Briquettes vs. Lump

There is been a long dispute amongst Grillers, that use live fire, what type of charcoal is best?

Briquettes?  Or, lump?

Well, certainly, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  Here is mine, and it may come to a shock to some.  I use both.  Just like a mechanic has specialized tools for a certain job, so do I.  Each has a specific purpose that is its strength.  

Lump

Gets hot fast and gives off a smokey flavor.  The cons are it has a short life and can be inconsistent on the amount of heat it generates, causing hot spots.

Still, its perfect for burgers, dogs, brats, sausages, steaks, pork tenderloins, boneless chicken just to name a few.  In the picture, you see my favorite lump charcoal, Ozark Oak.  It's the only one I've found that doesn't spark while lighting.  Cheaper than most as well.  10 lbs. bag for around $5 or so.  Locally, it can be found at Harp's and Warehouse Market.  If you don't believe me check out it's #1 ranking at http://www.nakedwhiz.com/lumprankpoll.htm  

Briquettes

Gets hot relatively fast, stays hot for a long time.  Consistent heat, no hot spots.  Con is it can give off funny smell and taste while lighting.  A way around that is too not use it to reload your charcoal during a long smoke.  There is an alternative to this, all natural briquettes.  Instead of using coal to bind the formed briquettes it uses vegetable oils or similar.  Stubbs at Lowes works well.

It's best for indirect cooking that won't have to be reloaded after the initial fire dies out.  Bone in chicken would be ideal, ot anything you might bake as well, like a meatloaf or cornbread.  

Or you can do what I do sometimes, use both together.

You get the smokey heat of lump and the consistent heat and longevity of briquettes.  

To each their own.  Everyone has a way to cook, making this method neither correct nor incorrect.  

What's your method?

Dude...