"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 20:06:27 -0600, Polly Esther wrote:
>
>> Ten points will be subtracted from the score of the first person who says
>> we've discussed this before. @#$! If you did, I missed it and I need
>> help.
>> The key ingredient to my praline recipe that I've used for at least
>> 50
>> years is Jell-o (cook) butterscotch pudding. It is just not available
>> here.
>> I need to get the pralines made and shipped. Now!
>> I tried another recipe. It seemed to me that the cooking time wasn't
>> quite long enough. There is a split second or less between just right
>> and
>> brick. I'm thinking a laser digital thermometer would be a super nice
>> Christmas gift (from me to me).
>> Any of you have a laser digital thermometer? Do you use it for candy
>> making? Any warnings as to brands or the care of the thermometer?
>> Polly
>
> This was discussed here recently (-10 cha-CHING!). Somebody, I think
> Jim Elbrect, did an in-depth analysis using fudge as an example. The
> conclusion was that is just to much convection going on in there to
> get an accurate and useful reading using a non-contact thermometer.
>
> Yes, it was Jim.
> <http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/browse_thread/thread/6834a0fde2aa1ad6/d0a16f2cf4f433bf>
>
> -sw (+11 cha-Ching!)

Well now. See? That was back in July. Sometimes I don't remember
breakfast. And . . . it wasn't as terribly important as it is now. The new
recipe says to cook on Hi for 13 minutes. I tried 8 level. That's not
quite enough. I just am afraid that 13 min. on full power would permanently
bond the candy to the bowl. I believe these will 'set' overnight. And
yes, sw. You get a +11 on your score. Well done. I hope the pralines are.
Polly