"Joe Doe" > wrote in message
...
> I have frequently been seduced by the thought of buying a new stove for
> the raw horsepower they have. I have done some calculations based on
> recently available data that might help people considering buying high-end
> gas stoves. Frequently, high-end stoves are marketed based on their
> supposed ³professional² performance and ³high BTU² burners. And the high
> BTU is sold as essential for Wok cooking etc. In a test measuring how
> long it took to heat 6 qts of water to a boil Consumer reports rated
> simple coil electric burners as the highest and stated that it took
> approximately 12 minutes to achieve this (Feb 02, page 34). Data on
> commonly pushed ³high end² gas stoves has not been published by the
> manufacturers (to my knowledge). Gardenweb may have had some relevant
> information but it is no longer available.
>
> In the December issue at depatures.com David Rosengarten compares the
> performance of a Blue Star, DCS a Viking and a Jade (see
> http://www.departures.com/ad/ad_1103_cookranges.html).
>
>
> He reports the following times for boiling 6 quarts of water:
>
> Blue star 18000 BTU, 17.83min
> DCS 17500 BTU, 19.50min
> Viking 15000 BTU, 21.33 min
> Jade 15000 BTU, 24.10 min
> My 20+-year-old gas stove 9000 BTU 30 min (my measurement).
>
> So all the stoves perform significantly worse than a simple $300-500 coil
> electric stove, that takes 12 minutes (at about 18 minutes the Blue Star
> takes about 33% longer).
>
> The numbers Rosengarten has correspond to a burner efficiency of about
> 28-32%. My 20-year-old stove has an efficiency of 38%!! [Efficiencies
> were calculated based on the assumption that it takes 1704 BTU to bring
> 1.5 gallons of water to a boil. Based on the rated BTU you can predict
> how long it should take theoretically (5.68 minutes for the Blue star at
> 100% efficiency for example)] The useful BTU in terms of water boiling
> the stoves are putting out based on the efficiency I calculated for each
> = 5733 (Blue star); 5243 (DCS); 4793 (Viking); 4242 (Jade) and 3408 (my
> 20+ year old stove).
>
> To perform equivalent to the cheap $300-500 coil electric stoves (12
> minute boil time for 1.5 gallons), these gas burners at 30% efficiency
> would need to be rated at 28400 BTU!!! Considering there is more than
> a 10-fold price differential between the two, I would say the performance
> of the current high-end gas burners is pathetic. The manufacturers are
> careful to advertise BTU rather than the useful work that the BTU is
> supposed to perform (like boil water). I know coil electrics are not as
> responsive as gas, but for raw horsepower tasks, this is not an issue.
> Infact if dual fuel ranges are made, perhaps it would make sense to have
> one "power" burner that is electric and actually has more power than
> current gas burners.
>
> To put it another way would I want to spend upwards of $3000 to buy a
> stove that changes my boil time from 30 minutes to 18 at best (30%
> reduction in time)? The answer for me is not likely. I plan on seeing if
> I can find a single element 2500 *2800 Watt coil electric for Wok cooking
> and the like. Alternatively, I would buy a good Cajun burner that can
> probably put out significantly more heat than any of the stoves above and
> use it outdoors.
>
> Roland
Shhhh! You are going to get the "gas is best" gang all upset. But these
numbers are not surprising. Anyone who has used gas is aware of the huge
amount of heat that escapes around the sides of the pan and into the room.
THis does not happen with electric and is, I expect, a major reason why
electric is so much more efficient about getting the heat into the food
where you want it. For a wok, consider a turkey fryer burner - for use
ourdoors of course. I do not have one (yet!) but many people have reported
good results for wok cooking.
--
Peter Aitken
Remove the crap from my email address before using.