Backstory: My buddy was browsing youtube and came across this video in which they use a reverse sear. The steak is slow cooked first and then seared at the end.
I was doubtful as the “steak” they used looked like a decent roast to me, and was in the oven 45 minutes. I decided to buy some 1" thick ribeyes and try it out.
I followed directions and after 20 minutes the steaks were at 110 degrees F. I then let them rest 10 minutes, and added a sear on the stovetop of 1 minute per side. Best indoor steaks I have ever made. You could pull them apart with a fork! Once the weather is a bit more cooperative, I intend to do this on the BBQ, slow indirect heat and finish on the IR side burner.
I’ve heard of the reverse sear. I don’t know if it makes much difference whether you sear first, then slow-cook, or do a reverse-sear-- the intended result is the same: nice and pink medium-rare throughout inside, with a tasty Maillard-Reaction crust on the outside.
The only advantage I can think of to a reverse-sear is that the overall temperature of the steak is higher, so the sear can possibly be accomplished more quickly, with less chance of overcooking the inside. But I usually cook steak on charcoal, and the coals are hottest at the start. So it’s easier to sear my steaks first, move to the cooler, indirect-heat side of the grill, cover and choke down the air intake to bring down the overall grill temp as they finish. It’s easier to cool down a charcoal grill than to heat it back up.
I can see why that would make sense on a charcoal grill, and I’ve done exactly what you are saying in the past over charcoal and campfires. One of the other benefits I found is that because you rest the meat after the slow cook, you can serve straight off the grill once the sear is done, and you don’t get that mess of juice on the plate.
You could possibly start the slow cook in the oven or a small gas grill and finish on the charcoal but I’m not sure it would be worth the aggro.
I’ve been doing reverse sears on steaks, roasts, and other cuts of meat where I want an evenly cooked interior for about a decade now, and I agree that it is fantastic. It produces a much more evenly cooked interior than the high-low heat method.
There’s a good illustration here of meat being cooked regular sear vs. reverse sear. The results are not the same. I’ve done the same experiment myself, and prefer the reverse sear for this reason. I seem to remember either Cook’s Illustrated or America’s Test Kitchen claiming some sort of enzymatic action at the lower temps that helps tenderize the meat, too, but that’s not a difference I was able to discern. The way the interior cooks, though, that was clear. (ETA: whoops. That site shows high heat vs reverse sear, but those are similar to the results I’ve witnessed in reverse sear vs sear-the-low. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen another website that shows this difference. Part of it is that the slow cook seems to dry up the outer surface of the meat, so searing is quicker than the normal sear.)
I’ve also been using the reverse sear for awhile, simply because it works. I did a boneless rib-eye roast and bone-in pork loin roast for XMas this way. Cooked to 115 and 125, respectively, on the smoker, then finished under the broiler. Medium rare all the way through for the beef, and moist and juicy for the pork. Not overcooked near the exterior like one gets when searing then roasting.
What you do is slightly freeze your steaks, then sear like normal, but just long enough to get a good crust. Then you put it in a LOW heat oven (like 150 degrees if you can do that), and let it cook in there until it’s done, as measured by a leave-in probe thermometer.
