Sous vide vs fire, which way do you all lean for a thick ribeye?

I been cutting for 14 years at the shop on Main Street, and I tried something last Tuesday that threw me. Took a 2 inch thick ribeye home, did the sous vide thing at 130 for two hours, then seared it hard in cast iron. Came out perfect edge to edge, pink all the way, zero gray band. My buddy at work says I'm overcomplicating it, that a hot chimney grill with a reverse sear does the same thing in less time and gives you that smoky taste you cant fake. He's got a point, the sous vide was tender but kind of clean tasting, if that makes sense. I grew up on my grandpa's charred cowboy steaks, so part of me thinks the fire method is more honest. But the consistency on that bath was unreal, every single bite the same temp. Which side do you all land on for a premium cut? And has anyone tried finishing a sous vide steak over actual wood coals instead of a pan?

1 comments

1 Comment

brooke7116d ago

Hot smoke from the coals does more for flavor than any water bath, that's for sure, but your buddy's timeline is a bit off with a two inch cut. A reverse sear on a chimney will take closer to forty minutes plus a hard sear, not less time, especially if you want it warmed through without a gray ring. Finished sous vide over wood coals gives you the best of both worlds, I have tried it, just pat it dry and give it sixty seconds a side, that smoke still gets in there.