4 ms·

I just got back from grocery shopping where I bought a lamb leg roast, haven't had one before. I plan to cook it sous vide at 133°F for 36 hours. Too much? A be

I just got back from grocery shopping where I bought a lamb leg roast, haven't had one before. I plan to cook it sous vide at 133°F for 36 hours. Too much? A beef shank benefits from even more. I did that to some lamb ribs not long ago and they were most excellent. Nothing added but salt. I've been trying to source a whole lamb for the freezer, to keep the cow in there company. I guess the pandemic is why it's been hard to find.

jessaustin 6y ago
I haven't cooked lamb sous vide, but I'd be amazed if a "leg roast" needs so much time. Won't it end up sort of mushy?
- hirundo 6y ago
  When I do that to beef it isn't mushy, but fork-tender. With shank or ribs, the flavor is still intense. Guess I'll find out if the same is true for a lamb leg. Beef comes out of the water bath pale and unappetizing, but crisps up nicely in the air fryer.
  - GoMonad 6y ago
    I think that depends on the cut of beef. 36h is great for brisket or short rib. But 36h would be bad for fillet mignon.
prpl 6y ago
Leg of lamb is not tough generally, I personally would cut that down to no more than 18 hours if it is bone-in and probably like 8-10 hours if boneless, depending on size. Edit: A few websites suggest something between 5-8 for boneless.
bullfightonmars 6y ago
Leg of lamb is a pretty tender cut of meat closer to steak or ribeye in my experience. Recently I roasted a leg of lamb for maybe 2.5 hours until the core temp was 135. It was a perfect medium rare in the thickest parts. I suspect you should target something like 2-6 hours. Kenji has a chart you can follow for cook times on Serious Eats. https://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2016/10/sous-vide-leg-of-lamb-mint-cumin-black-mustard-recipe.html https://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2016/10/sous-vide-leg-of...
dogma1138 6y ago
You really don’t need to sous vide it for 36 hours it’s a waste of time and money. Depending on the size 5-6 hours in a sous vide is more than enough and it’s much better if you simply roast or braise it. I used to sous vide everything then I’ve learned to cook better and I sous vide as a mostly pointless exercise for most food perpetration other than reheating.

jessaustin 6y ago

I haven't cooked lamb sous vide, but I'd be amazed if a "leg roast" needs so much time. Won't it end up sort of mushy?

hirundo 6y ago
When I do that to beef it isn't mushy, but fork-tender. With shank or ribs, the flavor is still intense. Guess I'll find out if the same is true for a lamb leg. Beef comes out of the water bath pale and unappetizing, but crisps up nicely in the air fryer.
- GoMonad 6y ago
  I think that depends on the cut of beef. 36h is great for brisket or short rib. But 36h would be bad for fillet mignon.

prpl 6y ago

Leg of lamb is not tough generally, I personally would cut that down to no more than 18 hours if it is bone-in and probably like 8-10 hours if boneless, depending on size. Edit: A few websites suggest something between 5-8 for boneless.

bullfightonmars 6y ago

Leg of lamb is a pretty tender cut of meat closer to steak or ribeye in my experience. Recently I roasted a leg of lamb for maybe 2.5 hours until the core temp was 135. It was a perfect medium rare in the thickest parts. I suspect you should target something like 2-6 hours. Kenji has a chart you can follow for cook times on Serious Eats. https://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2016/10/sous-vide-leg-of-lamb-mint-cumin-black-mustard-recipe.html https://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2016/10/sous-vide-leg-of...

dogma1138 6y ago

You really don’t need to sous vide it for 36 hours it’s a waste of time and money. Depending on the size 5-6 hours in a sous vide is more than enough and it’s much better if you simply roast or braise it. I used to sous vide everything then I’ve learned to cook better and I sous vide as a mostly pointless exercise for most food perpetration other than reheating.