Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > Outer Boroughs >
Apr 5, 2009 07:36 PM

Peter Luger- Steak for 2 vs. for 3 vs, for 4 Debate???

OK, anyone who has read my posts knows my infatuation with Peter Luger so I wanted to just let everyone know I have been there several times and am a Luger "veteran" *yes credit card owner and all*. However, I just wanted to find out some information on the whole Steak for 2 vw 3 vs 4 debate since I always order the steak for two. Everyone has said for years that the steak for two is the absolute best cut, and I never stray from that. However, in about a month I am taking a bunch of guys from my family who have never been to Peter Luger (Yes, I know such a tragedy!!!) and after hearing me raveeeeeeee about it forever they are psyched about going. Being the Luger "afficionado" I will be in charge of ordering for the table. Here is the conundrum: We will be about 8 or 9 people and everyone likes their steak differently. It will go something like this.... 3 people like medium rare, 3 medium, 2 medium well, and myself the only one who likes its BLOODY RARE. I know for myself what I will be ordering- the porterhouse for two just for me.... but for everyone else???

Is the porterhouse for three really that much worse than for two and what exactly is it--- a combination of the porterhouse for two and the single sirloin steak?? That is my guess. And what about the steak for four?? Isn't that just two porterhouses for two?? I was just thinking the best case scenario would be instead of ordering a porterhouse for 3 to just order 2 porterhouses for 2 for the parties of 3 who like it all cooked the same way. I know it would be much easier to just tell them to get porterhouse for three but I want to give them the best aND TRUEST Luger experience...So in essence this is how it would work out....

Porterhouse for 2 BLOODY RARE for me
2 Porterhouses for 2 for the 3 who want it medium rare
2 Porterhouses for 2 for the 3 who want it medium
Porterhouse for 2 for the 2 that want it medium well

Overall- 6 porterhouse for 2's for 9 people... instead of getting 2 porterhouse for twos and 2 porterhouse for threes. Or is the porterhouse for three just fine. What are your thoughts??

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. Please opine hounderssss

    1. I will gladly come along and help eat all that's extra. Unless you are champion eaters its too much. I do know that the steak for one is a strip with no fillet.

      1. Do you plan on having; the tomato & onion, bacon, shrimp cocktail and/or lamb chops for appys? If so, i'll have to asume your bring the defensive line from the New York Football Giants cause thats a LOT of food!

        5 Replies
        1. re: baldwinwood

          When I go I get the bacon, tomato and onion. I skip the spuds and spinach. If room left the strudel and schlag. Draught Brooklyn Lager

          1. re: phantomdoc

            As I prefaced at the beginning I am a Luger vet. We would only be ordering the bacon app just so they get the experience of it. For sides some fries, spinach, and onion rings. I know this is going to be a ton of food. My real question is do you really lose a lot of quality with STEAK for 3 and STEAK for 4 as opposed to STEAK for 2???

            1. re: steakrules85

              I have never eaten anything other than a two. Otto my waiter of choice there, told my Dad years always order the twos.

              1. re: baldwinwood

                That is what I have always been told too. Can someone who has experience the steak for 3 and 4 please weigh in on the argument.

                1. re: steakrules85

                  Had a 3 once. The amount of meat having that "just right" consistency/feel MAY have been less, from both sides, but you know how it is, each night is a little different even if you get a steak for 2.

        2. Just tell everyone they're getting their steak medium rare, and be done with it.

          1 Reply
          1. re: 1stand3rd

            That would be ideal lol I don't know why anyone would ever want a steak cooked any more than that but who knows.

          2. Card holding member for years.
            Steak for two is way better than steak for four. Different cuts, they don't tell you that when you order. The filet is much smaller on the two steaks for four, got our waiter fired in an argument over this, he called us A holes! ,almost got our party of four tossed out. They did redo the entire order, so PL rules!

            Going again Sunday!

            5 Replies
            1. re: Rperst

              I'd love to hear the details of that argument if you feel like sharing.

              1. re: foodiemom10583

                I'd love to hear the details as well. I was a waiter for many years and I waited on a ton of A holes.

                1. re: Sluggo1407

                  I try hard to be a pleasant customer, so I am truly curious about what could have caused such a heated argument other than low blood sugar on the part of the diners.

                  1. re: foodiemom10583

                    From what he writes it sounds like the waiter assured them that steak for 4 was the same cut or somehow better than steak for 2, then once they were served rperst pointed out the difference.

                    1. re: scooter

                      Yeah, but for the end result to be the termination of a Luger waiter, it must've gotten pretty heated. I'm surprised management didn't step in before it was too late. I mean, you're going there with an expectation of great steak and somewhat surly service. How could it get so out-of-hand?