AZ Barbeque.com

Smokers, Grills, Pitts & More => Pro Q's => Topic started by: catfish charlie on February 29, 2012, 10:59:41 am

Title: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: catfish charlie on February 29, 2012, 10:59:41 am
Sorry if this topic has been discussed before.  For those who have experience with both, how do they compare?  I own an Pro-Q Excel 20 and overall not greatly satisfied.  Seemed like it was nearly impossibly to get temperature up to 225, and to maintain for any length of time.  Constant adding of new hot coals and stirring the basket to keep the heat.  Ash buildup restricted airflow after only a few hours - mod to raise basket helped somewhat but not hugely.

I read posts every day claiming WSM can hold temp for hours and hours unattended.  Makes me think that not everything that looks the same is created equal.

Appreciate any and all feedback
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: RudedoggAZ on February 29, 2012, 11:23:28 am
I own a ProQ and use it for my part of comp cooks. It's been a great cooker but is getting a little beat down so my next one will be a 22 WSM.I load a FULL basket of coals minus the middle and dump a full chimney of hot coals in the middle. Then I usually close the vents to half way.  I haven't had much success getting it past 250 but once I get it to temp it holds for 6+ hours. Anyway, as I said it's been a great cooker but it's not built as well as the WSM.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: AZWildcat on February 29, 2012, 11:24:51 am
The problems you mentioned wont happen with a wsm. No experience with a Pro Q tho..
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: G$ on February 29, 2012, 12:26:54 pm
I have used both extensively  and have a strong personal preference toward the WSM.  In terms of temp stability, it is simply far more reliable.

Now, as you said, we can get 6-8 hours from a PRO-Q with no problem, by making tweaks (some of which you listed like rasing the basket an inch).  Frankly, that aint bad unattended time for an affordable cooker!    The point is, (again, personal opinion here)  a PRO Q is way more stable than a horizontal charbroil .... but a WSM is way more stable than a proQ.

By the way ... I also have plenty of experience with the 18 vs 22 WSM.  You could continue down the continuum and say the 18 is more "stable" than the 22.      Would I trade make an even trade of my 22 for an 18, not a chance - it is the perfect compromise IMO!
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Mike P in Tucson on February 29, 2012, 01:36:44 pm
I have an Excel 20 and I love it.  I have cooked on a WSM and would stick with the ProQ anyway.  The WSM is a bit stingier with charcoal, but I love the flexibility of the ProQ stackers, with their thermometer eyelets.

I have had no problem at all getting the Excel 20 up to 250 to 260, using one stacker.  And, unattended, it holds that temperature for over 8 hours with a fully loaded charcoal basket.  Also have had no problems with ash buildup and I have not raised the charcoal basket.  I have run it at 280, using a BBQ Guru pit minder, and it still burns for over 6 hours on one charcoal load.

How are you measuring the temperature?  Not with the lid thermometer, I hope. 
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: AzJohnnyC on February 29, 2012, 06:15:18 pm
When you want to unload that Pro Q, let me know.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: catfish charlie on February 29, 2012, 07:12:30 pm
I have an Excel 20 and I love it.  I have cooked on a WSM and would stick with the ProQ anyway.  The WSM is a bit stingier with charcoal, but I love the flexibility of the ProQ stackers, with their thermometer eyelets.

I have had no problem at all getting the Excel 20 up to 250 to 260, using one stacker.  And, unattended, it holds that temperature for over 8 hours with a fully loaded charcoal basket.  Also have had no problems with ash buildup and I have not raised the charcoal basket.  I have run it at 280, using a BBQ Guru pit minder, and it still burns for over 6 hours on one charcoal load.

How are you measuring the temperature?  Not with the lid thermometer, I hope.  

The longest unattended time I ever got with a Pro-Q might have been 3 hours, then the constant fiddling just to keep temp over 200.  Temperatures measured right below the rack using Maverick ET-73.

I always had the feeling that the stacker sections and access doors had a lot of looseness that was causing heat loss, but the bottom line was I just didn't seem to have coals that wanted to stay lit, whether it was ashes blocking the air inlet, or some other factor.  I wondered if there was a trick to arranging the coals / unlit briquettes that I wasn't aware of, but having used that smoker probably 15 times the experience I got wasn't bringing any ground breaking improvements.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Mike P in Tucson on February 29, 2012, 07:28:45 pm
That really baffles me, because I haven't experienced anything like that.  Where are you located?  I am in Tucson, and if you are down in this area, I would be happy to get together with you to see if we can figure things out.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: catfish charlie on February 29, 2012, 07:29:25 pm
When you want to unload that Pro Q, let me know.

I have a brand new never used one I'd love to sell, but I live in Michigan.  I bought the 2nd unit to use the stackers for extra capacity, and before every getting around to using it my friend introduced me to pellet smokers which solved my first problem and gave me "hands off" smoking capability.  Only problem is pellet grills don't give the same smoke flavor as conventional grills, so now I'm back to looking at a WSM or UDS with BBQ Guru or Rock's Stoker to get the "hands free" operation I want.  

On one hand I think maybe I should try the Stoker with the Pro-Q, but I guess I just have little faith in it.  When I got the pellet grill I gave away my original Pro-Q, so now I'd risk using the new one, when I'd much rather sell it and take my chances with the WSM or UDS
Title: UDS or Weber Smokey Mountain 22.5" ?
Post by: catfish charlie on February 29, 2012, 07:31:53 pm
sorry, tried to delete this post
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: catfish charlie on February 29, 2012, 07:34:14 pm
That really baffles me, because I haven't experienced anything like that.  Where are you located?  I am in Tucson, and if you are down in this area, I would be happy to get together with you to see if we can figure things out.

Appreciate the offer Mike, but I'm in MoTown.  In fairness, I probably should say that much of the time I used the Pro-Q was Fall and even Winter, with cold outdoor temperatures - never used it thru a full summer.  Maybe that was part of the issue?
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Bam Bam on February 29, 2012, 08:34:19 pm
I have a pro Q is my garage and honestly I don't see why people like them as much as they do. WSM all day for me. Not to mention, you have an excellent company behind it. If you have ANY issues with your WSM, Weber bends over backwards to fix the issue.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Crash on February 29, 2012, 11:21:15 pm
I've had little experience with the Pro Q E20s.  I absolutely love them.  It did take us a little playing with to perfect them, but it really wasn't that hard.  

I have 4 Pro Q E 20's and one 18" WSM.  I still have yet to use the WSM in the past 2 years.  I'd much rather cook on the E 20 than any WSM, but that's probably just because I now know exactly how to use it.  

I think both the WSM and the Pro Q E 20 have a fairly solid fan base.  It really just comes down to your preference and learning how to control your fire/fuel.  I'd strongly suggest learning to manually control your temps before going to a draft control system.

Oh yeah, you didnt mention this (or maybe I missed it).  Fuel Source?  Fuel type?  Amount of fuel?  How many stackers are you using for a cook?  Water in the water pan?  

The answers to these questions might allow us to help you out.  
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: catfish charlie on March 01, 2012, 04:03:36 am
I've had little experience with the Pro Q E20s.  I absolutely love them.  It did take us a little playing with to perfect them, but it really wasn't that hard.  

I have 4 Pro Q E 20's and one 18" WSM.  I still have yet to use the WSM in the past 2 years.  I'd much rather cook on the E 20 than any WSM, but that's probably just because I now know exactly how to use it.  

I think both the WSM and the Pro Q E 20 have a fairly solid fan base.  It really just comes down to your preference and learning how to control your fire/fuel.  I'd strongly suggest learning to manually control your temps before going to a draft control system.

Oh yeah, you didnt mention this (or maybe I missed it).  Fuel Source?  Fuel type?  Amount of fuel?  How many stackers are you using for a cook?  Water in the water pan?  

The answers to these questions might allow us to help you out.  


I always used a water pan with both stackers that came with the unit.  Used regular Kingsford charcoal briquettes.  Filled the basket to the top with a bit of a hole in the middle, where I'd pour a full chimney of lit coals.  Not sure what you mean by fuel source.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: bucaguy on March 01, 2012, 05:41:51 am
I am a Pro Q guy as well.. I had a Crash hand me down ;D

She is a very good cooker but you have to play with it a bit.. Things I found using the Q to help the temp.. No water in the water pan! and I started using 6#'s of Lava rocks.. That help out more then you would believe. I was running a lot over night in AZ in the fall and I could get 8-10 hours at 235-255 with now problem at all and that was using 3 Stackers.. It just takes time to get it dialed in.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: G$ on March 01, 2012, 07:09:34 am
Appreciate the offer Mike, but I'm in MoTown.  In fairness, I probably should say that much of the time I used the Pro-Q was Fall and even Winter, with cold outdoor temperatures - never used it thru a full summer.  Maybe that was part of the issue?
Couple notes:
1) Much Harder to control temps in MoTown in the winter than  in AZ
2) Run it without water, see how that works for you.
3) I have run a proQ with a stoker to get those 6-8 hour burns.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Quiggs on March 01, 2012, 09:06:53 pm
With 5 WSM's (18's & 22's) and three Pro Q's in the immediate family...I would go for WSM overall...  The 18's holds temp forever! The 22's take a bit of watching to get through a complete cook (6 to 10 hours)  The Pro Q's have given me fits, but I do like the clamping ability of sections. 

So now we have regulated them to what we call "The Golf Ball's"... top & bottom section only for direct cooking at comps for dinner & super hot "whatever" which I love!!!  Weber should follow with clamps and the ability to stack top & bottom directly..  The other part I was amazed at was the the finish of Pro Q's faded very bad, and very quickly (paint compaired to baked porcelain??). I have heard they are changing or have changed this outer covering??

Now...the big $$$ comes in to play... a Pro Q is much cheaper than WSM and for some that will be a big factor...

My 2 cents worth...
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Crash on March 01, 2012, 11:16:25 pm

I always used a water pan with both stackers that came with the unit.  Used regular Kingsford charcoal briquettes.  Filled the basket to the top with a bit of a hole in the middle, where I'd pour a full chimney of lit coals.  Not sure what you mean by fuel source.
My bad, fuel source and fuel type...same meaning.  As for that water pan, are you adding water or any liquid to it?  Try it with no water, and see if you have better results.  IMO, liquid of any sort in the water pan adds little if any moisture content to the end product and just makes your fuel work harder to maintain temp.  Just my opinion and you'll find a lot that disagree with the idea of a dry water pan.

You might also consider losing a stacker if you are doing a cook that will allow you to get all the meat on one grate.  We've found on the two occasions that we have cooked with 3 stackers, that the top stacker was highly inefficient.  Regardless of how many stackers you utilize (well, at least 1, 2 or 3...never cooked with 4), it seems that the grate level temp has a differential of about 10-20 degrees, top grates being the cooler.  In short, if we dont need an additional stacker to hold additional meats, we don't use it.

You also might want to try using some aluminum tape to shut down air entry around the doors.  We have done this on occasion when it has been windy or cold.  Works like a charm and really adds that "white trash" aspect to your cooker.   ;)

As for the Pro Q's paint fading...that's one of the few drawbacks that I haven't been able to work around.  Ours still cook great, they just don't look great.  I've been really lucky to not be afflicted by the prettier/bigger/better smoker syndrome. 
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: catfish charlie on March 02, 2012, 04:09:22 am
Thanks a lot to everyone for some great feedback - as always I've learned some things.  Since "hands free" / long cooks (Pork butt) is a definite requirement of mine, I'm going to buy a Stoker regardless.  But I think I'm going to try again with the Pro-Q (lump charcoal, single stacker, dry water pan) before putting money into a Weber that I might not need to spend.
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Mike P in Tucson on March 02, 2012, 11:31:57 am
Ditto on not using water.  I switched to using a clay saucer (like you would put under a flower pot).  It is around 16" diameter and I just wrap it in foil.  Some folks use lava rocks and some use sand.  I had used sand, but it ened up getting pretty gross from drippings leaking under the foil I put over it.  And it was a pain having to keep replacing the sand.

The only time I use my BBQ Guru pit minder is when I want to get the temps up over 250.  Otherwise, I just adjust the vents one time and forget it.  I usually end up with two bottom vents completely closed and one maybe 1/4 open (top vent always open).
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: barbedQ on March 08, 2012, 09:51:09 pm
little late to the party, but I'd have to say that for the money I spent on my ProQs I've been pretty happy.  Not the most successful on the circuit be we hold our own cooking our pork and brisket on ProQs.   I own WSM's too and we use those for chicken and ribs at events.   I've cooked in 28 degree weather on my ProQ and a homemade smoker cozy kept us at 230 without a problem.    We're all about an empty water pan and only 2 stackers.  I've never raised the charcoal basket, but have been known to reach in with tongs and give the basket a shake half way thru a cook.  we use a mix of hardwood lump and kingsford as the hardwood burns with less ash and the kingsford seems to keep it all burning smooth.

Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: RudedoggAZ on March 08, 2012, 10:11:11 pm
Well said... That's the cooker I use for brisket. I will get a 22 soon but the ProQ has been a decent investment  ^-^
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Crash on March 09, 2012, 12:15:54 am
Well said... That's the cooker I use for brisket. I will get a 22 soon but the ProQ has been a decent investment  ^-^
Decent investment???  Dude, I was giving those things away.   :D

I should have charged you double.  ;)
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: RudedoggAZ on March 09, 2012, 08:13:22 am
That's how it all started for me Crash... Now look, 30+ comps under our belt and I have the biggest liver in AZ  :D :angel:
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: azkitch on March 09, 2012, 08:18:58 am
That's how it all started for me Crash... Now look, 30+ comps under our belt and I have the biggest liver in AZ  :D :angel:
There are a few on here who'll argue with you on the liver thing....not ME, but...
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: smitty250 on March 09, 2012, 08:43:12 am
There are a few on here who'll argue with you on the liver thing....not ME, but...

Me...
Title: Re: Pro-Q versus Weber Smoke Mountain
Post by: Gizzy's Smokin Crew on March 09, 2012, 01:16:21 pm
Me Too ;D