Cooking chicken question

That sounds incredibly long. The target internal temp of 180F is also way too high. I would recommend roasting for a much shorter time at a higher temp. Something like 400-450F for about an hour for a 5.33 lbs chicken should do it. The only way to really know is to get the chicken out and cut through the joint between the leg and the thigh, and make sure the juices run clear. That or using a thermometer...

I wonder if it is called sticky chicken because for that amount of time at a low temp the skin will get kind of sticky and gummy?  Chicken done low and slow in a smoker does this.

5 hours does seem a bit long.  As for your original question a single 5+ pounder will take just a bit longer than the 4 pounders.  The best way is to use a thermometer, and I agree with FrenchFries about 180 being too done.  I'd go about 165 - 170 and make sure you rest it for at least 10 minutes before cutting.

And when you do cut you may end up with chicken that looks raw along the bone simply because of the redness.  This has been discussed before here and in other forums.  Basically the chicken is done, in spite of the looks.  The bloodiness comes from the marrow inside the bones oozing out.  Factory chickens are forced to market weight before they really mature, and the bones are not fully developed and are still rather porous.  Perhaps the recipe calls for taking it to 180 to reduce the "raw" appearance of the bones at the expense of overcooking and drying it out.

I thought I had a link to some web articles about this bloody chicken - ah, here it is:

http://www.hi-tm.com/Documents/Bloody-chik.html

mjb.

The high ratings are due to the fact that some people like overcooked chicken.  "Sticky" probably isn't just the skin, because this chicken will stick to your teeth.  Also, the meat will fall of the bone, and the rib and wish bones will crack easily.  Having grown up with my grandmother's chicken -- been there, done that and didn't like it. 

But if you do like the really well done rotisserie chickens sold by many super-markets, 5 hours is more than enough time to take a 5+ lb chicken to the same degree of over-doneness and beyond.  My editorialzing aside, go with 5 and you'll get the chicken as promised. 

Maybe a nice kugel on the side?  

BDL

375 regular oven 350 convection, cook on a rack in pan, so it stays dry, till internal temp 165 take out let sit 15 minutes then carve.   That slow cooking concept is great if you have a commercial Alto Sham oven which are great.

I absolutely loved my grandmother's fried chicken.  It would always be tender, juicy and fried with a delicious crisp.  No one in the family has been able to duplicate it.  I've never seen anyone else outside the family follow the same process she did.

She would soak her raw chicken in buttermilk for a while (I was never privy to the amount of time she soaked it).  Then she would boil the chicken in just salt and water.  She'd dip her finger in periodically to taste the water.  Once she deemed it was ready she'd remove it, bread it and fry it.

Maybe some of you can enlighten me on the purpose of her process. 

Frying chicken means frying for a fairly long period, 20 minutes ish. By poaching the chicken, she only had to cook the coating as the chicken was already cooked. In deep frying chicken, it's not particularly different as the steam does most of the cooking of the chicken.

A whole 4-5 pound chicken (2-2,5kg) -rubbed in a coat of sunflower oil and seasoning- will be nicely done in 45-60 minutes in an oven of 200°C/395°F. I prefer the whole 60 minutes, always; chickens have a lot of fat just under the skin, so a high temperature works well. 

A slightly quicker method is to cut the chicken along the spine, fold open. But, I still put it in the oven for 60 minutes to get it really crisp.

Also, try loosening the skin before cooking and fill the gap with a butter/fresh herb mix like here. This was a butter, tarragon and cayenne mixture.

Want it sticky? Mix honey with almost an equal amount of lemonjuice, some of your favorite herbs and spices and mix. Paint it on the chicken the last 15 minutes of cooking time.

Do you all just leave the chicken sitting in the bottom of the pan, turn it over a few times, or roast it on a rack?  This also seems to be a point of contention in the various recipes I've seen.

Truss, rack AND turn three times.  Finishing breast side up seems to net the best combination of crisp skin and juicy meat.  But that's definitely going the extra mile -- one turn might be enough for you. 

Perhaps the largest advantage you can give yourself is to use good quality chickens.  They are never produced in large Southern factory farms, nor are they often found in super market meat counters.

BDL

How many here no from Kugel either potato or noodle??Sweet or savory??

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCZ 

Do you all just leave the chicken sitting in the bottom of the pan, turn it over a few times, or roast it on a rack?  This also seems to be a point of contention in the various recipes I've seen.

When you cut a chicken open like I showed in the picture, you don't need to turn it, but.... first flatten the chicken a little and use a big lasagnetray. To start, make a bed of goodies to put the chicken on; take the unpeeled cloves from a whole garlic bulb, or more if you like, and/or a few handfuls of  olives, shallots, halved onions, a bundle of herbs: tarragon + chicken is a match from heaven (not a shy little twig, please)... etc. Put the chicken on the bed and you will always have the most tasty chicken ever witjpout having to turn it over when cooking!

When done, remove all herbs, squeeze the pulp from the garlic and work it in the cookingjuice at the bottom. Yummie!

I never turn the chicken, cook it in a large, low-sided pan (1 inch max) so the dry heat surrounds it, and not steam, and at a very high temp - 450 F.  I stuff some butter and herbs under the skin - thyme or marjoram, and salt and pepper.  It comes out extremely crispy outside and very juicy inside.  I never bother to turn it.  I cook potato wedges around it, that take up the nice flavor of chicken, butter and pepper, and they get nice and crispy outside and creamy inside too.  (Parchment paper to line the pan). 

I find that a high-sided pan doesn't allow for nice browning. 

I'm going to try flattening it like that, Chris.  And use a shallower pan.  Thanks for all the advice.

Grandma made luchshen (noodle) kugel, with apricots but not too sweet.  I've got a few kugels in my rep, but her version is still my favorite. 

BDL

I too usually spatchcock a chicken before roasting or broiling as in Chris B's photo.  Herbed butter under the skin gives good flavor, olive oil on the outside helps give a brown, crispy skin.  Did we mention getting the skin dry before cooking?  Usually the chicken sits on a bed of celery, carrots and onion slices, sometimes unpeeled garlic cloves added to the mix.  Steel racks don't add much flavor to the pan juices.

When broiling I keep the seasoning to a minimum, just olive oil and kosher salt.  Start with skin side down, turn once.  When roasting don't turn at all.

Might be time to roast a chicken for sunday's dinner, some mashed potatoes with a good gravy ....

mjb.

The only chicken I can think of that would benefit from 5 hours of cooking would be one that died of old age.  In which case, I would prefer attempting to create a new fashion trend of chicken leather accessories over actually eating it. 

Heston Blumenthal roasts a chicken for 4 hours at 60*C, tho'. Then, because the skin would still be tough, he pan-fries it in 'chicken butter' (basically frying the wing tips and other off-cuts in butter). It all depends on the very low temperature.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTaylor 

Heston Blumenthal roasts a chicken for 4 hours at 60*C, tho'. Then, because the skin would still be tough, he pan-fries it in 'chicken butter' (basically frying the wing tips and other off-cuts in butter). It all depends on the very low temperature.

It's true, to a certain extent.  Under specific circumstances, and with proper handling, long cooking periods are best.  In the case of roasting, though, unless the item in question is completely submerged in fat throughout the cooking process (such as confit), or some other moisturizing measure is taken (such as constant basting), or perhaps an initial high temperature searing method (such as in Peking duck), the meat will drastically dehydrate under such a long period of time and in such a small portion, no matter the temperature and even with a decent amount of larding. 

If the meat is dehydrated, one would then have the option of forcing more fat or moisture into the meat via some other process, in which case you have a fatty jerky or reconstituted meat.  As for myself, I would prefer to reserve the last option for only the most desperate of meats.  I can not think of any time where I would prefer to take a wonderful piece of meat and subject it to such rough treatment intentionally when it started out in such good condition. 

I liken it to adding cocacola to a finely aged single malt scotch.  Sure, some people might actually like it more that way.  On the other hand, one could respect the initial ingredients and all that has gone into them, save a bundle by starting with a lower quality product to begin with, and create an end product that is just as satisfying. 

True. I understand your point. Blumenthal brines it it for 24 hours beforehand (followed by 24 hours sitting in the fridge uncovered to dry out the skin--I was concerned, too, that this would see it take on aromas floating around the fridge). Brining a chicken before roasting is, I think, a pretty solid idea to begin with ... but would it make up for 4 hours in the oven?

EDIT

Would vacuum packing the entire bird (along with, I don't know, some herbs or garlic or whatever you care for) and cooking it in a 60* (celcius) water bath be better?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTaylor 

True. I understand your point. Blumenthal brines it it for 24 hours beforehand (followed by 24 hours sitting in the fridge uncovered to dry out the skin--I was concerned, too, that this would see it take on aromas floating around the fridge). Brining a chicken before roasting is, I think, a pretty solid idea to begin with ... but would it make up for 4 hours in the oven?

 

EDIT

 

Would vacuum packing the entire bird (along with, I don't know, some herbs or garlic or whatever you care for) and cooking it in a 60* (celcius) water bath be better?

What would concern me more is the temperature to begin with.  At 60c (I think that equates to 140f) maximum temperature, there is still the matter of bacteria.  Brine would help control the bacteria, and it might not be as big of an issue with a high quality chicken after the brine, but I still can't help but to cringe at the thought. 

Please don't get me wrong...  I am not one to shy away from carpaccio, aoli, or anything else that goes against what the often over-zealous gov't guidelines say here in the U.S., but I still think those rules are a necessarily accurate set of guidelines.  The exceptions to the rules are dependent on numerous other factors affecting food safety.  If I could rest assured that the chicken I was cooking was raised, slaughtered, cleaned, shipped, and held in proper conditions, 140f would likely be a perfect temperature, but, given that I don't think I could trust anything to that extent, I would be more comfortable with the minimum temperature to kill harmful bacteria.  In this case that would be 150f.  I'd feel quite confident and comfortable (again, given the assurance that all other conditions for the meat were good) at 155f, which is still below gov't rules. 

Without too long of a cooking period (especially with an initial higher temperature or flash-poach), an end temperature reading of 155f would yield a nice and tender chicken. 

Vacuum packing with brine and flavorings is not a bad idea at all.  I've done so myself.  It helps to infuse the meat quicker and more thoroughly, but as far as food safety goes, I do not think it would help much over a normal soak method.  Also, when vacuum packing with brine, it is usually a good idea to soak in a milk (buttermilk is my preference whenever I brine chicken) solution of some sort, or to at least rinse thoroughly before roasting to help remove added salt content, depending on how salty the brine is.

BDL  We made with dried apricots, raisins, cherries , coconut. We also made a cheap commercial one with canned fruit cocktail, and a savory one that we cut in triangles or wedges and served with Brisket or beef or Tongue Polonaise. Stuff would really fill you up but it was good.

I did think about the bacteria factor, too. The bacteria is all on the surface, though? As in the skin and the cavity? The browning of the whole bird in the pan, once cooked in the oven for 4 hours, was, I think, meant to take care of that (altho' obviously it doesn't reach the cavity). Couldn't I take my sous vide/low roasted chicken and then throw it in a screaming hot oven, just like you might with slow roasted pork belly, to heat the skin past the point where the bacteria die? Or, perhaps, butterfly the chicken before roasting it so I can reach every surface with the pan/grill/whatever I use to brown it.

One can always "kill the bacteria" with heat, BUT, heat does NOTHING to any toxins that might have been produced byt the bacteria before they were "killed by the heat"!

I think that, at 165 F bacteria will be killed. Am I right?

Pete is correct, once the bacteria started to make the bird bad you can't make it better  by cooking. I worked with the old time chefs years ago and they thought  "This is going bad let's freeze it ""also false. If it is bad dump it, don;t take a chance.

Very long and slow roasting doesn't overcook the chicken by itself --- it's letting it get to 180 that does it. The surface will get a bit sticky, and as BDL says the meat will tend to fall off the bones. The meat is very tender, but I find that it also becomes rather bland, I'm not sure why. I find that this method does make sense with ducks, because domesticated ducklings like you find in the supermarket are very often excessively fatty and this long and slow method renders a great deal of it out without drying the meat.

To me, "sticky chicken" means something Paul Prudhomme's mother (and his many, many siblings too) did with old hens and roosters. Basically they'd fry the chicken, but do it at very low heat, something like 250F, for a long time. This process tenderizes the chicken amazingly, and a chicken that old needs all the help it can get. I've done it with a friend's old layer who finally couldn't lay any longer, and it's terrific --- and unquestionably sticky. But I would not subject a younger bird to that kind of treatment.

If you have a convection oven, you can skip all the turning and stuff. Put the chicken on a rack so that it's above a pan, not shielded on the sides, and convection-roast at 425F or so until it's golden brown -- about 10 minutes or so. Then lower the heat to 350 and keep going until it's done, perhaps 45 minutes to an hour or more, depending on weight. Go by temperature not blood or movable joints or any of that unless you are using some kind of very fancy truly farm-raised organic bird of an heirloom breed, and even then temperature is the best way. I roast to 165 and rest 10 minutes. Convection will produce spectacular results here, with beautiful crispy skin and no uneven cooking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisTaylor 

I did think about the bacteria factor, too. The bacteria is all on the surface, though? As in the skin and the cavity? The browning of the whole bird in the pan, once cooked in the oven for 4 hours, was, I think, meant to take care of that (altho' obviously it doesn't reach the cavity). Couldn't I take my sous vide/low roasted chicken and then throw it in a screaming hot oven, just like you might with slow roasted pork belly, to heat the skin past the point where the bacteria die? Or, perhaps, butterfly the chicken before roasting it so I can reach every surface with the pan/grill/whatever I use to brown it.

I don't like the sound of this, Chris. Seems to me the sous vide would make for a lovely environment for bacterial breeding, and then you'd just quickly hot-roast a rotten chicken. Yuck. I wouldn't do this unless I was very, very sure that the chicken was clean to begin with.