Lamb Osso Buco

In the Sous Vide Recipes Forum
Any hints on time and temp for these shanks from Costco/ I planned 135F for 3 to 4 hours but now have seen suggestion from 24 to 48 hours, wich have me wondering.

The shanks looh great and at under three bucks a pound for lamb are a great bargain.

Thanks

Tim Culhane


8 Replies So Far

I checked in two of my books. Douglas Baldwin's instructions for 4 lamb shanks each weighing 1 pound says to sear them first for 20 to 35 seconds per side. Then, vacuum seal and cook for 12 to 24 hours at 175F. then re-sear until deep brown. Jason, on the other hand, instructs that they should be cooked at 131F for 1 to 2 days. And then seared. I don't know why the instructions are so different but there you have it. I have not done lamb shanks myself yet, but I am jealous that you managed to get them for such a good price. Costco here (Canada) never carries them and I love them.
Hi Elsie-

Thanks for the info and I must apologize for the pricing info; three bucks a pound would be fabulous but I erred. The weight was 2.98 pounds and the price was $5.98/pound. which still isn't too bad for lamb.

Thanks again.
Hi Tim:

You are right, still not a bad price for shanks. Will you post how you ended up cooking them and for how long and at what temperature? II would be helpful to know what another person's experience was. I am pretty new still to sous vide having gotten my equipment (polyscience pro) as a Christmas gift, but I do love it. I did some chicken breasts the other day and am turning two of them into butter chicken tonight. Another meat I love to cook sous vide is hangar steak.
Hi all, my thought is that either time / temp combination Elsie mentioned above will work just fine. The reason they are so different is they will result in different dishes.

Baldwin's are cooked at a very high temperature and will come out much more similar to traditionally cooked shanks. Because of the high temperature you do not need to cook it as long.

Mine cook at a very low temperature and will come out as tender, medium-rare shanks. Because they're at a lower temperature they need the extra tenderizing time.

It's a completely personal call on what you'd like. I run into this when I cook pulled pork / pork shoulder. Sometimes I'll cook it at a higher temperature because I really want that "pulled pork" texture. Othertimes I'll want a most moist, tender pork and will cook it at a lower temp.

As for the pre-searing. Taste tests (by Serious Eats) have shown that there is no flavor difference by doing a pre-sear so I never pre-sear it. However, some people swear by it and I'm not going to tell them they are wrong. If you do something and it makes the food better for you, then by all means do it!

I hope that helps some!
Hi

Thanks for the info Jason and I split the difference by SV 'ing the lamb for 24 hours at 150 which resulted in an epicurean delight.

It was juicy, and just on the pinkish-gray side...medium rare/well? From the SV into a hot skillet for a bit of crust, roasted spuds and grilled Brussels Sprouts all washed down with a California Cab. Can't beat it.And Elsie, I'm certain you'd like it also.

Thanks again and Go UConn Huskies!
On the topic of pre-searing. One thing you do gain from pre-searing is the killing of any pathogens that maybe on the meat. Some experts in SV will have you place your bagged meat in a 190 F. bath for 2-3 mins to do the same thing, kill any surface pathogens. So while pre-searing may not be doing anything for the taste, it is having a positive purpose from a food safety point.
That's a good point John. It especially matters if you are not cooking things at a pasteurizing time / temperature combination.
Hi

Thanks for the info dear keep shear your thoughts.


Reply to this Topic

In order to add a reply to this topic please log in or create an account, it's free and only takes 30 seconds.