New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A Pound of Chicken Feet ....

post #1 of 5
4/23/07 at 7:06am
Thread Starter 
a pound of chicken backs and necks, a pound of breast bones with some breast meat attached, and about three pounds of thigh and leg bones. Added to that mix were a couple of small onions, some carrots, celery, and a bay leaf.

These were the ingredients for the chicken stock I made yesterday - pretty much all bones, very little meat. It was simmered for about five or six hours. The results were a reasonably good, but certainly not strong, chicken flavor, and the stock was somewhat gelatinous this morning when I pulled it from the fridge to defat it. Not bad, but I much prefer a stock/broth made with more chicken meat with a little more flavor - this was the first time I made a stock with all/mostly bones. It should make a nice reduction though, so I'm looking forward to that.

The stock is a little cloudy. Perhaps someone can refresh my memory as to the technique for clarifying it using egges or meat.

Shel
Reply
post #2 of 5
4/23/07 at 5:04pm
If it became gelatinous, that is a good thing. I would say it is reduced as much as you want it to be. As a general rule the ratio of bones to mirepiox (sp?) is 5:1. That is 5# bones to 1# veg. And the onion, carrot, celery ratio for a classic Mirepoix is 2:1:1. Also, how much water did you start with? It may be diluted too much - Hmm, but probably not if it gelatinous.

If you cooked the veg the same length of time as you did the bones that may be why the stock is cloudy. After an hour or two of cooking the vegetable proteins start to break down and can cloud the stock. When I do my stock I barely simmer the bones by themselves and throw the veg in for the last hour.

If you use more meat than bones isn't that called a broth?

Jock
Reply
post #3 of 5
4/23/07 at 5:52pm
Thread Starter 
Water was a little more than 4 quarts - essentially just enough to cover the contents. Durn! I forgot about adding the veggies later as was discussed a few weeks ago. I've been told that more meat than bones is a broth ... but if they're about equal proportins? In any case, the "all bones" process was as muct a test for flaver and gelatine as anything else. Now I've a point of comparison and know exactly what I want the stock or broth to taste like. So, while I'll continue to save bones and use them, I'll also add more chicken meat for the taste and texture that's most pleasing for me.

Thanks!
Reply
post #4 of 5
4/24/07 at 5:35am
a few years ago I read an article (possibly by Judy Rodgers) that talks about making stock with whole Hens....using bones all you get is thin flavor. feet gives the jell, but meat gives the flavor.
Reply
post #5 of 5
4/24/07 at 6:27am
Thread Starter 
G'morning,

Essentially that's what I've been doing since I started cooking, more than 25 years ago. This was the first time I tried a "bones only" approach. Often, instead of using a whole chicken, I'll stick to thighs and legs, backs, wings, and meaty breast bones because I can get them inexpensively. The breast bones are free and have a lot of meat left on them, backs and necks are less than $1.00/lb, and thighs and legs are often available on sale for less per pound than a whole chicken. But, that said, putting a couple of whole chickens in the pot makes for a beautiful broth/stock.

Shel
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home