• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Day off Chili Thread

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
beans are a thickening agent. then you wouldn't need to add flour (wtf?)


no fuggin white beans either. beans must be red.
 
beans are a thickening agent. then you wouldn't need to add flour (wtf?)


no fuggin white beans either. beans must be red.

beans aren't a thickening agent, wtf are you talking about? they are used to replace meat. look at my recipe then look at his. mine has more meat, he has substituted that meat for beans. it's perfectly fine but it dramatically changes the dish. maize or flour is a thickening agent.

OH I LEFT OUT THAT I LIKE TO USE MOLE as well. Big table spoon is usually pretty good. I want to experiment using really really finely ground coffee.
 
beans are a thickening agent. then you wouldn't need to add flour (wtf?)


no fuggin white beans either. beans must be red.

I zoned out temporarily and stupidly put the bean sauce from the cans into the chili, making it too "liquidy".
 
beans aren't a thickening agent, wtf are you talking about? they are used to replace meat. look at my recipe then look at his. mine has more meat, he has substituted that meat for beans. it's perfectly fine but it dramatically changes the dish. maize or flour is a thickening agent.

OH I LEFT OUT THAT I LIKE TO USE MOLE as well. Big table spoon is usually pretty good. I want to experiment using really really finely ground coffee.

by volume it has more meat. big f'ing deal. people were poor back when chili was invented and didn't always have a ton of meat. it doesn't dramatically change the dish.

and the starch in beans will thicken the chili.

you add ground coffee? gtfo! and you think you can lecture people who put beans in?
 
Last edited:
by volume it has more meat. big f'ing deal. people were poor back when chili was invented and didn't always have a ton of meat.

and the starch in beans will thicken the chili.

holy fuck you add ground coffee? gtfo!

when chili was invented people had beef because it was in san antonio and beef was plentiful. people then wanted to replicate the dish in different areas of the country, but beef was not as plentiful and cheap so they used beans which were instead. what i'm saying is not that mine is better because it has more meat, but that it's a completely different dish. hence CHILI and CHILI BEANS. I'm not saying one or the other is superior, although I happen to enjoy chili con carne(chili) more.

re-read that. I don't use coffee, but i want to try it. instead of using mole use really finely ground coffee.
 
when chili was invented people had beef because it was in san antonio and beef was plentiful. people then wanted to replicate the dish in different areas of the country, but beef was not as plentiful and cheap so they used beans which were instead. what i'm saying is not that mine is better because it has more meat, but that it's a completely different dish. hence CHILI and CHILI BEANS. I'm not saying one or the other is superior, although I happen to enjoy chili con carne(chili) more.

re-read that. I don't use coffee, but i want to try it. instead of using mole use really finely ground coffee.

dirt poor people in SA put beans in their chili because even back then in texas it was expensive and people had 20 kids so needed beans to stretch the dish. and they invented the thing so i'm not going to question.

'chili beans' is a term used by yankees. no one in texas has ever said that.
 
dirt poor people in SA put beans in their chili because even back then in texas it was expensive and people had 20 kids so needed beans to stretch the dish. and they invented the thing so i'm not going to question.

'chili beans' is a term used by yankees. no one in texas has ever said that.

well it's what i've been used to here in California. chili cook offs what not when i was younger is where i learned most of what i know.
 
made a pot yesterday as well.
used
1 lb turkey ground
3 thai chilis,
3 jalapenos,
2 habaneros
2 cans black beans
1 can northern beans
1 can garbanzo
1 can kidney
half a box of chicken stock
1 can diced tomatos
2 cloves garlic
1 white onion
some cumin, chili powder, paprika, i forget what else
 
Post-consumption update

Turned out really well. Heat level was perfect, took note of ingredients for future batches. The only problem with it was that it wasn't nearly salty enough. Had to add my own to individual bowls.
 
when chili was invented people had beef because it was in san antonio and beef was plentiful. people then wanted to replicate the dish in different areas of the country, but beef was not as plentiful and cheap so they used beans which were instead. what i'm saying is not that mine is better because it has more meat, but that it's a completely different dish. hence CHILI and CHILI BEANS. I'm not saying one or the other is superior, although I happen to enjoy chili con carne(chili) more.

re-read that. I don't use coffee, but i want to try it. instead of using mole use really finely ground coffee.

you're still crazy. When pizza was invented it didn't have tomatoes or cheese according to my 12 seconds of internet searching.

My chili traditionally calls for just over 2lbs of ground meat(beef, pork, turkey, chicken) as well as 6 cans of beans. half batch is usually 1-1.5lbs meat and 3 cans beans.
 
beans aren't a thickening agent, wtf are you talking about?

Guess it depends on your defintion of "thickening agent". If you add beans to something I almost guarantee you will have a thicker consistency to your meal after resting overnight. To me, that's a thickening agent. It's not in the traditional sense like flour or corn starch. But they do absorb fluid making for ultimately a "thicker" soup/stew/chili.
 
Guess it depends on your defintion of "thickening agent". If you add beans to something I almost guarantee you will have a thicker consistency to your meal after resting overnight. To me, that's a thickening agent. It's not in the traditional sense like flour or corn starch. But they do absorb fluid making for ultimately a "thicker" soup/stew/chili.

you guys don't want to argue semantics about the chili name, but you want to argue semantics about what is a thickener and what is a meat substitute? come on lol
 
you guys don't want to argue semantics about the chili name, but you want to argue semantics about what is a thickener and what is a meat substitute? come on lol

starch thickens, beans are high in starch. mash them a bit first.
 
You're nuts if you don't think beans thicken a dish. They're very starchy. Same as potatoes. Both are regularly used to thicken.
 
* 1 and 1/2 lbs of ground beef
I'm pretty resilient to heat (I grow habaneros) but 8-15 jalapenos seems like quite a bit for that volume of chili.

It is. That chili can be wicked hot if you use the seeds from all 15 jalepenos. I usually use the husk from all 15, but the seeds from about 6 or 7.

The recipe makes about 4 gallons, so bring your apetite.
 
It is. That chili can be wicked hot if you use the seeds from all 15 jalepenos. I usually use the husk from all 15, but the seeds from about 6 or 7.

The recipe makes about 4 gallons, so bring your apetite.

4 gallons? more than I make in my crock pot which is like 1.75 gallons. I probably use 4 whole diced up finely jalapenos and one habanero. everything goes in seeds and all.

also, it's not that i don't think beans thicken up the dish i'm saying they aren't the thickener that's what flour/maize are for.
 
Back
Top