Comparisons · Two cuts
Whole sea bass or Whole trout
Two whole round fish at a similar size, which is the comparison somebody makes at a fish counter. What differs is thickness through the shoulder, and that is what sets the time.
What each one is
Whole sea bass
A lean white round fish cooked whole, and the standard case for fish sticking to a grate — lean flesh and delicate skin with nothing to spare.
Whole trout
A whole round fish, gutted, cooked over direct heat until the flesh is opaque and lifts from the bone. The skin is structural — it is what holds the fish together on a grate.
Where they overlap
- Both are the same food form, so the same safety rules apply to each.
What actually differs
| Aspect | Whole sea bass | Whole trout |
|---|---|---|
| Typical weight | 400–700 g | 250–400 g |
| Typical thickness Thickness governs timing more than weight or cut name does — Weber's own chart roughly triples the time between a one-inch and a two-inch steak. | 40–60 mm | 35–50 mm |
| What BBQHQ's evidence gives for time Windows from the cooking profiles, at the conditions each profile states. They are not comparable to the minute — the profiles differ in cooker and configuration — and are shown to give the scale. | 15–29 minutes | 13–24 minutes |
| What tends to go wrong From BBQHQ's troubleshooting index. Choosing between two cuts is partly choosing which failure you would rather risk. | stuck to the grate, fell apart | came out dry, stuck to the grate, fell apart |
Can one stand in for the other?
Swap it straight across
On every axis BBQHQ models — anatomy, thickness, bone, safe endpoint and the cooking windows in the evidence — these two behave the same way. What differs between them is flavour and fat, which BBQHQ does not model and will not guess at.