First time ham cure/cook questions

[dougal]

One technique I have seen for boiling hams, is to simmer for the requisite time, and then turning the heat off and leaving it to steep in the cooking liquor overnight. Anyone tried this?

I think Vernon did...


Paul, it looks very appetising indeed.
I hope you'll show off the interior texture you achieved.

Did you boil/soak out any salt before simmering?
Did you taste the simmering broth?
And - probably best left till you attack the beast properly - how would you compare the saltiness of the broth to the saltiness of the ham?


I'm sure I saw a suggestion in Mrs Grigson (can't find the bless�d bit now) about removing the thigh bone, but leaving the knuckle bone. Thus giving a handle, better access to the thickest meat for the cure, and much easier carving.
Does anyone do that?

[Paul Kribs]

dougal

Yes, I soaked it for 36 hours prior to cooking, brought it up to the simmer and skimmed the scum after about 10 minutes. I did taste the broth (who wouldn't) and although it would have made a very good base for a stew or soup, I chose to discard it due to the dwindling freezer space. It was not over salty and had a slight sweetness to it from the treacle.

As I say, I did taste a bit of the muscle but this was only about 1�" inside and right next to the bone, so it had been flavoured by the stock.

My main concern was removing the cooked ham from the pot without it falling to bits. I believe it could have done with a bit less cooking and still been succulent. I did ponder inserting the temperature probe after about 2� hours, but was making a load of chicken and potato pasties, so got waylaid.

One point I would like to raise concerns cooking the ham 'bone in'. I calculated the time to include the weight of the bone, would it have been prudent to 'guestimate' the weight of the bone and subtract it from the total and reduce the cooking time accordingly? I would be interested in any views on this.

Of course I will post another photo when I carve it, and give my opinion regarding the inner taste and texture.

Regards, Paul Kribs

[tristar]

Hi Paul,

One other point to remember when cooking 'Bone In' is the greater thermal conductivity of the bone which transfers heat quicker to the centre of the joint being cooked!

Regards,
Richard

[Paul Kribs]

A very relevant point tristar.. so we are basically reducing the cooking time to a certain degree due to cooking from the inside as well as outside. Maybe the thermal probe should be employed as I doubt there is a formula (or is there?) for the rate of heat transference along the bone.. This would bring in to play the density of the bone etc.

Looks like I'll be sticking to the 20 minutes per lb + 20 mins recipe, provided my ham is cooked properly when I carve it of course. I wonder if the Ham Cooking table is for bone in hams? it doesn't state.

Incidentally, raw weight was bang on 5 kilos ( a shade over 11 lbs), and cooked dry weight is 3.884 kilos ( 8lbs 9 ozs). Quite a reduction when you consider it still contains the weight of the bones and rind.

Regards, Paul Kribs

[dougal]

Paul - 11 lb (5kg) from the MAFF chart published by Jane Grigson is around 3hrs 20.
The 3hrs 40 you gave was appropriate to Vernons 6.5kg leg.
So it sounds like the 3hr 20 timing could be spot on for your bone-in leg.

Does anyone actually have MAFF Bulletin No 127 ??
I'll ask if the local library can find a copy...

I alluded to the thermal conductivity of the bone in my commenting about Vernon's experience.
There is a comment in Julia Child's "Mastering the Art of French Cookery" in which she discusses this in relation to roasting legs of lamb and mutton.

A boned leg or shoulder will weigh approximately 30% less than a bone-in piece, but its cooking time per pound usually more than doubles, depending on the thickness of the meat"

I'm also surprised that brine calculations seem to ignore the possibility of a significant part of the total weight being bone...

The time to get the core up to something like 70C will also vary somewhat depending on whether the starting point is 4C (fridge) 15C (dry-cure conditions) or 20C+ (summer or tropical ambient).

As regards the core endpoint temperature, in their "Charcuterie" (at page 62), Ruhlman and Polcyn indicate that the american federal guidelines want 71C for roast pork, however they prefer the result from pulling it out at 54/60C internal.
They also remind us that the core temperature will rise another couple of degrees C after the cooking heat is removed from the exterior.
Hence their 54/60C gives an actual max temp of 60/63C, which they describe as "medium-rare to medium".
I'd expect this "carry-over" to be perhaps rather less with lower exterior temperatures than roasting (as with ham simmering).
The point I'm making here is that the 70C previously quoted is for cooking until "well done" - which may not be what everyone is hoping for with ham - and isn't written in tablets of stone...
(I believe that 71C in pork is one of the 'hurdles' to achieving total confidence in safety of food for commercial sale.)

[Vernon Smith]

Steady on guys, I only wanted to make some ham and I seem to have started WWIII. Aren't we all playing for the same team?

I already posted an explanation of 3% KNO3. I meant 3% by weight of salt. In other words 30g total. Sorry for that...

OK! My turn now. All the posts endorse the obvious conclusion that I stuffed it up but I am still not sure I have all the answers. Some, yes but not all. Oddley reckons my ham finished up with 7.1% salt, which is far too high. I am led to conclude that 28days after pumping was too long. Oddley suggests 1 week after pumping so I will give that a try next. The intense smoking was wrong too. I won't smoke the next one. Then the cooking was wrong because I didn't float the ham but weighted it down to the bottom of the pot. In future I will suspend it with the knuckle above the surface somehow. Given the above I am not surprised it was a disaster.

Wohoki, you still haven't said how long your ham takes to reach mid 70's according to your spike thermometer neither do you give an idea of your starting temperature. Mine will be about 25 deg C Please divulge, the suspense is killing me.

Paul, have you any idea at what temperature you cooked your ham?

The next question is how to reduce the salt from 7.1%? If I cut down the volume of the cure I won't have enough to cover the ham even though it fits quite snugly in the curing bucket. Catch 22! I would have to leave some of the ham above the surface of the cure and turn it over say every day. Any ideas please? Alternatively, can I reduce the weight of salt in the cure that will also be used for the pumping? For example:

6000g water,
500g salt
1,000g sugar
30g KNO3

What is the minimum amount of salt to effect a cure? 500g might not be enough.

I note the statement that a bone-less ham requires double the cooking time than a ham with bone in. This is adding to my confusion. The graphs don't mention bone in or out although Paul seems to have got it right. Best of luck my friend.

That's enough from me for now. Let's see what ideas are posted next.
Thanks guys, all information gratefully received.

[Paul Kribs]

Vernon

Although my ham was a bit smaller than yours, I still had the problem you describe regarding covering the ham with the cure.. My brining bucket was slightly too small for the length and a bit too wide to push the brine up to cover it (hope that makes sense. I overcame this problem but putting the ham in a high tensile butchers meat bag, basically a strong polythene bag. I then added the brine and drew the top of the bag together allowing the brine to cover the whole ham.. Obviously this was a bit fiddly, but after I had tied the top of the bag with twine it did the job admirably.

I am afraid I didn't monitor the temperature. I just bought it up to a rolling simmer, skimmed it, lowered the heat so the water was barely moving, and left it like that for the prescribed time. As the ham didn't quite fit my largest pot (2 gallons), I used aluminium foil to fashion a domed lid cum cartouche (sp?). Also, the base of the ham was in contact with the bottom of the pan throughout the cooking process, but it didn't burn at all, but did tear a small piece of the skin off on removal. Obviously it's on the underside in the photo, and doesn't detract from it's appearance.

I saved the juices that exuded whilst it was cooling, and they jellied in the fridge and will go into a pork pie within the next few days.

Regards, Paul Kribs

[Wohoki]

Hi Vernon, sorry mate, but I can't give you times. I just didn't check.

If it's any use, the last ham I did, and the best so far, was a whole, unboned, shoulder from a smoked baconer that my butcher let me have for a stupidly small sum of money. He can sell all the rashers he can stock, and the gammon slices as well, but if he gets left with a hand I get it for less than a tenner, as no-one else wants it, and they are huge.
I soaked it for twelve hours in the fridge, then in fresh water overnight at room temperature (just under 20C). It was then brought to a slow simmer, which was then reduced until the water just moved but no more, and I checked the temperature with a thermometer at the thickest point every half hour from the end of the first two hours (trying to use the same hole to minimise loss of juices). I just turned it off when the core temperature reached the mid 70's C. and put it on the doorstep to cool (I guess about 10C, it was a while ago.)
To keep it submerged I used a chip basket upside down and then a rolling pin to hold the basket down- no lid on the pot to avoid boiling, and the meat didn't touch the bottom (BIG stockpot).
It was served warm with mash, parsley sauce and frozen broad beans, then the remains (about five kilos ) was skinned and baked with honey, mustard and cloves for an Easter lunch.

[saucisson]

[quote="Vernon Smith"]Steady on guys, I only wanted to make some ham and I seem to have started WWIII. Aren't we all playing for the same team?
quote]

I read healthy debate without any animosity here, so I think all is well

Dave

[Wohoki]

I agree, Dave. I do really appologise to Dougal if I annoyed him at all. My reading of it was that two people who dislike being contadicted were contradicting each other. Peace?

[Vernon Smith]

Thanks Wohoki, You've just filled in the last pieces of my ham jigsaw for me. Even though you didn't check the times your whole procedure is crystal clear and I am confident enough to try it whenever I pluck up the courage to do another ham. Assuming the temperature rises slowly over a couple or three hours it must be the core temperature that is the important factor so the time is not as rigidly fixed as some experts have led us do believe. No disrespect either to Parson Snows who's knowledge I envy greatly.

I believe there are two different ways of tackling the task, each perfectly valid in its own right but for my own peace of mind I will go with the mid 70's spike job. I don't mind if the ham is a bit on the rare side, to me it's juicier that way. I enjoyed reading the posts on jamon serrano. I was raised as sprog in Andalucia during the 50's so I was practically weaned on "uncooked" ham. My thanks also to Paul for the poly bag trick. That's a gem. Oddley says I mustn't have too much salt available for the meat to absorb, especially after pumping. BTW Paul, cartouch or cartouche, either will do you smartie, I had to look in the dictionary to find out the meaning. Who says train drivers ain't erudite? Having given the issue a thorough thrashing I have learned a lot and I am content. Thanks to you all for sharing your experiences with me. I will post the results of my next attempt in a few weeks (I think).
Regards,
Vernon

PS Wohoki, where did the word "wohoki" come from? It's too cryptic for me to work out. Just like to know, that's all.

[Oddley]

Vernon due to recently realized information if you want to use the brine cure you have as is, then pump it at 10% estimating the bone weight and taking it off the meat weight. From what I can remember the bone weight is about 30% of the weight of the leg. You may want to check that. Then immerse it for 4-5 days.

The reason is in the link below:

http://forum.sausagemaking.org/viewtopic.php?t=1907

If you want me to work out the equilibrium cure just say.

I think wohoki is the hairy bear like creature in the star wars film.

[jenny_haddow]

Ref Wohoki, is it a plant or a branch of a native American tribe, or both?
I'm sure we will find out.

[saucisson]

The peyote cactus is a flowering plant of the family Cactaceae, which is a group of fleshy, spiny plants found primarily in the dry regions of the New World. The Mexican word "piule," which is generally translated to mean "hallucinogenic plant," may have come indirectly from the word "peyote." R. Gordon Wasson, who has studied many hallucinogenic plants and fungi, suggested that "peyotl" or "peyutl" became "peyule," which was further corrupted into ''piule.''[18] "Piule" is also applied to Rivea corymbosa (Convolvulaceae).
Other names which are apparently variations in spelling (and pronunciation) of the basic word "peyote" or "peyotl" include: "pejote," "pellote," "peote," "Peyori," "peyot," "pezote," and "piotl." The many tribes of Indians who use peyote also have words for the plant in their own languages. However, many also know and use the word "peyote" as well. Some of the tribes and their common names are:
Comanche�wokowi or wohoki


Hope this helps!!

Dave

[Wohoki]

Well done Dave. Wohoki is a native American name for peyote. I grow sacred plants as a hobby, and when I was choosing an email address years ago I stuck a pin in a table of peyote names.

(Oddley wasn't too far off either. I wasn't in Star Wars, but I am a large, hairy bear-like creature.)