HOME > Chowhound > General Topics >

Discussion

Pork Chops-Bone-In or Boneless?

Boneless pork chops are more expensive but I much prefer the bone-in. The meat close to the bone is so flavorful plus I like to gnaw on the bone to get the goodies off them. Any preferences?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Most definitely bone-in! Boneless pork chops are leaner than chicken breast, and we all know fat is flavor. If you get a center cut chop with the little piece of tenderloin on one side, so much the better.

    4 Replies
    1. re: FrauMetzger

      I thought the tenderloin has next to zero fat and therefore very little flavor.

      1. re: tommy

        That's true, but for some reason, when I cook it on the bone with the rest of the chop, it seems very nice. Perhaps the bone, extra fat, and connective tissue work some type of porky magic?

        1. re: tommy

          Center cut chops in general are pretty low in fat, no? (minus the fat band)

          1. re: joonjoon

            I was highlighting the dichotomy of stating "fat is flavor" in one sentence (I don't agree with this broad generalization) and singing the praises of the least fatty part of the loin in the next sentence.

            The blade and sirloin chops may have a bit more fat, but they also have more connective tissue, of which I am not a fan. I'll take breaded and pan-fried center cut any day!

      2. Yes! Bones! Boneless loin chops are okay for making schnitzels, but that's about it. I've given up on cooking them as plain pork chops, because the same ones with a bone attached are so much better - juicier, tenderer, much more flavor. Even when I want a pork chop sandwich, I'll cook a bone-in one and then trim it. And now I just noticed it's lunch time … !

        1 Reply
        1. re: Will Owen

          Bone-in. Always cook it on the bone...occasionally, I might take it off for serving

        2. One vote for boneless here. With the exception of ribs and drumettes, if I can't eat it, it doesn't belong on my dish. OTOH, Mrs G loves to gnaw on the bones like everyone else who posted here. If we get meat w/bone, she'll cut most of the meat off for me and keep the rest. Gnawing on bones seems so primitive to me. A pile of bones actually nauseates me.

          4 Replies
          1. re: mucho gordo

            You say primitive, I say delicious. :) Why the exception for ribs and wings?

            1. re: mucho gordo

              The Khantessa shares your aversion to bone-gnawing. For this reason, BBQ ribs are right out.

            2. Iowa Chop, Bone-in, 1" to 1 1/2" thick, large tenderloin section. 1 lb each. Come to Iowa State Fair August 11-21 and get a grilled one on a stick. Can't be beat.

              1. Bone-in.

                In fact, unless you've *know* where boneless chops are cut from, they are not worth buying, because "center cut" and "loin" cover everything from blade chops near the shoulder to sirloin chops near the ham. The best chops are from the rib (bone-in chops where the bone forms the shape of a curved number 7); blade chops (from between the rib and the shoulder) can be tasty but typically have more "stuff" in them. Sirloin chops and "T" bone chops are much less desirable, and therefore they are what boneless chops are usually made from. Which is why one shouldn't buy them ....

                1 Reply
                1. re: Karl S

                  Some people like the chops from the t-bone (like Frau, above). I don't see these as inherently inferior. They are good for quick cooking, where as chops near the blade can benefit from slower cooking. I buy different cuts depending on what I plan on cooking.