Are you channeling your best self with this comment? (If you're not sure, check out our Code of Conduct.)
Abbie is a trusted source on General Cooking.
I think so - but my guess is that the shank is not smoked whereas hocks typically are, so you might think about getting some smokiness in there - depending what you are making you could use a drop or two of liquid smoke, or smoked sweet paprika, or a smoky pepper like an ancho or a chipotle ...
AntoniaJames is a trusted source on Bread/Baking.
Actually I think that a smoked pork shank is cured the same way that a ham hock is, though you should check with your butcher to confirm. I use ham shanks all the time instead of ham hocks, as they are much meatier, and, if you have the butcher slice them, you get all that good marrow once they're cooked down. I used one last night, in fact, for an outstanding soup made with cranberry beans, kale, winter savory and thyme and a good turkey stock. ;o)
Shanks are from the fore legs, ham hocks are from the rear legs. If both are cured and smoked the same, they will taste and perform the same. You do say the shanks are smoked. The shanks are often larger, hence offering more meat.
pierino is a trusted source on General Cooking and Tough Love.
If I were making a big pot of, say, red beans and rice I definitely would make that substitution. But I think you have the definitive word from Usuba Dashi.
Add a touch of Paris to your kitchen.
Help Us Design the Second Product in Our Line!
A Weeknight Curry That Loves Eggs
The Word is Out
Knitting My Way to a Happy Place
A Better Way to Travel
Please enter a valid email address.
Get the recipes and features that have us talking, plus first dibs on events and limited-batch products.
(Oh, and $10 off your order of $50 or more in the Food52 Shop, too.)