# Thermapen



## zydrus (Jan 5, 2013)

After having problems with several cheaper meat thermometer I did some research and finally broke down and bought a Thermapen.  I'm pretty good at touch temping steaks, pork chops, chicken breast, etc but needed a thermometer for bigger pieces of meat. 

Last night I was grilling a couple boneless skinless chicken breast and decided to test the Thermapen out.  I touch temped it and they were about done.  I inserted the thermometer and it was only reading 114 degrees?  I was a little upset because of how much I spent on it.  Do meat thermometers just not work on smaller cuts of meat?


----------



## raibeaux (Dec 21, 2012)

The outside of the meat, next to the fire, is naturally going to be hotter than the inside..  thermopen is great.  If you want to test it use boiling water for 212, but try not to let the steam get to it...it only takes about three seconds to stabalize enough to tell you the story a little longer for exact temp, maybe ten seconds in all.  If the Thermopen is bad, they'll replace it.


----------



## scubadoo97 (Nov 7, 2011)

The Thermapen is accurate and one of the best instant read thermometer. A standard in the industry. As mentioned do a test in water just off the boil


----------



## raibeaux (Dec 21, 2012)

Also, in case you didn't know, the sensor is in the tip, at the very end of the probe. You need to have the probe *tip *in the place you want to check. As in the surface of the product being hotter than the inside, the edges will also be hotter, so get your probe tip into the thickest part of the meat. Don't test with the probe inserted into fat, it will read hotter than the meat itself. Hope this helps.


----------



## zydrus (Jan 5, 2013)

I might not have been clear.   The chicken was done which it should have been 165 internal temp.   But when I used my Thermapen just to see how accurate it was it was only reading 114 degrees.  It wasn't an issue of the surface temp being hotter than the internal temp. 

So according to my Thermapen it needed to cook longer when in fact it was already done.


----------



## raibeaux (Dec 21, 2012)

Don't know.  Like I said, test it.  You can test high temp with boiling water and if you want to, go to Thermoworks site and they have info on how to test low temp with icewater.


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

Having used and relied on Thermopens for over ten years, and learned HOW to use them during that time, I would suspect operator error over a malfunction of the device.


----------



## drewkal (Jan 14, 2013)

Just remember, if you're calibrating, boiling H2O varies with altitude, here in MN, it's 210 degerees.  There's sites on line where yoy enter your location, and it gives you your temp of boiling water.  Don't calibrate your therm to 212 in Aspen, as water boils at 197 degrees F there.


----------



## raibeaux (Dec 21, 2012)

Also, your idea of doneness may be different.  I have customers that want their chicken breasts pretty much dried out.  Personally, I like mine done just a touch past the springiness of a medium steak.  I've never tested chicken breasts with a thermometer.  For a whole chicken, if the leg is all loosey-goosey I start eating.

Hmmm.  Maybe this is why I have a hard time training folks?


----------



## dillbert (Jul 2, 2008)

>>The chicken was done which it should have been 165 internal temp.   But when I used my Thermapen just to see how accurate it was it was only reading 114 degrees.  It wasn't an issue of the surface temp being hotter than the internal temp. 

the only reason "it should have been done at 165'F" is the gummymint's ideer of "safe" - based on a 'conditioned' reflex of not bloody / not cool / meat consolidated / no running red juices /etc etc / et.al. - all of which one, inappropriately, uses to say "gosh must be at 165!"

that said, it is very true that thermometers, instant read or not, are not difficult to "fool"

"misplaced" - too close to exterior / bone / muscle division / fat streak - all, and likely a few more, will not give the result you're thinking about.

I'm in your corner - touch / poke / squish / whatever - way harder to fool the cook than the gadget.

hmmm, could be easier to test-by-feel than to learn ten thousand ways to _not_ place a thermometer....


----------

