribbling moron. You still haven't explained how a copper pan is possibly suitable for searing when the tin melts at lower temperatures than the cooking requires.
You're not even cooking in the right temperature interval, and just as well because your cookware can't handle it.
Stop pretending you 'know the tool for the job' before you further expose your incompetence.
>>7593827
>Copper has a high thermal mass and is unresponsive you dribbling moron.
compared to what?
thermal mass:
copper: 385 J/(kg*K)
iron: 450 J/(kg*K)
aluminium: 897 J/(kg*K)
thermal conductivity:
copper: 400 W/(m*K)
iron: 80 W/(m*K)
aluminium: 235 W/(m*K)
of course talking pure, which probably your pan/pot/etc. isn't.
>>7593827
Again, I am using Falk. Copper has the highest conductivity, which means the fastest heat transfer, which is what counts when wishing to sear hard on the outside without overcooking the inside. The greater conductivity also adds to the increased responsiveness of the pan since, as I just stated, it heats up and also cools down quicker. These are facts. You don't know what you're talking about.
I've never enjoyed steak in my life... I'm wondering if it's just because I've never had a good, high quality, well prepared steak. Whenever I'm at a steakhouse I always get burger instead.
>>7592510
>there are no copper frying pans.
Wat?
>>7593824
i'm not a troll you cunt, you called cast iron a 'meme', you are the troll.
Cast iron has a higher heat capacity than copper, so it takes more energy to heat a pound of cast iron to a given temperature than a pound of copper. More energy is stored in each pound of the cast iron. Aluminium has a higher heat capacity than iron (it stores more heat per pound) but is much less dense than iron. For a given volume, therefore, cast iron stores more heat than aluminium. Because cast iron pans typically weigh much more and are thicker than the same size pan in another material, they tend to store more energy when heated. This combination of high heat capacity and weight means that cast iron takes a long time to get hot. Once hot, however, a cast iron pan usually contains more thermal energy than other pans at the same temperature — a significant cooking advantage. Cast iron has unparalleled searing power because it has a lot of available thermal energy – and unlike almost any other type of pan, cast iron pans won’t warp when left dry on a burner to heat up. Thick and heavy cast iron will remain flat and true.
Cast iron is slow to heat up, so it’s also slow to cool down. It is a good regulator. It retains its temperature longer than other materials and won’t produce temperature spikes. This behaviour can be disconcerting to the uninitiated. Cooking with cast iron is more akin to driving a boat than a car: the pan doesn’t respond instantly to changes in the applied heat.
you should learn your shit before you start mouthing off at other people for not learning theirs. dunning-kruger up in this bitch.
>>7580187
>not well done
enjoy your parasites
>>7594144
I didn't call it a meme, I said that I thought it was based upon what I have read, but I was willing to give it a try. Your reactions really are pretty over the top. You should calm down.
I am going to try not to be patronising when I say this but what makes you think that your pan storing heat, rather than transferring the heat to the food, is a good thing for searing? If it is slow to build up heat, keeps a hold of its heat and it is slow to transfer that heat, this is called a low conductivity and means that a lower amount of heat is transferred to the food at a slower rate. This is bad for searing meat. It really is simple science, so I honestly can't understand why you have the misconceptions that you clearly do.
Are you the same anon that stated that copper is unresponsive compared to cast iron and are now proudly stating that cast iron is slow to heat and slow to cool? I hope not.
Copper is more conductive FACT
The more conductive a medium, the quicker it transfers heat FACT
The quicker heat is transferred, the better the sear FACT
The quicker a pan is to heat up and cool down, the more responsive it is FACT
You really are just making yourself look foolish, and you are a waste of my time.
>>7594300
if you don't know what 'available thermal energy' means then it isn't worth continuing this argument, sorry you're thick anon.
>>7594219
Go back to your containment board, troll.
>>7594219
>ketchup + fat hands
You OK there lardo ?
>>7594311
To be honest, I can't be bothered with you anymore. What do I care which pan you use? What do I care if you're ignorant and will end up making a fool of yourself in a place where you aren't anonymous?
Best of luck for the future, anon.
Let it rest for 30 minutes.
Dry rub with pepper, cumin, paprika, and chili power.
Pan sear each side for 1-2 minutes. Use high quality olive oil.
Pop in oven pre-heated to 450. Let it bake for 8-15 minutes, depending on thickness.
Pull it out when it's 135-140 internal temp. Let it rest for about 5 minutes. Serve.
>>7594649
All trolls are retards. You should all stop it.
>>7594649
The retarded thing is when an anon thinks that other anons on a cooking board don't read cookingissues.com and then takes content without giving credit to the author, trying to make it look like their words.
>>7594740
ya got me! i wanted to take the credit, that's why i posted it anonymously on 4chan!
>>7594744
No, you mocked copper pan guy for not knowing what 'available thermal energy' meant, which implied you did and that the words you were using were your own.
I would invite you to explain what the term means (not just a definition from Wikipedia), how it relates to the topic and why it is advantageous. Otherwise, please leave the thread, and let it get back on track, you've been found out.
>tfw genuinely want to know how /ck/ cooks steaks but too late to the party before it devolved to hyper-meta jokes
>>7594838
just eat it straight from the can bro
>>7594838
Grill on fucking hot grill with flames spitting up for like 3-4 minutes each side.
Or pan sear in lots of herbed butter, again for 3-4 minutes each side, finish 400 degree oven for about 4 minutes.
Let rest for five minutes.
That's what I do.
>>7593944
>of course talking pure, which probably your pan/pot/etc. isn't.
You're also talking equivalent mass, which pots and pans aren't. An aluminum pot will be very light, meaning is will have the lowest thermal mass of the three.
A copper pan will be the heaviest, partly because it's extremely soft and you have to use a lot of it to make the pot stable.
Cast iron will be inbetween.
Everyone but the hurr-durr-copper-is-fast guy gets this. Thermal conductivity is high enough for all materials to be irrelevant for all but very narrow, very high and very well filled vessels. So unless your cookware looks like little chimneys...
I usually sear in a scorching hot cast iron for about 90 seconds on each side (including the edge of fat) and then throw it in an oven for about two more, usually at 350/400.
When I'm at my vacation home though I just use a grill like a big dick cool guy.
>>7594782
they weren't my words, but they were true words, which is why i posted them. the thread is still 'on track'.
the available thermal energy is what is stored in the pan once it reaches a certain temperature. this is what flows into the steak in the form of heat, the rate of which is limited by the conductivity of the metal. copper pans are good because its thermal energy increases at a faster rate over the fire and it transfers this energy into the steak at a faster rate too. but searing a steak is an energy intensive process. the pan needs a high storage of energy to drive off and evaporate water from the surface of the steak and continue to output enough heat to develop a crust. a relatively thin copper pan with a lower specific heat is going to deplete its thermal energy much faster than a thick cast iron pan at the same temperature. the conductivity is not the limiting factor in this case. the cast iron pan is going to output heat more consistently and for longer than the copper pan. this is especially appropriate for home cooks with underpowered burners. the pan works as a a store of heat, not just a medium for the flame.
>>7594856
>You're also talking equivalent mass, which pots and pans aren't.
good point, didn't take that in account
>>7594856
>You're also talking equivalent mass, which pots and pans aren't.
That is true. But you seem to be assuming that they are of equal thickness which is just as bad an assumption as thinking they are equal mass.
Aluminum pans are rarely very thin because aluminum is quite soft, though it does vary by brand. My old T-fal frying pan measured about 3mm thick. My current Eagleware is easily double that.
Copper is almost never more than 3mm thick; 2 or 2.5mm is much more common.
>>7595024
Thank you for your answer, it was interesting, but you didn't explain what the scientific phrase you referred to actually meant though, which was a bit disappointing. I've not heard about available energy before, and it sounds compelling. Is the premise that a cast iron pan as a kind of heat battery? I can kinda get what you mean, but the pan can't get hotter than the heat source, can it? So is the situation as you view it better than a very hot pan, with lower conductivity is more efficient than a less hot pan with high conductivity (because the energy seeps out during heating)?
>>7580187
All I know is the frequency of people specifying that they "reverse seared" is starting to irritate me. It's almost as bad as mallard reaction, suspension, and umami were as far as over use and incorrect use, and people seem to think searing after low heat cooking greatly changes the result in a good way. If anything, it's usually a less desirable result. Yeah, a lot of people suck at searing, but if anything is different in those cases, an initial shitty sear might benefit a little from the low heat cooking afterward, and doing the sear after won't make them any better at searing.
>>7595194
>Copper is almost never more than 3mm thick; 2 or 2.5mm is much more common.
Plain copper is never that thin because it's way, way, way softer than aluminium.
Traditional tinned copper pots and pans will be thicker than aluminum because of this. In my experience they're all be 4-5mm thick in the bottom, sides vary a bit but only SS/sandwich pans are realy thin. CI needs to be thick because casting and being brittle. Copper needs to be super thick because only mildy more structual than certain cheeses, and alu will be thick because both soft and brittle.
Assuming rougly the same volume of material is not miles off, and even if you allow for a great variation they'll never be very close in mass. At least not alu.
We must be talking about completely different classes of cookware. Super thin, stamped steel/aluminum foil trailer-home cookware was never on my mind.
>>7595353
>but the pan can't get hotter than the heat source, can it?
But seeing as the heat source is usualy either several hundred to thousands of degrees hot, or not a fixed temperature source at all but merely a source of power, that doesn't matter.
Conductivity is irrelevant as long as we're not talking ceramic heat shields that don't transmit the heat across at all. You can always compensate low conductivity but high mass by preheating, but it is extremely hard to compensate inadequate thermal mass with conductivity.
Energy input/output and temperature are related, but not the way I suspect you think they are, and you're not cooking with the temperature of your heat source. You're cooking with the temperature of your pan, and that's affected by the power output of your heat source. Not the heat sources temperature, in any direct way.
If you have a very high power and quickly regulated heat source (high power gas) you could theoretically compensate the lack of thermal mass by cranking up the power output when you put something in, but in reality it will just burn at the edges instead.
>Is the premise that a cast iron pan as a kind of heat battery?
Any pan is. It's a matter of having the appropriate amount of stored heat, and a material that releases it back at an appropriate rate for the task at hand. Sometimes that's a thick cast iron pot, and sometimes it very much isn't.
>>7580187
Medium rare is how it should be. I don't like my steak "mooing", but well done is a sin.
>>7595881
Thanks for your reply, I'm about to hit the sack (Britbong) so will posy respond tomorrow. Sleep tight....
>>7595916
*post
chop it up and put it in a dang burrito
>>7581271
>front page
I notice how redditors don't even hide thier shame anymore. Like people opening calling /ck/ a sub instead of a board.
>>7594688
Exactly what I do. Put some butter on top before you bake it and it's so much better.
>>7596275
I have no idea what he's talking about yet you do while complaining about people from reddit. Good job, pot.
>>7580201
You skank, I like you
>steak at room temp not cold.
>salt pepper
>heat pan until smoking
>add oil
>Sear steaks one min each side
>render fat
>add crushed garlic thyme rosemary
>Flip every minute
>add butter
>baste that shit
>don't cook past medium
>let rest
>serve
Perfect steak.
>>7580187
use butter
thats all I know
>>7580187
I prefer my steak over easy
>>7596275
He means page 0.
Boards have pages, faggot.
On the topic of sous vide, what are your preferred aromatics
>>7580187
You can't cook steak without ruining it. Just get it fresh, bring it to room temperature, and rub some salt on it to kill most of the microbes.
>>7581260
That's just a known fucking fact.
If you buy the meat from the grocery store you have to cook it well done, if you order it at any restaurant you could eat it raw and be fine.
Well done steak is a modern thing.
>>7596275
I came here to tell you that you were wrong
Because I saw a response to your post from /ck/'s front page
Also, 4chan has a general front page at the default
it shows you popular threads/posts
Pan sear in garlic and soy sauce, till rare, then charbroil it till medium rare. Throw some gorgonzola and maple syrup on that bitch and eat it with figs.
>>7600206
>Well done steak is a modern thing
Not really, unless you're referring to the modern period which is the 19th century through 1960s
Because it was even easier to get sick from steak because they had less standards for health
>>7600270
Who the fuck gets sick?
>>7599465
garlic powder and Accent
