New vs. Old Kingsford

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that enjoys cooking.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

LarryWolfe

Chef Extraordinaire
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
15,035
Location
Bealeton
I've seen alot of discussion and most of it negative about the New Kingsford vs. the Old Kingsford. What am I missing here? I've used the new Kingsford on many many cooks both grilling and 15+ hour cooks so far and I don't notice any difference whatsoever, other than maybe it lighting a bit quicker. What's everyone's thought on this.
 

Bruce B

Master Chef
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
6,759
Location
Utica, MI
I'm weening myself off Kingsford, going to Royal Oak lump and Nature Glo hardwood charcoal briquettes from Gordon Food Service.

The new Kingsford lights faster and does not burn as long as the old Kingsford and compared to RO lump and Nature Glo, the amount of ash produced by Kingsford is really uncalled for.
 

LarryWolfe

Chef Extraordinaire
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
15,035
Location
Bealeton
Bruce B said:
I'm weening myself off Kingsford, going to Royal Oak lump and Nature Glo hardwood charcoal briquettes from Gordon Food Service.

The new Kingsford lights faster and does not burn as long as the old Kingsford and compared to RO lump and Nature Glo, the amount of ash produced by Kingsford is really uncalled for.

I agree about the amount of ash between KF and Lump, but haven't noticed the shorter burn times. The amount of ash doesn't really bother me either, as long as it's not getting all over the food.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom