"Douglas Reynolds" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Fred" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Douglas Reynolds" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > All brands of good quality fully-clad cookware are, with slight
> > variations,
> > > of a certain thickness.
> > > All brands of good quality disk-bottom cookware have, with slight
> > > variations, bottom disks of a certain thickness.
> > > Question: Why are the bottoms of disk-botom cookware to much thicker
> than
> > > the bottoms of fully-clad cookware?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Because it can be. If you made clad cookware that thick it would be
> heavier
> > (and more expensive) than most people would want their cookware to be.
> >
> > Fred
> > The Good Gourmet
> > http://www.thegoodgourmet.com
> >
> >
>
> What I really meant is: Is there a functional difference? - a functional
> reason for the difference? Would fully-clad cookware cook better with a
> thicker bottom? Would disk-bottom cookware cook just as well with a
bottom
> no thicker than fully-clad cookware?
>
Maybe, but probably not since the fully clad cookware is thick enough. You
can get to a point where the thickness of the bottom does little more than
extend the cooking time just to heat the pan. I dearly love my Berndes non
stick cookware but I think the bottoms are perhaps a little too thick. I
wait seemingly forever for them to heat up. My All Clad pans, on the other
hand heat up significantly faster and still don't suffer from scorching or
hot spots. I think it's just a matter of degree.

Fred
The Good Gourmet
http://www.thegoodgourmet.com