MikeJ
I find DuraFlame has the same kind of heat and time as Kingsford. The fact it has less ash is a plus.
Jim

I've used the new Duraflame Real Hardwood Briquettes, and found them to cook virtually identical to Kingsford. The Duraflame Briqs produce far less ash, and the ash produced is much lighter (weight). Flavor wise I could not detect any difference.

The only problem is that I can't seem to buy any of the Duraflame Briqs ANYWHERE. I scored my bag at a comp, but was told that they're not available for sale locally. I could buy a pallet (58 bags?), but nothing less.

Someone mentioned this would be an excellent time for some aggressive marketing by the folks at Duraflame. I couldn't agree more. As I understand it, they feel they've got an excellent product but just can't seem to elbow their way onto the shelves. A strong demand from the consumer would certainly go a long way here.

I've yet to try the "New" Kingsford, so I'll reserve judgement, but the old trick of offering less product for the same $ is a tried and true method of boosting the bottom line. I say we give their pitch a chance. Pound for pound, does it burn longer? Does it burn hotter? If there's any group that can answer those questions, it would certainly be us.

In the meantime, I've got a 288 lb stash of the original blend to burn through

I have my stash of old as well. 320 pounds and still have about 15 pounds of the new junk. I know Sams Club carries Duraflame fireplace logs. I am going to go try and convince my Sams manager to get the Duraflame briquets. A little known fact if if you tell a Sams manager you can get an item at cosco or something like that they will make all the effort in the world to get it into the Sams. You guys should give it a shot too...

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin S.:
Pound for pound, does it burn longer? Does it burn hotter? If there's any group that can answer those questions, it would certainly be us.

I was thinking that we should devise a side by side test that several of us could run and pool the results. Something like lighting one measured chimney - same number of briqs in each - of old and new at the same time and measure the lighting and burn time.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Joel Kiess,

The interesting thing is that about 4 or 5 months ago I posted a question about Kingsford because I noticed, after buying my usual batch of Kingsford Original, that it was visibly different and seemed to react differently...it was much darker looking, flamed up in my chimney rather than ashing over like it had been doing, and seemed to burn through quicker...noone responded to my inquiry so I thought I had an odd batch...but all my batches were exactly the same since and I had to be more vigilant on all my cooks...hmmmmm...perhaps they were tinkering around earlier than we think...

Here's a quote from one of their press releases: "This is an exciting development for grillers who love the taste of charcoal grilled foods but are looking for convenience, given today's fast-paced lifestyle."

Well, Kingsford has essentially abandoned the "low and slow" crowd with that quote...I hope that those who compete in BBQ competitions will revolt, use another product, and then that company will market the heck out of it...

This is all so incredibly discouraging...keep that information on alternatives and comparisons coming folks...especially on the long cooks...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Brad H.,

Just got back from the HD in Ft Wayne. I have 400 lbs and no room for any more. That should last me well into the Summer and then I'll go to plan B.

Does any one know where I can find plan B?

quote:

Originally posted by Joel Kiess:
Just curious Chris - how much is enough to last through 2006??

I think I have six 24 pound bags.

Regards,
Chris

I have posted an article on the Web site regarding this topic, mainly as a vehicle to show a series of photos of the new product and packaging.

Kingsford Charcoal Briquets: New Design, New Formula For 2006

Regards,
Chris

I wonder how a product can burn both "hotter and longer" than an equivalent amount of the previous product ? Guess the proof is in the pudding and we'll just have to see.

Paul

What will be interesting is when the Competitions really start up, and to see what the teams are saying. Do any of them stop using Kingsford, or does the number of teams winning with Kingsford drop. We shall see.

I was at the Lakeland pig fest last week, and many of the teams were using Sam's choice. Teams were fairly split between old kingsford and Sam's choice. A couple of the "big guns" had the walmart brand. Did not notice a single bag of the new kingsford.

Looks like I jumped on the lump bandwagon just in time! I still have four 24 lb bags of the "old K" and once it's gone ... no more briquettes for me. If you haven't tried lump yet, now might be a good time to give it a shot. Just a suggestion.

Rick

quote:

Originally posted by Paul G.:
I wonder how a product can burn both "hotter and longer" than an equivalent amount of the previous product ? Guess the proof is in the pudding and we'll just have to see.

Paul

Exactly correct Paul.

This isn't rocket science. It is basic chemistry. An equivalent amount of wood hydrocarbons cannot burn longer and hotter (i.e., contain more energy) than the old mix of similar wood hydrocarbons, no matter what enhancers are added to the mix.

If it is the additional chemicals that are burning longer and hotter, I will not be using this substance to cook. And I question that there could be much difference in the energy these chemicals contain, short of adding Uranium-235.

Jim

I bought by first load of Royal Oak lump today. I was going to search out some old kingsford, but said "wtf" ...... time to move on.

I am now a lump convert.

question for the lump users... is refueling done any differently than briquets? normally i add 1/2 - 3/4 of a weber chimney full of lit briquets when its time to refuel. i'm cooking a 13 lb brisket this weekend and i'm expecting to have to refuel a few times.

Hey don't come look'in for the old Kingsford here, because I just purchased the last 200 lbs. available at our local HD stores. It's all new stuff now.

quote:

Originally posted by Brian J:
question for the lump users... is refueling done any differently than briquets? normally i add 1/2 - 3/4 of a weber chimney full of lit briquets when its time to refuel. i'm cooking a 13 lb brisket this weekend and i'm expecting to have to refuel a few times.

People refuel differently. I never added lit charcoal or lump when more fuel was needed, unless I let it almost burn out.
I just grab a handful, toss in the lump, or use the door like a chute and let it slide on in. If I need to position it to get closer to the lit coals, I use one of those long handled narrow garden shovels. The ones where the shovel spade is about 7" long and 3-4 inches wide. They are good for stirring, or adding another hunk of smoke wood where you want it also.

I just looked at Chris's webpage showing the differences, notably that 10 new briquettes weigh 1/4 oz less than 10 old ones. What jumped out at me was the side by side picture showing the new product as slightly thicker. I think that picture says it all. It shows the grooves are pretty deep, nearly to the to the midpoint. Looks to me like just the right amount of charcoal missing to lose the 1/4 oz per 10 briqettes. And as others have mentioned, there is no way less product can burn both longer and hotter without higher energy density (chemicals). Even the same amount of charcoal can't do BOTH without this sort of tinkering, let alone less charcoal. I guess they could use different types of wood to achieve this, but I doubt it. I always thought the big charcoal makers basically used just odd scraps anyway?

That picture also proves that they WILL burn hotter (all else being equal) because there is more surface area to burn at once. How much hotter is the question. Also just a hunch, but looks to me like they would fall apart quicker. This would create even more surface area and could cause mini-temp spikes and the charcoal to burn up even quicker (assuming there was plenty of oxygen, which is most likely). That could explain some of the problems people have mentioned.

This leaves the burn longer part of the equation. Again, echoing others, that is not Kingsford lying. It is Kingsford "marketing" . I think Kingsford's own response to this very question says it all. Rather than say, yes the briquettes do indeed burn longer, they say "Please take note they are ready to cook on sooner..." -so if you can start grilling fifteen minutes sooner, but the charcoal burns out ten minutes faster, you still "gained" 5 minutes of "usable" burn time right?

Sorry for the long post. I know I'm a newbie at this forum, but I just thought I'd share my thoughts. I use Kinsgford when not using lump, so this topic really burns me
BTW- I've been a "lurker" at this site for a couple years.

Forgot to mention, I will be using Royal Oak (briquettes) instead of Kingsford, I like it better anyway. I've used it and gotten the same results with seemingly less ash and better smell. It was just a pain to drive to Academy. For any of you who have Academy stores nearby, they carry this and it's a few cents cheaper than Kingsford at their store. They also have great prices on most everything so check them out if you can.

I've read Royal Oak makes the Walmart brand lump. Does anyone know if they also make the briquettes for Walmart? The Walmart briquettes I tried were extra large, like no other I've seen. Makes sense they'd buy briquettes from same company as their lump though. Just curious.

I sent a letter to Kingsford detailing my objections to the new product. The response I got was one of sincerity and they seemed like they were working something out. I basically compared the Kingsford situation to the Coke situation in the 80s. ANyone else remember "New Coke"? boy was that a disaster and not long after came Coke Classic. I would suggest sending them a professional letter and hopefully they will get enough of a response to start investigating a way to make things right. Perhaps the new product should stay on the market but it definately shouldnt be the only choice.