Sous-Vide 101: Prime Steak Primer

Clockwise from top: Steaks cooked to various temperatures, a perfect hanger steak, chart of moisture loss. [Photographs: J. Kenji Lopez-Alt]
Sous-Vide Steak
Ready to get vacuum-packing?
Sous-Vide Steak Recipe »
If you've gone out to a fancy restaurant in the last five years or so, you've most likely eaten a protein that was cooked sous-vide in a water bath, whether you knew it or not. The process of vacuum-packing meat and cooking it in a precise temperature-controlled water bath has revolutionized the way fine-dining restaurants are run.
The introduction of the Sous-Vide Supreme, the first temperature-controlled water bath designed for home cooks promises to do the same for home cookery. Finally, anyone with a bit of cash (or a generous friend or two) can produce perfectly cooked proteins without fail—chicken with a juiciness the Colonel's wife only dreamed of, and the kind of double-thick pork chops that would've made me break out a celebratory PBR mid-service, had I been able to produce it when I was a line cook.
Unfortunately, there aren't too many practical resources for home cooks now that they've actually got the damn machines. Hopefully, this new recipe series will shed some light on sous-vide cookery basics.
A good steak is a good place to start.
It's simple enough that it can be accomplished with about 5 minutes of active work, and under an hour from start to finish. Why would anyone want to cook a steak sous-vide, you might ask? The short answer is flawless execution. When a steak is cooked via standard methods, even with a precise thermometer, you run a certain risk of over or under-cooking it.
This risk can be minimized, but it takes practice and skill—even the seasoned line cooks at Luger's, who've been turning-and-burning steaks before vegans existed, will produce the occasional slightly-too-well-done porterhouse.
By cooking your steak in a vacuum-sealed pouch at the precise temperature you want to serve it at, sous-vide cooking makes that risk a thing of the past. But there are still a number of variables involved that can give you better or worse results.
Temperature and Time
With traditional cookery, when you are exposing your meat to temperatures much hotter than their final desired temperature (say, cooking a steak to 130°F in a 550°F skillet), timing is crucial. The center of your steak is getting hotter and hotter, and it's your job as cook to take it off the flame at precisely the moment that it reaches the desired final temperature.* Miss that precise moment, and dinner is ruined.
* In some cases, carryover cooking will make this task even more difficult.

The beauty of sous-vide cooking is that since you are cooking your steak in a 130°F water bath to begin with, there is absolutely no chance your meat will ever get above that temperature. Guests are an hour late? No problem—leave the steaks in the water bath, and they'll be exactly the same an hour later.
So really, with sous-vide cooking, all you need to do is select what temperature you want to serve your meat at. As long as you give yourself enough time to allow the meat to come to that temperature (for chops and steaks, that's about 45 minutes), you can let it sit in the bath for as long as you want, with no detriment to its eating qualities.*
*Alright, alright. Really extending the cooking time—say 18 hours and above—can cause enzymes in the meat to break down too much connective tissue, delivering a mushy steak.
While temperature is really a matter of personal taste, I wanted to lay out some actual data on temperature versus eating quality. So I cooked five prime-grade New York strips at temperatures ranging from 120°F to 160°F and fed them to a group of a dozen tasters. The chart represents percentage of overall weight loss (i.e. moisture loss) that each steak experienced while cooking.

- 120°F (rare): Bright red and slippery on the interior. At this stage, the meat fibrils (which resemble bundles of juice-filled straws) have yet to expel much moisture, so in theory, this should be the juiciest steak. However, because of the softness of meat, chewing causes fibrils to push past each other instead of bursting and releasing their moisture, giving the sensation of slipperiness, or mushiness, rather than juiciness. Additionally, abundant intramuscular fat has yet to soften and render.
- 130°F (medium-rare): The meat has begun to turn pink, and is significantly firmer. Moisture loss is still minimal, at around 4%. Intramuscular fat has begun to render, which not only lubricates the meat, making it taste juicier and more tender, but it also delivers fat-soluble flavor compounds to the tongue and palate—beef at this temperature tastes significantly "beefier" than beef at 120°F. When tasted blind, even self-proclaimed rare meat lovers preferred this one, making it the most popular selection.
- 140°F (medium): Solid rosy pink, and quite firm to the touch. With over 6% moisture loss, it is still moist, but verging on dry. Prolonged chewing results in the familiar "sawdust" texture of overcooked meat. Fat is fully rendered at this stage, delivering plenty of beefy flavor. This was the second most popular choice.
- 150°F (medium-well): Pink, but verging on gray. At this stage, muscle fibrils contract heavily causing moisture level to drop precipitously, jumping all the way up to nearly 12%. Definite dryness in the mouth, with a chewy, fibrous texture. Fat has fully rendered, and has begun to collect outside the steak, carrying away flavor with it.
- 160°F (well done): Dry, gray, and lifeless. Moisture loss is up to 18%, and fat is completely rendered. What once was cow, now is dust.
So, as far as temperature goes, my strong recommendation is to stick within the 130 to 140°F range. To all you hardcore carnivores out there who insist on cooking your well-marbled, Prime-grade steaks rare, you are doing yourself a disservice: Unless it renders and softens, the fat in a well-marbled piece of meat is worthless. You may as well be eating lean, Choice, or Select-grade beef.
And as for people who cook their beef well-done, well, let's just say that you have a special place in my heart right next to Star Wars Episode 1 and that kid who stapled my arm to the table in 2nd grade.
Conclusion: For most people, 130 to 140°F is best.
Searing
Unfortunately, sous-vide cooking is deficient in one key category: it doesn't brown your meat. The browning reactions that take place to give your meat those wonderful crusty, roasted aromas only take place to a significant degree at temperatures well above 300°F, a good 170°F hotter than normal sous-vide cooking temperatures, which means that you still need to pull out the sauté pan to finish.
The key is to sear the meat as quickly as possible, to prevent any possible overcooking. Have your skillet ready and ripping hot before the meat comes out of the water bath, dry the steak thoroughly before adding it to the pan (wet meat will cool the pan down faster than dry meat), and leave it in the pan only long enough to color.
The question on my mind: some chefs pre-sear their meat before adding it to the bag, claiming that the browned flavors penetrate into the meat as it cooks in the water bath. Is this true?

Steaks just out of the bag—untreated on the left, pre-seared on the right. [Photographs: J. Kenji Lopez-Alt]
To find out, I cooked two identical steaks at 130°F, one with a pre-sear for one minute per-side in a 550°F skillet, and one without. Some of the color on the pre-seared version fades during its time in the bag. One can only hope that this is due to the fact that it has been somehow transported into the meat, reinforcing its flavor.

Same steaks, post-searing. [Photographs: J. Kenji Lopez-Alt]
These are the same two steaks after being seared for a minute per side in 550°F skillet, in hot canola oil. Visually, there's not too much distinction. And flavor-wise? In a blind tasting, tasters were split across the board on which one they preferred, and when asked to correctly identify which steak was which, they fared no better than chance.
Conclusion: Don't bother with the pre-sear—you develop plenty of flavor with just the single, post-water bath sear.
Aromatics
Next we move onto the final variable I tested: adding aromatics to the bag. For the sake of this test, those aromatics consisted of three sprigs of thyme, and a sliced garlic clove. In one bag, I placed the steak (seasoned with salt and pepper), thyme, and garlic, while in the second, I placed the same ingredients, along with 2 tablespoons of butter.
My hope was that as the butter melts, it would pick up all the fat-soluble flavor molecules from the garlic and thyme, helping to distribute their aroma evenly over the meat, and further enhancing its flavor. I also included a single, non-aromaticized steak as a control

The results were a shock: tasters unanimously picked the non-butter version as the most aromatic. Some even had trouble telling the difference between the buttered version and the version with no aromatics at all!
How could this be? I looked at sous-vide bags the steaks had been cooking in and had my answer: the bag with the buttered steak contained a large amount of highly aromatic, melted butter. Turns out the butter absorbing the fat-soluble flavor compounds in the aromatics was working against me. Rather than traveling into the meat, where I wanted it to go, it was ending up getting thrown away along with the bag.
Of course, I could use the melted butter and juices from the bag to make a tasty sauce, but if I'm going to do that, I might as well add butter-less aromatics to the steak bag, and use fresh butter and fresh aromatics for any subsequent sauce to double-up on flavor.
Conclusion: Aromatics are fine, but leave out the butter if you want to maximize their flavor.
Final Thoughts
That about wraps it up for the basics, but I want to mention one more thing. The really expensive cuts of beef—NY strip, rib eye, Porterhouse, T-bone, Filet (tenderloin)—have historically been prized for their extreme tenderness, not particularly for their flavor. On the other hand, more flavorful cuts like hanger, blade, or flatiron steak are much more difficult to cook correctly—even a tad over or undercooked, and you're left with a tough, stringy, chewy mess. But cooked properly, they can be every bit as tender as the more expensive cuts, and with more flavor to boot!
That's why those cuts are commonly referred to as "chef" cuts or "restaurant" cuts—chefs love them because they are cheap, and with proper preparation, delicious.
Well, with a sous-vide cooker, anyone can properly cook those tricky chef cuts.

$7 per pound for a hanger steak that is just as tender and tastes much better than a $16 per pound strip steak? Yes please!
Two more quick notes:
Safety: Any time you eat undercooked meat, you are running a risk of food-borne illness. Use your own judgment to weigh whether or not your pleasure is worth this risk. And if pleasure is not your priority, seriously consider becoming a vegan. At 130°F and above, bacteria will cease to multiply, but lower than this, and bacteria will multiply at an accelerated rate. If cooking your steak below 130°F, do not leave it in the water bath for any longer than four hours.
Resting: Unlike with standard high-heat cooking, which requires you to allow your steak to rest before cutting into it in order to give muscle fibrils time to relax and reabsorb juices, a steak cooked sous-vide can be served immediately after searing. Fancy that!
Now if only I could get my wife to wear that bow-tie I bought her for Christmas and serve me overpriced wine with a bit of attitude, I'd have no reason to ever set foot in a steakhouse again.
Continue here for Sous-Vide Steaks »
About the author: Become a fan of The Food Lab on Facebook for play-by-plays on future kitchen tests and recipe experiments. After graduating from MIT, J. Kenji Lopez-Alt spent many years as a chef, recipe developer, writer, and editor in Boston. He now lives in New York with his wife, where he runs a private chef business, KA Cuisine, and co-writes the blog GoodEater.org about sustainable food enjoyment.
Add a comment:
Previewing your comment:
HTML Hints
Some HTML is OK: <a href="URL">link</a>, <strong>strong</strong>, <em>em</em>
Comment Guidelines
Post whatever you want, just keep it seriously about eats, seriously. We reserve the right to delete off-topic or inflammatory comments. Learn more at our Comment Policy page.
If you see something not so nice, please, report an inappropriate comment.
36 Comments:
Thanks,
pookguy at 1:24PM on 03/03/10
That last picture is now my wallpaper
Grease at 1:46PM on 03/03/10
I know I've seen the home-hacked version of a SV somewhere on this site. I might find it tonight and give it a try.
Fernando at 1:57PM on 03/03/10
Love it. When paying too much at a restaurant, let them use it so some idiot doesn't mess up my meat. But at home? Man, grill, delicious beverage, wafting smoke, the tantalizing sizzle- all senses are satiated--- a glorified boil-in-bag steak seems too homogenized, stripped of all of our caveman roots. I like the undercurrent of fear involved in grilling- it adds more umami!
bruisedbuddha at 2:07PM on 03/03/10
Yes, sous vide is used a lot in restaurants, but not for personal steaks or burgers. Though I've seen the method used for big beef roasts that were post-seared.
resolutejc at 2:28PM on 03/03/10
Regarding your contention that people are doing a disservice by cooking their steaks to rare:
Your analysis fails to take into account the fact that the average steak cooked without sous vide equipment has a temperature gradient. Thus, rare according to your definition (120 degrees) only equates the the temperature in the middle of an average steak. I'm no scientist, but I would bet that a steak cooked to 120 degrees rare in the middle, has a huge differential between the inside portion that is rare and the outside portion that was cooked with heat as high as 750 degrees a la Peter Luger.
If I could order a steak that was consistently done to 135 degrees, I would. Unfortunately, this is impossible in the majority of restaurants and why people who prefer their meat south of medium must order rare or risk being disappointed with a greater portion of meat cooked beyond 130 degrees or so.
To all you hardcore carnivores out there who insist on cooking your well-marbled, Prime-grade steaks rare, you are doing yourself a disservice:
scottyp at 2:49PM on 03/03/10
Crap, don't read the last sentence of the above post. Just a bad cut and paste job and a failure to preview on my part.
scottyp at 2:50PM on 03/03/10
@fernando if you do find that home hack can you link back on here?!
i am the shame of texas...i dont like steak! i never in my life have eaten a steak ( i have tried bites from time to time). i cant stand the texture of it in my mouth and the metal taste i get from it. understanding the science behind it has made me very intrested in trying one that is really cooked properly! i am a huge fan of understanding the science behind good food! thanks for this post! (heres a few more exclamation marks, just incase you dont understand how excited i am about this post) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
vertigoxcured at 2:57PM on 03/03/10
My wife bought me a circulator for my birthday and current lamb chops are in the bath. After a quick sear they will be perfectly medium rare. Mine has been used for hamburgers, meatloaf, lamb, pork chops, steaks and chicken. The most important aspect of using one is to make sure that the temperature has enough time to get to the center of the protein. Thus, it is more important to focus on the minimum amount of time to cook something rather than a maximum time.
pksmash at 4:05PM on 03/03/10
Graph title should be percentage weight retained. Nice test!
lagomorph at 4:15PM on 03/03/10
@scottyp
Very good point. A regular steak cooked rare will have some parts of it that are well done, some parts that are medium, etc, giving the overall impression that the steak is more well done than the very center is. With a sous-vide steak, however, this doesn't happen.
So maybe I need to amend my statement. If the delta T of cooking (the temperature differential between the steak and the cooking medium) is very great, then a rare steak is fine. If the delta T is low (as in with sous-vide cooking), then perhaps medium-rare is the way to go.
@resolutjc
I've worked at and staged at a number of restaurants that do individual steaks sous-vide.
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 4:18PM on 03/03/10
@lagomorph
Yup - good catch.
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 4:19PM on 03/03/10
I've seen the larger boneless beef cuts cooked sous vide and then portioned into individual steaks, which were later seared. I've just never seen a restaurant sous vide bath holding 30+ individually bagged 130 F steaks on a busy Saturday. Using all those bags is not economical nor is it a good use of time or space.
What do you do when you have bone-in steaks where the bone can puncture the sous vide bags?
resolutejc at 4:51PM on 03/03/10
Man....I want one.
JacobEstes at 4:54PM on 03/03/10
@resolutejc
I guess at the places I've worked at, steak was the "safe" item on the menu, so they weren't moving 30 of them a night, more like a dozen or 20. Even so, spacewise, it's much more economical to have 30 steaks ready to go in a water bath that only need a minute per side in a skillet when fired than to use up valuable stove or oven space cooking a steak for the 7-10 minutes that a traditional method would take.
For bone-in steaks, it's not really a problem with heavy-duty commercial sous-vide bags. Only seen that happen rarely, and usually it happens while vac-ing the steaks, so it's easy to catch and fix before you dunk'em in the bath.
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 5:02PM on 03/03/10
Would the same timing & temps work with a veal chop of equal thickness?
BobYes at 6:42PM on 03/03/10
@BobYes
Yes, or a lamb chop, or a pork chop!
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 6:45PM on 03/03/10
I do use the SVS and I concur with Dave Arnold of Cooking Issues - you should pre-sear and then post-sear if you can. You get the best flavor development via Maillard reaction this way and pre-seared meat will have a more "cooked" flavor - i.e., it tastes more as though you traditionally prepared it by roasting or grilling, as opposed to the post-seared meat, which can taste as though the searing was an afterthought. If doing both is not an option and you have to choose one, then post-searing is the way to go, especially with longer-cooked cuts like brisket or short rib.
I never have had a puncture problem with bone-in meat.
upstart kitchen at 10:16PM on 03/03/10
Also, as you know, it is so important it is to chill down your food if you're not eating it right after SVS prep. Otherwise, it can be dangerous. You do note that it's important not to leave a steak in the SVS (or any other water bath) for more than four hours, but as a practical matter steak doesn't pose much of a threat (unless prepared in advance and improperly chilled) because you should not leave relatively tender cuts in the SVS for too long. If you do, the muscle fibers tend to break down and become mushy. Longer is better with the SVS only with tough cuts. Anything tender - i.e., any steak cut - is best cooked for a short time.
upstart kitchen at 10:22PM on 03/03/10
Someone told me that for bone-in chicken breast, they cut a square of thick filter paper and press it against the bone side to prevent it from puncturing the bag. This would help if you have jagged edges on a particular steak or chix breast.
resolutejc at 8:11AM on 03/04/10
Sigh.
Fire, made with wood, is the way god intended steaks to be cooked.
Water doesn't smell like a campfire.
biminitwst at 9:35AM on 03/04/10
I've never tried a SV steak - I'll say that up front.
I just don't get it.
You can sear a steak, and hold a temperature, but it's hard to improve on a perfectly cooked steak with a crisp crust, sizzling on a platter right off a wood fired grill.
Look at the best steak houses in the country, wherever you're located - NY, KC, Chi-town, Tampa etc.
Are any of them serving SV steaks?
***crickets***
Grifola frondosa at 10:28AM on 03/04/10
@Grifola Frondosa & @Biminitwst
I don't think this is meant to replace any traditional techniques. We certainly won't see grills going away any time soon. Then again, many people, myself included, often like the taste of a pan-seared steak. Not all the time, but some times. And in those cases, cooking the steak sous-vide optimizes the results.
It's not better or worse than grilling, just different.
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 11:33AM on 03/04/10
Food safety question.
In this article you say "If cooking your steak below 130°F, do not leave it in the water bath for any longer than four hours."
Yet in the perfect prime rib post you could be cooking the prime rib to 130 for over 4 hours.
Does this pose a significant risk*
*Yes, I understand there is always a risk eating "undercooked meat"
*Yes, I understand it is mostly the surface (not the interior) of meat where you are most likely to encounter a problem
Just wondering if I should up the oven temp on my roast recipes to bring it to 130 in under 4 hours as a rule?
jtminnesota at 12:13PM on 03/04/10
@jtminnesota
Good question.
The answer is, of course there is a small risk, as there is with any undercooked meat, but it's very minimal.
The interior of meat, unless something has gone horribly wrong, is pretty sterile - it's the outside (the cut surfaces) you have to worry about. When cooking a prime rib, even in a low 200 degree oven, the outside, where all the baddies are hanging out gets above 130 degrees pretty quickly, so as long as the interior of the roast is clean (which is almost certainly is), you're safe.
In a sous-vide water bath, however, the outer surface of the meat never comes above the temperature of the water. So at 120 degrees, you're basically creating an incubator for bacteria to multiply on the surface of your steak.
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 12:23PM on 03/04/10
I have now done this using items I bought at Walmart.
1 Freshsaver hand held vacuum 19.98 (comes with 3 bags). Extra Bags 7.98 Digital Thermometer with cord 13.97 (needs 3A batteries) 1 chuck steak 4.82. 1 clove garlic .44 Fresh thyme 2.66.
Amazon: Hamilton Beach Stay-or-Go 4-Quart Slow Cooker 33.54
Total cost 83.93
Came out perfectly. Used the digital thermometer and checked frequently to make sure water temperature stayed between 130 and 140. Best steak I have ever cooked. No need for fancy equipment.
samhell at 1:23AM on 03/13/10
Thank you for this column on sous vide. My husband bought me a SVS for Christmas, and I have made the most delicious steaks and lamb chops ever.
To your point there are very few sous vide cookbooks. I bought the Thomas Keller book, but the recipes are an all weekend affair. I hope you continue to give info and recipes for the SVS.
elencas at 7:40PM on 03/14/10
Making perfect steaks is a closely guided secret among the SV cooks for a long time and I am glad that this is out in the open.
Any idea on how to make a perfect and safe 131F hamburger?
An other secret, I hope your readers should know, is that anybody with a slow cooker or rice cooker can cook serious sous vide too.
This is done by a temperature controller like the Sousvide Magic or other PID temperature controllers.
Mandy28 at 12:15PM on 03/15/10
Great article, and particularly the follow-up link on pre- vs. post searing.
I've been cooking nearly everything sous vide for the last year or more (yes, including hamburgers), using the inexpensive Sous Vide Magic PID controller from Fresh Meals Solutions, together with a 12 liter commercial rice cooker (as well as several smaller ones if I need to cook several items at the same time.) If you use a rice cooker, or anything else that heats from the bottom, you don't have to worry about evenness of the temperature -- natural convection will take care of it (assuming the pot isn't completely stuffed full). An inexpensive CrockPot can also be used, but you might want to put a $9 submersible garden fountain pump in the water bath, just to improve the circulation. Just don't use it above 160F -- it will melt and deform.
I normally use the blow-torch method of searing, because I got tired of all of the grease throughout the house from using the hot-oil searing method.
I would add one note of caution regarding the need for an accurate thermometer when cooking meat for a long period of time, e.g., 24 hours for chuck steak, and up to 72 hours for brisket and short ribs. I've seen quite a few digital thermometers that were off by as much as 5 degrees Fahrenheit -- even those that were advertised to be within 0.5 degree.
At a minimum, I would suggest calibrating your sous vide rig with a NON-DIGITAL basal or ovulation thermometer, at the highest temperature it will register (probably 108F). I've calibrated the Geratherm unit (made Germany, instead of China) against my NIST-certified reference thermometer, and they are accurate to within 0.05F. The Sous Vide Magic 1500D is calibrated at 131F/55C from the factory, and although there is some drift, it is within 0.1C over most of the working range. Cf. http://sousvide.wikia.com/wiki/Thermometer_calibration.
Other units, including the Sous Vide Supreme, may or may not do as well, and I haven't tested it myself, nor have i seen any published test results. There is a considerable art involved in making good sensors, and making sure they are waterproof. I've seen sensors fail, and suddenly be off by 10C or 18F That is certainly enough to ruin your meal, and perhaps make you very ill, depending on which way it goes. So depending on your level of paranoia, you might want to put another thermometer probe in the water bath, and compare the readings from time to time. Many oven thermometers can be set to beep if the temperature exceeds a set point, but unfortunately, none that I know of will beep if the temperatures drops too low.
I use a higher-end FoodSaver sealer (ordered online), in order to have a range of vacuum settings. I'm saving up for a chamber vacuum, some fine day.
RobertJueneman at 12:43PM on 03/15/10
If you're looking for a cheaper solution to DIY sous vide cooking, I've posted a complete step-by-step guide on building a sous vide heating immersion circulator for about $75.
My controller is amazingly accurate - I ran it for 24 hours and it held temperature within 0.1C the entire time. http://seattlefoodgeek.com/2010/02/diy-sous-vide-heating-immersion-circulator-for-about-75/
Seattle Food Geek at 3:37PM on 03/15/10
Those of you who love sous vide cooking as I do are invited to join my just-created mailing list: SousVide @ Modern Paleo:
http://www.modernpaleo.com/sousvide.html
It's an informal, private mailing list for people who cook sous vide, particularly home cooks. Its basic purpose is to facilitate the sharing of information, resources, recipes, and tips related to cooking sous vide.
Diana Hsieh at 6:37PM on 03/16/10
This is a great article, i use sous vide to cook almost all the steaks in my 200 seater steakhouse. When i started out doing this a few years ago there was not much information on the subject at all and had to figure most of it out myself. I now have 5 baths going at service 60l each and different temps. I only sear after on my grill where i add clarified butter and seasoning for flavour. Using sous vide lets me serve MW & WD steaks that are much more enjoyable and much faster for the customer and i don't hate serving them. I also find that sous vide is particularly good for wagyu and lets my chefs cook it with confidence.
toddynz at 5:09AM on 06/02/10
Thanks for this article. Question regarding the searing - is there a particular way to sear the steaks so the internal temp rises minimally? I'm cooking my steak in a 130F water bath to get to med rare, then searing it over high heat for ~1min a side. The result is a steak that is closer to medium and that lacks the deep sear I'm fond of. Thanks!
Jw6784 at 9:31AM on 06/11/10
Kenji, first of all thanks for the excellent articles on sous-vide in a beercooler. I gave your steak recipe a try over the weekend, the first attempt starting at 143 F (to account for heat loss and to be on the safe side on my first try) for 2.5 hours (down to approx 138 F). At the end of cooking, there was a significant amount of juice from the meat at the bottom of the bag and the meat was pretty much well done. So the second time around, I started at 137 F for 1.5 hours and temperature was down to 133 F at the end (probably due to the larger amount of meat straight from the fridge). Once again there was a lot of juice at the bottom of the bag and the meat appeared slightly dry, and a fairly uniform grey, with only hints of pink left. Having read your warning about food safety of cooking at temperatures below 130 F, I am unsure about how low I should start out to get the meat to medium without dropping into dangerous territory at the end of the cooking process. What would you suggest?
Then again, maybe I should get a better cooler?
AlexK at 5:43AM on 06/21/10
@AlexK
if your cooler started at 143 and ended at 138 and your steak ended up grey, there are only two things that could have gone wrong. First, maybe you spent too long searing it at the end and it overcooked in the pan. The other problem could be that your thermometer is not calibrated.
If your meat never got above 143 degrees, there's no way it can end up well done or turned gray. It must have gotten too hot at some point.
I don't think you'll do too much better than losing 2 degrees per hour (which is what you indicated), so I don't think there's a need to get a new cooler. Just calibrate your existing thermometer using boiling water and ice water, or get a new thermometer.
Good luck!
Kenji
J. Kenji Lopez-Alt at 9:52AM on 06/21/10
Thanks Kenji, I'll give it another try then!
Cheers,
Alex
AlexK at 12:23PM on 06/21/10