YA mediocre barbecue place. The "roasted potatoes" were kind of waxy and seemed undercooked, the barbecue was blah. I did kind of like the barbecue nachos, which lacked structural integrity but didn't taste half-bad: but that was the only thing I did like.
Avoid.
"Severely understaffed" is the phrase that comes most readily to mind about Chisholm Trail. I mean, when your staff (and by "staff" I mean "one guy behind the counter") isn't able to handle the Saturday evening rush (and by "rush" I mean "six guys total in the whole restaurant"), you have problems. Either that, or exceptionally low expectations. Even more so that Camino Real in the same strip, this seems to be a lunch joint that happens to be open for dinner.
And the food? Pretty mediocre, albeit not as bad as we had feared. Ribs were decent. Brisket was blah at best. Potato salad was ultra-bland, out-of-the-50-gallon-Sysco-drum tasteless. Oddly enough, the pork loin was actually pretty good, and fairly moist compared to most restaurant offerings. The BBQ nachos were slightly interesting (and had a fair amount of chopped beef on top), though I do wish I had asked them to hold the beans (my fault, not theirs). As for the BBQ sauce, I've had a lot worse, and it was just tangy enough to satisfy.
That said, and even though it's cheaper, I can't see why anyone with a car would eat here rather than driving a mile down 183 to Rudy's, where you can satisfy your BBQ Jones with meat off the grill rather than out of the steam warmer.
Since our last visit, as Lawrence notes, they've gotten rid of the gianormous appetizer platter. I can't say I miss it that much: you needed at least four, and more like six, people to order that, and how often do you go out in parties of six? The past few times I've been there, though, they've served complimentary home-made potato chips with a nice dipping sauce (I think there's a small amount of dill in the dip, which I don't usually care for, but it works here.)
They also do a quite good onion soup. The past few times I've been, I've ordered their seafood entrees, which are also surprisingly good (given that the name of the place is J.C.'s Steakhouse). I usually order the special, which (of course) varies, but I recommend trying the stuffed flounder if they have it. I think the salads could be a bit better (a wedge salad would be a nice addition).
And, finally, they have a pretty regular all-you-can-eat steak special on the weekends. (Call ahead and make sure.) Plus open WiFi. What's there not to like? (Well, the cartoons on the menu are a bit cute for my taste.) J.C.'s may be one of Austin's best (still) undiscovered bargains.
I'm glad they changed the name to JC's Steakhouse, which seems much more accurate than JC's Bar & Grill. They still haven't been discovered by the thronging masses, so we were seated right away. Thankfully, the food remains both excellent and reasonably priced since our last visit. In fact, more than reasonably priced, as they were having an all-you-can eat sirloin steak special that I took shameless advantage of to the tune of 32 ounces. The only real drawback was that they've eliminated the huge appetizer platter we had the last time around.
While it's still a notch below Fleming's or Ruth's Chris, those places will set you back roughly twice as much as a meal at JC's, and they are nowhere near twice as good.
Dollar for dollar, JC's is unquestionably the best steakhouse in Austin.
Everyone knows what they're getting into with "Mongolian Barbecue". The big question is: how does Mongolian Grille compare to Mongolian BBQ?
Grille has better dumplings, more and better sauces and condiments (the basil leaves were a nice touch), more suggested recipies posted, and slightly better preparation, I think. BBQ has, as far as I'm concerned, better soup and much better service.
Both have pretty much the same assortment of meat and veggies. Grille has three pasta choices, BBQ only has one. Grille has the edge on aesthetics: BBQ has a better laid out line. The prices are roughly the same.
Where to go? If looks are important, I'd say go to the Grille, but I'm not wild about their service. Otherwise, I'd say go to the one that's convienient for you.
I'm fine with the Mongolian BBQ concept. As for Mongolian Grille's execution, it's both better and worse than Mongolian BBQ. Better in that it has a wider variety of items on the line, the decor is nicer (and miles above the festering hole the downtown location was several years ago), and it seems better staffed. Worse in that instead of have two sides to pick your fixings from (such as the Mongolian BBQ on north Lamar), you only have one, so that if you're stuck behind a slow, clueless dumbass (which I was), things go very slowly indeed. I'm also a little unclear on the pricing policy. Since we didn't even get menus, I was unaware of the additional $1.95 charge for extra trips; though certainly far from heinous, it was an unwelcome surprise. And while I don't usually mind an automatic 15% gratuity, it does seem high when you're busing the main course yourself. Finally, for some reason your dishes seem to come out drier here than at Mongolian BBQ, requiring additional sauce.
Still, it was good enough and reasonably priced, and I'm willing to make a return trip, and its a fairly credible choice for Asian food along this stretch of 183.
I think Ciola's was even better the second time around. Certainly, the service was (but then, we didn't have the ever-expanding party we had last time). My chicken Rollatini was genuinely fine, and the clams oreganata were quite good. (I did not have any of the calamari, alas.)
Even though the construction situation on 183 has improved, I'd still slightly prefer to drive out to Lakeway than to drive up to Reale's. Both are good, but Ciola's has the edge.
The service was better than our last visit, though the appetizers seemed less interesting. However, my Veal Rollatini was exceptionally good, and quite flavorful, if a touch skimpy on the veal for the price (I'd had a late lunch, so it wasn't a problem).
I think that Reale's does everything better and just a bit cheaper, but Ciola's is a good backup option if you don't mind the drive.
See the logs for September of 2004.