Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 52

Thread: Ham cooking question followup

  1. #1
    [email protected] Guest

    Default Ham cooking question followup

    Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
    label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
    that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
    planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
    ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
    never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
    labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.

  2. #2
    Steve Pope Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the
    > label/cooking directions. The label says "ready to cook",
    > so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham that I
    > just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
    > than planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per
    > pound. It's a 12 pound ham. That works out to 300 minutes or
    > five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've never had anything
    > in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    > take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable?


    Yes, that's reasonable. Cook it as directed (use an oven thermometer
    if you have one). You should be fine. It may well turn
    out better than a pre-cooked ham might have.


    Steve

  3. #3
    [email protected] Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 05:18:48 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] (Steve Pope)
    wrote:

    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the
    >> label/cooking directions. The label says "ready to cook",
    >> so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham that I
    >> just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
    >> than planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per
    >> pound. It's a 12 pound ham. That works out to 300 minutes or
    >> five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've never had anything
    >> in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    >> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable?

    >
    >Yes, that's reasonable. Cook it as directed (use an oven thermometer
    >if you have one). You should be fine. It may well turn
    >out better than a pre-cooked ham might have.
    >
    >
    >Steve

    Thanks. I actually have a digital probe thermomter I've never used. I can stick
    the probe in and watch the temp from outside the stove. Maybe I made the right
    decision after all!

  4. #4
    EJ Willson Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    [email protected] wrote:
    > On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 05:18:48 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] (Steve Pope)
    > wrote:
    >
    >> <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the
    >>> label/cooking directions. The label says "ready to cook",
    >>> so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham that I
    >>> just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
    >>> than planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per
    >>> pound. It's a 12 pound ham. That works out to 300 minutes or
    >>> five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've never had anything
    >>> in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    >>> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable?

    >> Yes, that's reasonable. Cook it as directed (use an oven thermometer
    >> if you have one). You should be fine. It may well turn
    >> out better than a pre-cooked ham might have.
    >>
    >>
    >> Steve

    > Thanks. I actually have a digital probe thermomter I've never used. I can stick
    > the probe in and watch the temp from outside the stove. Maybe I made the right
    > decision after all!


    Definitely use the thermometer. Different pieces of meat heat up
    differently, and also your oven temperature may be off. Be careful not
    to position the probe in direct contact with the bone. Try to get it to
    the "middle" of the meat area. I consider it done at 165F.

    It is my experience that it will take somewhat less time than 5 hours. I
    believe that this is because the packager must put some margin in the
    cooking time to allow for low temperature ovens etc.

    If it comes up to temperature too quickly (say in 2 1/2 to 3 hours) then
    either your thermometer is no good or you've positioned the probe
    incorrectly.

    HTH,

    EJ in NJ

  5. #5
    sf Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, [email protected] wrote:

    >Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
    >label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
    >that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
    >planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
    >ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
    >never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    >take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
    >labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.


    If that's a fresh ham, it's not going to taste at all like what you
    expected. So, be prepared.

    --
    I love cooking with wine.
    Sometimes I even put it in the food.

  6. #6
    brooklyn1 Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, [email protected] wrote:

    >Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
    >label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
    >that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
    >planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
    >ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
    >never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    >take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
    >labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.


    You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
    IQ piece of **** douchebag.



  7. #7
    sf Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:43:08 -0500, [email protected] wrote:

    >Thanks. I actually have a digital probe thermomter I've never used. I can stick
    >the probe in and watch the temp from outside the stove. Maybe I made the right
    >decision after all!


    Is this one with a probe on a wire that stays in the meat and a dial
    that stays outside the oven? If it's a regular instant read
    thermometer, don't leave it in the oven or you'll ruin it.

    --
    I love cooking with wine.
    Sometimes I even put it in the food.

  8. #8
    pavane Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup


    "brooklyn1" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    | On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
    |
    | >Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
    | >label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
    | >that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
    | >planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
    | >ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
    | >never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    | >take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
    | >labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.
    |
    | You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
    | IQ piece of **** douchebag.

    Sweetie pie forgot his pills again, and on Christmas of all days.
    Just think how miserable he must feel to have to spout garbage
    like this. It's almost a shame.

    pavane



  9. #9
    Dan Abel Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    In article <[email protected]>,
    sf <[email protected]> wrote:

    > On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
    >
    > >Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions.
    > >The
    > >label says "ready to cook"


    > > This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.


    > If that's a fresh ham, it's not going to taste at all like what you
    > expected. So, be prepared.


    Well, if he said it "looks like a cooked ham", it's not likely to be a
    "fresh" ham (uncured and unsmoked).

    --
    Dan Abel
    Petaluma, California USA
    [email protected]

  10. #10
    cshenk Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    "Dan Abel" wrote
    > sf wrote:
    >> rfdjr1@ wrote:


    >> >Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking
    >> >directions.
    >> >The label says "ready to cook"
    >> > This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.


    >> If that's a fresh ham, it's not going to taste at all like what you
    >> expected. So, be prepared.

    >
    > Well, if he said it "looks like a cooked ham", it's not likely to be a
    > "fresh" ham (uncured and unsmoked).


    Grin, Dan thats from the perspective of a 'cook' who knows the difference.
    Also, for SF, we only go with fresh hams given the option. I prefer to
    spice and brine them my own way. Smoker sometimes used, other times just
    oven.


  11. #11
    [email protected] Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 14:24:54 -0500, brooklyn1 <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
    >
    >>Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
    >>label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
    >>that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
    >>planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
    >>ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me. I've
    >>never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    >>take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
    >>labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.

    >
    >You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
    >IQ piece of **** douchebag.
    >

    Well arent' you a real asshole.

  12. #12
    [email protected] Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the a-hole
    who needed to know the manufacturer), apparently was cured but needed to be
    cooked. It spent five hours in the oven with the probe thermometer monitoring
    it. I basted it the last half hour. I had quite a bit of trepidation about how
    it was going to come out (for you who wants to know the make of the ham, you'll
    probably have to look up trepidation as it has several sylables). But it came
    out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be doing it
    again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal! Happy
    Holidays to all minus one.

  13. #13
    Dan Abel Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] wrote:

    > Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
    > a-hole
    > who needed to know the manufacturer), apparently was cured but needed to be
    > cooked. It spent five hours in the oven with the probe thermometer monitoring
    > it. I basted it the last half hour. I had quite a bit of trepidation about
    > how
    > it was going to come out (for you who wants to know the make of the ham,
    > you'll
    > probably have to look up trepidation as it has several sylables). But it came
    > out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be doing it
    > again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal! Happy
    > Holidays to all minus one.


    Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
    instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
    it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
    never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
    hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
    but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.

    --
    Dan Abel
    Petaluma, California USA
    [email protected]

  14. #14
    cybercat Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup


    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 14:24:54 -0500, brooklyn1 <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:08:29 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
    >>
    >>>Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking
    >>>directions. The
    >>>label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a
    >>>cooked ham
    >>>that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
    >>>than
    >>>planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12
    >>>pound
    >>>ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to
    >>>me. I've
    >>>never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked
    >>>didn't
    >>>take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better
    >>>read
    >>>labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.
    >>>Thanks.

    >>
    >>You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
    >>IQ piece of **** douchebag.
    >>

    > Well arent' you a real asshole.


    He really is.



  15. #15
    cshenk Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    <rfdjr1@ wrote
    > brooklyn1 wrote:


    >>You still refuse to say what brand of ham, you ****ing worthless low
    >>IQ piece of **** douchebag.
    >>

    > Well arent' you a real asshole.


    Thats just Sheldon at Xmas. You know that kindergarden grade for 'plays
    well with others'? He still gets 'progressing towards'.

    Hope the ham came out nicely!


  16. #16
    cshenk Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    <rfdjr1 wrote

    > Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the
    > a-hole
    > who needed to know the manufacturer), apparently was cured but needed to
    > be
    > cooked. It spent five hours in the oven with the probe thermometer
    > monitoring
    > it. I basted it the last half hour. I had quite a bit of trepidation about
    > how
    > it was going to come out (for you who wants to know the make of the ham,
    > you'll
    > probably have to look up trepidation as it has several sylables). But it
    > came
    > out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be doing
    > it
    > again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
    > Happy


    Glad it worked! Don cooked ours 3 hours but it was probably a smaller one
    or he used a higher heat. That or it's still a bit rare at the bone (grin).
    Thats ok if so as it's been in the fridge and will be chopped down and bits
    re-cooked in many meals over the next 2-3 months (frozen and held in 1 cup
    or less hunks for use with other meals).

    Ours is bone in so we have the lovely bone for the crockpot.


  17. #17
    John Kuthe Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    On Dec 24, 11:08*pm, rfd...@optonline.net wrote:
    > Thanks for all the previous answers. I checked the label/cooking directions. The
    > label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a cooked ham
    > that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier than
    > planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12 pound
    > ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to me.. I've
    > never had anything in the oven for that long. Even turkey's I've cooked didn't
    > take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better read
    > labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham. Thanks.


    If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
    or some semblance thereof.

    Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
    although many may.

    John Kuthe...

  18. #18
    cshenk Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    "Dan Abel" wrote
    > rfdjr1@ wrote:



    >> Thanks for all the help and suggestions. The ham, (a COOK'S ham for the


    (snips)

    >> out absolutely tender and delicious. Best ham I ever cooked. I'll be
    >> doing it
    >> again real soon. Don't want to wait for a holiday to enjoy that meal!
    >> Happy
    >> Holidays to all minus one.

    >
    > Glad you liked it! A few decades ago, we decided to do an uncooked ham
    > instead of a cooked one. Being that it was a holiday season like now,
    > it was just ridiculously cheap. It tasted so much better that we've
    > never bought a cooked ham for the oven since. Although the uncooked
    > hams are cheap, they lose a lot of weight due to moisture and fat loss,
    > but it's still a deal, and IMNSHO, much better.


    Same here Dan. We've found most of the 'pre-cooked' ones have been injected
    with all sorts of things (not just a simple salt brine in sensible amounts).
    Ham itself in this natural un-cooked state is already 'sweet' tasting with
    nothing added. Since it's already as 'sweet' as we want, added injected
    sugars and stuff do not suit us.

    Definately less price too. The precooked ones ranged all the way up to
    2.89/lb. The actually *better* (if you dare to try as the above person
    learned how) raw hams were .89/lb with additional money off if a member of
    that grocery club. I think it was .59/lb then? Not sure exactly because I
    tossed the recipts already. I just remember it was over 11 lbs (11.5?), and
    less than 7$ by a bit. I picked the one with the best bone for later use.

    Sure, we paid for bone at meat prices. Hehehe we often end up trying to
    find bone for just .59/lb anyways (hard to find here in the city). Brand?
    Dunno as it had one. Local hog farms likely. Had a warning 'must be
    cooked' on the store label and that's all I recall. This one wasnt
    pre-brined but we've gotten ones that have been as long as they list that
    the brine injection is just salt and water.

    Don's usual method is to pre-brine in the fridge for a day or so, using just
    water, some salt, a little vinegar and soy sauce. This time I ran late with
    the ham shopping so only got it the day before and we didnt bother. He made
    a nice ham gravy to go with from the drippings and we let it shine in all
    it's simple purity with just that.

    I like the term 'Cooks Ham' for these BTW. The flavor is just better to me
    and the flexibility in what you do with it is higher. If you want to studd
    it deep with cloves or star anise, there won't be any competing flavors from
    what the 'factory' _thought_ you wanted it pre-flavored with.


  19. #19
    brooklyn1 Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    John Imbecile Kuthe wrote:
    >
    >If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already.


    Imbecile thinks swine walk about with smoked butts... what a maroon.

  20. #20
    cshenk Guest

    Default Re: Ham cooking question followup

    "John Kuthe" wrote
    rfd...wrote:

    >> label says "ready to cook", so I guess I screwed up and didn't buy a
    >> cooked ham
    >> that I just have to warm up. Alright, so I start my day a lot earlier
    >> than
    >> planned. It says cook at 325 degrees for 25 minutes per pound. It's a 12
    >> pound
    >> ham. That works out to 300 minutes or five hours. Seems a long time to
    >> me. I've


    Ah, there's the size and temp. Missed it before. Yes, he had a bigger ham
    and a lower temp.

    >> take that long. Does five hours for a ham sound reasonable? I'd better
    >> read
    >> labels better in the future. This thing sure looks like a cooked ham.
    >> Thanks.


    RFD, there are some things that take even longer. A pork shoulder for
    example done 'southern style' often goes in at 375 for 30-45 mins, then
    reduce temp to 225 for 8 hours or more (size dependant, I know by looking
    but there's probably stuff on th web showing how long per lb).

    > If it's called a "ham", it's been "cooked" already. Smoked hopefully,
    > or some semblance thereof.
    > Ham is 100% cooked when sold. You do not have to cook it more,
    > although many may.


    Sorry John but that isn't true where I am nor apparently Dan. Could be in
    your part of the country? Here it is sold as 'ham' based on the cut and if
    it hasnt been pre-cooked, has to be labeled something like 'must be cooked
    before eating' or some semblance there-of. I will say that they are
    normally off to the side a bit since the store probably gets a higher markup
    for the pre-cooked ones hence tends to put them more where the eye will see
    them first. I had to scrabble around behind the gwaltney's to find the
    'good one' we got.



Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32