What’s Hot, What’s Not, in Pots and Pans (2008)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/dining/08curi.html?mtrref=topics.nytimes.com&mtrref=www.nytimes.com&_r=0

by Tomte • 11 years ago

25 7 11 years ago

johnhess• 11 years ago

I started by timing how long it took the pans to bring a cup of water to a boil over the maximum gas flame on my stovetop. The copper and the cast iron each took 3 minutes, the aluminum-stainless combination 2.5, and the thin nonstick aluminum just 2 minutes. Light and cheap win for speed.

Not sure that's the right test... speed isn't what you're going for. For example, aluminum foil would very quickly conduct heat straight to the water opposite the flame, rather than distribute it broadly across the surface.

Because heat transfers fastest across the gradient where the temperature difference is greatest, foil would win the day even though it's a terrible cooking surface.

A heavy copper pan would evenly distribute the heat it's given to the sides and all over the bottom rather than straight to the bottom. That's kind of the point.

mdergosits• 11 years ago

I thought the same thing. There could've been more scientific tests, maybe an infrared camera to see the heat distribution rather than the burn marks on the parchment paper.

rtkwe• 11 years ago

The heavy copper and the light aluminum pans produced evenly toasted heat maps. The stainless-clad aluminum did pretty well, too. But the cast-iron pan scorched a small area, and the pattern was familiar.

Two paragraphs later in the article the author talks about the heat gradients of the different pans.

draw_down• 11 years ago

Easy, easy. There are other tests after that one. Gotta keep reading.

Consultant32452• 11 years ago

It also depends on what you're trying to do, you might not want a pan that gives up all its heat so quickly. For example, if you want to sear a steak and then cook it in that pan you don't want a pan that will lose all its heat as soon as you put that steak on it. For a task like that you want probably cast iron or at least stainless or something. Though good stainless pans generally have copper linings to help more evenly distribute the heat. If I were just frying an egg or something then aside from the lack of non-stick your aluminum foil would be just fine.

kbart• 11 years ago

"I dropped a cold steak on the surface, then checked the pan temperature under the steak after a few smoking minutes."

This is wrong. Of course, temperature will even out after few minutes, but for steaks (and other food you want to sear) the initial temperature drop is important -- the higher it is, the higher chance that your steak will be steamed, not seared. Heavier pans retain more heat (that's why heavy copper, cast iron and stainless steel pans took longer to heat during the first experiment), but that's a good thing when making food. Also, what this article didn't mention, is that light, cheap pans tend to deform as soon as after few uses, what makes cooking food evenly nearly impossible on a flat surface. Cast iron and stainless steel pans, on the other hand, are nearly indestructible if used correctly, I know cases when people still use their >100 years old cast iron pans from their grand-grand fathers.

exodust• 11 years ago

I highly recommend a Scanpan ceramic titanium frypan.

Built tough, can't be scratched or warped. Not too expensive either.

Impressive pressure cast technology goes into its construction where compressed aluminium is bonded with ceramic titanium and a non stick compound which can't be scraped away. The aluminium is completely internal, encased in the ceramic titanium so there's no danger with exposing the aluminium - chosen for its heat transfer properties.

I've had mine for ages and the non-stick surface is as good as ever. I've abused the frypan, and it takes anything you throw at it. I will never go back to stainless steel frypan.

What’s Hot, What’s Not, in Pots and Pans (2008)

Related Stories