HOME > Chowhound > Home Cooking >

Discussion

Vanishing Stock

  • f

I made the quick chicken stock, (from Cooks Ill. see below), and only got 4 quarts of stock.

I put in 5 quarts of water and there is the chicken juice .

My question is, It this result normal?

Dice and Sauté 3 onions,
10LB Chicken Thighs cleaved into three pieces, Sautéed Browned, Deglaze
Sweat Onions and Thighs for 20 Minutes,
Add 5 Quarts Boiling water with Seven Bay leaves, Bring to Boil,
Simmer20 Minutes, If you want Skim the Foam, (I did not),
Strain and defat,

Frank

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Seems hard to imagine that if you simmered it only for 20 minutes you'd lose a whole quart of water, let alone the other juices.

    Oh, and regarding the recipe--note the "no copyrighted material" advisory at the top of this board.

    Hope the stock turned out good, even if it wasn't as plentiful as you'd hoped. I made stock the other day too, as it happens, but I just threw everything in the water without any initial cooking or sweating. I wonder what kind of difference this makes, and whether one method is more appropriate for some things and the other method for others. I'd imagine the method you used makes the stock darker and more flavorful. But I guess this should be a topic for another thread.

    5 Replies
    1. re: Denis

      ''Oh, ad regarding the recipe--note the "no copyrighted material" advisory at the top of this board.''

      But this method is well known. To have Cooks copyright it would be tantamount to copyrighting the recipe for mashed potatoes.

      Cooks Ill. say sweating chicken or beef allows the meat to quickly release the juices and greatly reduce simmering time.

      The stock turned out well. I did use a china cap and squeezed the heck out of the meat.

      I am mystified.

      Frank

      1. re: Frank

        what is a china cap?

        1. re: edinaeats

          also- how do you sweat chicken?

          1. re: edinaeats

            Aka chinois -- its a very fine double mesh sieve, shaped like a cone, usually with a protective band along the outside. It's what professionals use to sieve even tiny solids out of liquid. Takes time.

          2. re: Frank

            I don't think you did anything wrong against the CH board rules. See my question and responses re: copyrighted material below.

            Link: http://www.chowhound.com/boards/sitet...

        2. Okay, so I'm willing to bet you could steam off 2 cups in the course of the cooking. When you took out the chicken and other veggies, they might retain water. What if you took them out and left them in a collander (over a bowl) until room temperature? I'm willing to bet you would get at least another cup or two of broth out of that (bonus - it would probably be very tasty/meaty). If you have 2 cups which steamed off plus another cup or two of broth which would be released from the meat, that would explain the quart of "missing broth". Sound reasonable?

          1. I suggest that you try weighing the chicken before and after - it may well be that the meat absorbed some of the water, similar to brining.

            My recollection of that recipe is that you cook the chicken meat until it's all washed out, which I think is a waste of good chicken. Also, I did not like the "browned" flavor, just my opinion.

            I like cooking a chicken in chicken broth, preferably low sodium from an aseptic box (no metallic flavors). The resulting broth I call "double-chicken broth" and I think it's really yummy. But I only cook the chicken until the meat is done, and still edible.

            Chicken skin and fat have a lot of flavor that should be cooked into the broth.

            2 Replies
            1. re: Ilaine

              Ref. chicken weight before and after, the chicken was White Gem Chicken with up to 7% water retained. Next time I’ll weigh the chicken. The reason I am interested in this is I was doing a costing/time/labor on the broth.

              You are quite right the remaining chicken had a washout taste, but.. the dog did not mind it.

              Best, Frank

              1. re: Frank

                Well, the dog has a great advantage over us homo sapiens: a sense of smell about 900-1000 times more powerful. Dogs smell in technicolor; we smell in very blurry black-and-white.

            2. When I strain the solids out of my stock, I always press down on them with a ladle to extract all the liquid.