My slow cooker is in imminent danger of becoming a planter. Can MN save it??

[phdlife]

I have tried my slow cooker twice

first time was a disaster but hey - I'd made it all up adapted a SC recipe on the "can't be that hard" principle and boy, was I wrong! (results akin to dogfood [gag])

So second time I tried one of the recipes in the instruction book. Was supposed to be a whole chicken but we ended up with chicken soup. Literally the whole thing had fallen apart and the chicken was soggy. Even though I followed instructions precisely.

Now I really, really want to do a leg of lamb tomorrow, but am SCARED of ending up with lamb soup!

from a new SC recipe book I've got a recipe that says

brown 1kg leg of lamb
cook with 450ml chicken stock + 2/3c white wine on low for ten hours

what do you reckon? that going to work for me? because if I have to face one more dish of expensive sogged-out meat I am going to take the bloody thing outside and plant flowers in it.

All my recipes have worked... I lurve my slow cooker.

Your leg of lamb (drool) will turn out just fab

Mine has three settings, low, medium and high. I would start it off on high for an hour or so and then if it says 10 hours like your recipe, I would turn it to low.

Would it really go in for 10hrs?

Because iirc it said do the chicken for 9-10 and when we took it out at 8 we basically had ragu!

LOL! I love the principle of my slow cooker but I seem to get the liquid quantities wrong, last week I made Goulash which was tasty but way to runny. On the plus side I put the rest in the fridge for a few days and re-heated it was even tastier and less liquidy! I haven't tried a joint of meat so can't advise but good luck and NO PLANTING!

I suspect that 10 hours would mean on low, but yes.

What time are you going to put it on tomorrow? If you are really that uncertain, just keep an eye on it and say after 8 have a poke!

we want to eat around 6 (young dc's)

so if it's really 10hrs I have to have it on at 8 [groan]

and I was considering adding veggies - would that make it take longer?

require more/less liquid?

phdlife I bought one a few months ago (ten pounds from Tesco) and have had the same experience as you.

I have decided things don't take NEARLY as long as recipes suggest. Try halving cooking times. I have found most things are done in two to three hours

The other thing I found was things needed much less liquid than recipes called for

Have just got my little booklet out that came with mine - it says...

Most meat and vegetable recipes require 8-10 hours on low, 5-7 on medium and 4-6 on high.

Pieces of food cut into small pieces will cook quicker - veg takes longer to cook than meat so try and arrange them in the lower half of the pot.

So the liquid you mention will probably cover half of the lamb? I think that sounds ok tbh.

do you have to have liquid at all?

I was hoping for a more roast-y effect, iykwin.

I have done beef without liquid - it does make it's own.

thanks bellavita, will give it a try tomorrow. stay tuned to find out whether the marigolds will have a posh new home...

it worked, it worked, the lamb was yummy

I didn't add any liquid, just squeezed half a lemon over it (and seasoning and garlic)

couldn't make the gravy work but didn't mind too much as we were all scoffing it with mint sauce anyway

now I am tempted to recklessly try another non-slow-cooker recipe tomorrow!

Wey hey

Sooo, all is not lost. Brilliant - there is life in the old crock pot yet then!

Am glad it worked.

I have just started a new job and two of my days are going to be 12 till 5 and my slow cooker will be coming out more. I do use it on weekends, but it will be very handy on a Monday and Tuesday now too.

I did a ham in the same way (no liquid) last Christmas - twas scrummy

ooh bellavita you'll be so proud of me - on the strength of the lamb I adapted a recipe last night, threw it all into the pot and flew out the door, came home, it was GREAT.

apparently the trick for my cooker is 1/2 the cook time and about 2/3 the liquid, even for proper SC recipes.

thanks for egging me on

Fab

phd, I´ve had this problem, the slow cooker was broken basically and exchanged. It was cooking at too high a temperature so meat completely fell apart to the extent that the bones were like sludge. Everything tasted like it had been boiled for a long time..

Does your SC appear to be boiling away, rather than on a gentle simmer?