Sausages!

stephen77

Just so you know.
Pig lips, anus are not a part of the meat content and can not be declared as such. Even back fat can only make up so much of the meat content.
Sausage with 42% meat, will also have pork in the form of back fat present in the sausage. Ie its not 42% pig and 58% non pig.


Have a look on QUID guidelines for meat contents.

stephen77

jack_pott wrote: »

Where do people get the idea that high meat content is better? Too much red meat is associated with a higher risk of bowel cancer.

A bag of these lasts me three months, and my red meat consumption is less than half the recommended maximum.

its not that simple with red meat and quite a few theory going around.
Some will say its not the red meat, more people diet who is high in red meat is lacking other foods to decrease your chances.


Generally a higher meat content will give you a more meaty sausage which is seen a nicer eat in most people view, or at least people who are prepared to pay more money.

stephen77

comeandgo wrote: »

What do you regard as actual meat? I think the percentage of actual meat is very low. With sausages you will have rectum, innards and other appetising parts.

see QUID guidelines.
It tells you in there. Rectum since 2004 can not be legally listed as meat.

stephen77

nlpnlp wrote: »

Sorry to sound all middle class but I was so unhappy with the low meat content and more imprtantly the low meat quality that I bought a sausage making machine and make my own. People are bandying around a few different level of meat percentage - the recommended high quality home made percentage is approx imately 68% meat, 15% rusk and herbs and 17% water.
So a sausage with 40% meat or 98% meat is going to be poor in my opinion. And the definition of meat is apparently:

to skeletal muscle with naturally included or adherent fat and connective tissue.

Making my own sausages I use supermarket shoulder pork generally £3 a kilo, so at 68% meat works out at a reasonable price. If I did go for a supermarket brand Richmonds would be at the bottom of the list - low meat content, full of fatty liquid - and butchers choice at the top along with 'proper' butchers homemade sausages.

have you tried using no water in your sausage at home?


Your need less rusk with less water.
when I have made sausages and wanted the best ones I would use less water, if any at all.
though its all subjective.


I agree when it starts to get to 98% meat content its not far eating minced pork.

stephen77

browneyedbazzi wrote: »

The 'lumpy bits' in premium sausages are the meat! Cheap sausages use very finely ground meat mixed with loads of fillers to product that texture (which I find horrid but some people like). I am not convinced you can achieve the same texture in a high meat content product.

You can If you bowl chop.


The meaty sausage you like are most likely minced pork then have the rusk and flavouring mixed into them.
Waste of good meat to bowl chop high end sausages.

Spidernick

My type of sausages are not in the poll: Quorn or Linda McCartney's (and before anyone says vegetarian sausages don't taste nice - probably never having tried them mind - in my opinion they do!).

76rosie

It's the fat and the seasoning that make sausages taste the way they do.

Lumps in sausages is irrelevant or smoothness is chosen by customers. That's only bowl chopping of the sausage and the amount and type of fat used.

At the end of the day you get what you pay for. Plus a 95 percent beef sausage would nt cook well or taste nice.

Personally I like an all pork sausage.

By the way mechanically separated meat isn't meat in quid either.

At the end of the day people like sausages. The ingredients are written on the label. Food laws are getting tougher and tougher.

COOLTRIKERCHICK

where we take our pigs to be slaughtered, also butcher them, and makes our sausages etc, our sausages are 60% pork, with the rest made up with rusk, herbs/seasoning etc... even if I run out of our own sausages, I would never buy supermarket ones again...

zzzt

The_Last_Username wrote: »

@ zzzt . . . . .
Those Nürnberger Bratwürste - they do thin ones in Lidl and they ARE good - in fact exactly the sames as the ones my Sister buys when we're in Germany!

Ah, I'll have to look out for them.

Spidernick wrote: »

My type of sausages are not in the poll: Quorn or Linda McCartney's (and before anyone says vegetarian sausages don't taste nice - probably never having tried them mind - in my opinion they do!).

I agree, they are nice, but they do not taste like real sausages. I consider them a different thing. They are tasty on their own merit, but not as a substitute for a real sausage. Although I do find the Linda McCartney ones too salty. They leave me very thirsty after eating them. Although vegetarianism is healthy, processed foods like these are not, particularly when you lack the natural deliciousness of meat and have to pump it full of salt and other flavourings to make them edible.

Jasper1

Cumberland sausages from the Butcher, more expensive but taste really nice.