I may end up being very sorry that I posted this offer, but there seem to be a lot of questions about nonstick coatings. I have spent the past 28 years in the industry and am willing to share what I have learned regarding cookware in general and nonsticks in particular. Ask away! :-)

"Nonstick" > wrote in message
...
|
| I may end up being very sorry that I posted this offer, but there seem
| to be a lot of questions about nonstick coatings. I have spent the past
| 28 years in the industry and am willing to share what I have learned
| regarding cookware in general and nonsticks in particular. Ask away! :-)

Which one is best for high temperature stovetop cooking?

pavane

It depends on what you mean by "High Temperature". Foods can be seared at a high-medium setting, but if you want to really crank up the heat, look to cast iron or uncoated stanless. Heating nonstick coated pans to over 550F will shorten the life of the nonstick. There are some new "ceramic" coatings that will withstand 850F, but their nonstick properties fade quickly. The coating itself will survive fine, but the nonstick characteristics will be gone.

"Nonstick" > wrote in message
...
>
> 'pavane[_3_ Wrote:
>> ;1506995']"Nonstick" wrote in
>> message
>> ...
>> |
>> | I may end up being very sorry that I posted this offer, but there
>> seem
>> | to be a lot of questions about nonstick coatings. I have spent the
>> past
>> | 28 years in the industry and am willing to share what I have learned
>> | regarding cookware in general and nonsticks in particular. Ask away!
>> :-)
>>
>> Which one is best for high temperature stovetop cooking?
>>
>> pavane
>
> It depends on what you mean by "High Temperature". Foods can be seared
> at a high-medium setting, but if you want to really crank up the heat,
> look to cast iron or uncoated stanless. Heating nonstick coated pans to
> over 550F will shorten the life of the nonstick. There are some new
> "ceramic" coatings that will withstand 850F, but their nonstick
> properties fade quickly. The coating itself will survive fine, but the
> nonstick characteristics will be gone.
>
I've been using a Circulon pan for blackening fish and chicken for many
years. Pan goes over a high heat for a minute or two before it even sees the
protein and it is still perfectly non-stick.

Jon

Which one is best for high temperature stovetop cooking?

pavane[/i][/color]

It depends on what you mean by "High Temperature". Foods can be seared
at a high-medium setting, but if you want to really crank up the heat,
look to cast iron or uncoated stanless. Heating nonstick coated pans to
over 550F will shorten the life of the nonstick. There are some new
"ceramic" coatings that will withstand 850F, but their nonstick
properties fade quickly. The coating itself will survive fine, but the
nonstick characteristics will be gone.
[/i][/color]
I've been using a Circulon pan for blackening fish and chicken for many
years. Pan goes over a high heat for a minute or two before it even sees the
protein and it is still perfectly non-stick.

Jon[/quote]

I'm not surprised that you have had good results. You are using the pan properly. A minute or two on high is not going to hurt the nonstick. The problem is when you get distracted and the minute or two becomes 10 or 12! Both gas and electric stoves are capable of getting hot enough to actually melt an aluminum pan!

Another thing you have going for you is that the Circulon pan is well constructed and of a decent thickness. The record-like circular pattern in the bottom also helps to protect the nonstick from damage by implements. Good choice!

Nonstick

I'm not surprised that you have had good results. You are using the pan properly. A minute or two on high is not going to hurt the nonstick. The problem is when you get distracted and the minute or two becomes 10 or 12! Both gas and electric stoves are capable of getting hot enough to actually melt an aluminum pan!

Another thing you have going for you is that the Circulon pan is well constructed and of a decent thickness. The record-like circular pattern in the bottom also helps to protect the nonstick from damage by implements. Good choice!

Nonstick[/quote]

"Nonstick" > wrote in message
...
|
| Nonstick;1507262 Wrote:
| > Which one is best for high temperature stovetop cooking?
| >
| > pavane[/i][/color]
| >
| > It depends on what you mean by "High Temperature". Foods can be seared
| > at a high-medium setting, but if you want to really crank up the heat,
| > look to cast iron or uncoated stanless. Heating nonstick coated pans
| > to
| > over 550F will shorten the life of the nonstick. There are some new
| > "ceramic" coatings that will withstand 850F, but their nonstick
| > properties fade quickly. The coating itself will survive fine, but the
| > nonstick characteristics will be gone.
| > [/i][/color]
| > I've been using a Circulon pan for blackening fish and chicken for many
| >
| > years. Pan goes over a high heat for a minute or two before it even sees
| > the
| > protein and it is still perfectly non-stick.
| >
| > Jon
|
| I'm not surprised that you have had good results. You are using the pan
| properly. A minute or two on high is not going to hurt the nonstick. The
| problem is when you get distracted and the minute or two becomes 10 or
| 12! Both gas and electric stoves are capable of getting hot enough to
| actually melt an aluminum pan!
|
| Another thing you have going for you is that the Circulon pan is well
| constructed and of a decent thickness. The record-like circular pattern
| in the bottom also helps to protect the nonstick from damage by
| implements. Good choice!

I appreciate your time and information. I have never used Circulon;
apparently it is due to be tried. My latest was one of the Cuisinart
Green Ceramics, seems very nice but the non-stick is beginning to show
signs of leaving; the finish is still very good. My favorite overall has
been Scanpan ceramic, years old and still very usable but no longer
really nonstick, as you mention. Thanks again.

pavane

Pavane - Your Sanpan is kinda unique in the market. The ceramic surface is applied by literally changing a solid ceramic into a gas and condensing the gas onto the frying pan surface! This gives a very hard surface to which the nonstick is applied. Your chances of wearing through to the base aluminum of the pan is about the same as your wearing down through a dinner plate to the table! However the same is not true for the nonstick coating. That will be worn away. Since the applied ceramic is the same color as the nonstick, it is not visually apparent when the nonstick is gone.

In article >,
says...
>
> 'pavane[_3_ Wrote:
> > ;1507623']"Nonstick"
> >
> > I appreciate your time and information. I have never used Circulon;
> > apparently it is due to be tried. My latest was one of the Cuisinart
> > Green Ceramics, seems very nice but the non-stick is beginning to show
> > signs of leaving; the finish is still very good. My favorite overall
> > has
> > been Scanpan ceramic, years old and still very usable but no longer
> > really nonstick, as you mention. Thanks again.
> >
> > pavane
>
> Pavane - Your Sanpan is kinda unique in the market. The ceramic surface
> is applied by literally changing a solid ceramic into a gas and
> condensing the gas onto the frying pan surface! This gives a very hard
> surface to which the nonstick is applied. Your chances of wearing
> through to the base aluminum of the pan is about the same as your
> wearing down through a dinner plate to the table! However the same is
> not true for the nonstick coating. That will be worn away. Since the
> applied ceramic is the same color as the nonstick, it is not visually
> apparent when the nonstick is gone.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Nonstick
>
Scanpan has been my favorite. However, the two skillets (seven and ten
inches)that I own have both lost their nonstickness. In fact, they have
become very sticky, more so than a simple noncoated skillet. I will
probably toss them.
--
Jerry Bank
Trenton, New Jersey
Music is the language of the gods.

"Jerry Bank" > wrote
>> > My favorite overall
>> > has
>> > been Scanpan ceramic, years old and still very usable but no longer
>> > really nonstick, as you mention. Thanks again.
>> >
>> > pavane
>>
>> Pavane - Your Sanpan is kinda unique in the market. The ceramic surface
>> is applied by literally changing a solid ceramic into a gas and
>> condensing the gas onto the frying pan surface! This gives a very hard
>> surface to which the nonstick is applied.
>>

> Scanpan has been my favorite. However, the two skillets (seven and ten
> inches)that I own have both lost their nonstickness. In fact, they have
> become very sticky, more so than a simple noncoated skillet. I will
> probably toss them.
> --
> Jerry Bank
> Trenton, New Jersey
> Music is the language of the gods.

I bought a Woll pan a couple of years ago.
http://www.woll-cookware.com/mediath...f&sel=2&lang=4

The coating has some sort of ceramic particles in it to make it durable. It
is, by far, the best non stick pan I've ever owned. Given the price I paid
for it, I'm expecting it should outlast me. They say you can use metal in
it, but I don't. Most coatings tend to deteriorate too soon.

Jerry Bank - I rest my case! When you pitch your Scanpans, one of the better bargains on the market right now is at Costco. It is a 3 frying pan set made by Tramontina (Made in the USA!). It is a good gauge aluminum set with porcelain enamel exteriors and very good nonstick coating. And I think it retails for about $30! Try it, you'll like it!

Nonstick

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 03:26:44 +0000, Nonstick
> wrote:

>....It is a 3 frying
>pan set made by Tramontina (Made in the USA!).....

Are you sure about that? All the Tramontina I've ever seen has been
made in Brazil.

-- Larry

Woll makes a good pan. I suspect yours is cast aluminum? Woll used the same ceramic reinforcing technique as ScanPan, but a better grade of nonstick coating.
The better you treat it, the better any nonstick pan will last. One area often overlooked is the damage done to the nonstick coating by the pan that is nested inside it when stacked up in the cupboard! A paper towel laid inside the pan will protect it from the next pan in the stack.
Nonstick

wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 03:26:44 +0000, Nonstick
> > wrote:
>
> >....It is a 3 frying
> >pan set made by Tramontina (Made in the USA!).....
>
> Are you sure about that? All the Tramontina I've ever seen has been
> made in Brazil.
>
> -- Larry

That's what I thought too about Tramontina and Brazil. Although, I do
believe some of Tramontina's stuff might be manufactured in China (?).
I've also heard/read from a few sources that their porcelain-covered
cast-iron cookware (whatever it's called?) is pretty good at a
reasonable price.

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

Nonstick wrote:
>
> I may end up being very sorry that I posted this offer, but there seem
> to be a lot of questions about nonstick coatings. I have spent the past
> 28 years in the industry and am willing to share what I have learned
> regarding cookware in general and nonsticks in particular. Ask away! :-)

Thanks for your post and many helpful replies regarding nonstick
coatings. A 'long time ago' (OK, that's relative, <g>) in 2003, a
former coworker shared an article with me from USA Today ("Out of the
frying pan, into a fire" on 4/24/2003 by Elizabeth Weise -
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/...lon-usat_x.htm - or
http://tinyurl.com/2a4rfny). He seemed concerned about nonstick
coatings (speficially Teflon, I believe?) when it's used in and exposed
to the high-heat conditions of extreme cooking (?). I'm just curious
what you think of this rather old article my coworker shared and how it
may correlate with the nonstick coatings currently used in cookware
7-years later after this article. TIA.

Sky, who's too curious sometimes

---
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

"Nonstick" > wrote
>
> Woll makes a good pan. I suspect yours is cast aluminum? Woll used the
> same ceramic reinforcing technique as ScanPan, but a better grade of
> nonstick coating.
> The better you treat it, the better any nonstick pan will last. One area
> often overlooked is the damage done to the nonstick coating by the pan
> that is nested inside it when stacked up in the cupboard! A paper towel
> laid inside the pan will protect it from the next pan in the stack.
> Nonstick

Yes, it is 10mm thick, heats very evenly. This one remains on the range top
most of the time as it is used nearly every day. I have copper pans and All
Clad, but this is still the main workhorse.

Larry and Sky - I am absolutely positive about that set being made in the US. You are right about some of their cookware being made in Brazil, but that is generally their lighter weight stock. The heavier gauge stock is made in Wisconsin in the old Mirro cookware factory. Check out the sets at Costco and Sam's Club. Very little (if any!) of the Tramontina aluminum cookware is made in China. It's either Brazil or the US. Their cast iron may be made in China. There is nothing wrong with porcelain coated cast iron cookware and roast ware aside from the weight. It is even preferred for some styles of cooking. They also look good as serving pieces - direct from the oven to the table.The porcelain eliminates the seasoning issues that go with uncoated cast iron.
Nonstick

"Nonstick" > wrote
>
> Larry and Sky - I am absolutely positive about that set being made in
> the US. You are right about some of their cookware being made in Brazil,
> but that is generally their lighter weight stock. The heavier gauge
> stock is made in Wisconsin in the old Mirro cookware factory. Check out
> the sets at Costco and Sam's Club. Very little (if any!) of the
> Tramontina aluminum cookware is made in China.
> --
> Nonstick


http://www.tramontina-usa.com/global.html
Global Innovations...Made For The U.S.
U.S. Manufacturing Enables Tramontina to Increase Market Share, Better Serve
Customers

Tramontina USA, Inc. has emerged as a leading manufacturer of houseware
products that are not only beautiful and functional but represent a very
high-level of quality, craftsmanship and value for retailers and consumers.

As a company with both U.S. and global manufacturing capabilities,
Tramontina is uniquely positioned to fill customers' orders for a wide range
of cookware, cutlery and hollow ware products with unparalleled efficiency,
accuracy and speed. Since 1986, the company has steadily invested in
personnel, facilities and equipment to develop an infrastructure that
delivers superior responsiveness to the demands of an ever-changing retail
marketplace.

If you click on the PDF link on that page yo find some other good
information about the company
Made in the U.S.A. In 2005, Tramontina refitted and
reopened a former Mirro factory in Manitowoc, Wisconsin, and
created a new company, Tramontina U.S. Cookware, Inc. This
effort affirmed Tramontina's commitment to a strong and
growing manufacturing presence within the United States and
highlighted its commitment to providing its customers with the
highest levels of customer service. This state-of-the-art factory
manufactures aluminum nonstick cookware in a wide variety
of exterior colors and finishes, including porcelain enamel,
commercial satin finish and colored enamel for both
consumer and commercial foodservice cooking.
Cookware vessels are produced in Wisconsin, where the
nonstick coating and exterior finishes are both applied. The
company has made enormous investments in new finishing lines
equipped with machines utilizing the latest technology available.
These machines accurately perform the final steps in finishing
the cookware and automatically assembling the cookware
fixtures. This initiative allows Tramontina to customize
cookware vessels with a variety of handle designs to match
customer needs, price points and expectations.
Vessels are then finished and packaged at the company's U.S.
headquarters in Sugar Land, Texas, enabling Tramontina to
deliver orders with unmatched speed and precision.

Sky - I went back and read the article thanks to the link you provided. The article is a great example of taking a little bit of information and extrapolating from there. First a few facts -
A. There is Teflon and there is "teflon". Teflon is a registered tradename of DuPont for a polymer they make. The chemical name for the polymer it is PolyTetraFluoroEthylene (abbreviated PTFE thankfully!)
B. There are quite a few other manufacturers of PTFE that do not have the strong brand recognition of the Teflon name. The Teflon brand is so strong that it has become synonymous with "nonstick" much as Kleenex for tissue and Ping Pong for table tennis.
C. Virtually all of the high-performance nonsticks contain PTFE. The PTFE is what makes them nonstick. DuPont has gotten a lot of bad publicity because of the strong brand recognition, but the other PTFE manufacturers face the same issues.

OK, enough background facts. Back to your question -

The article mentions PFOA - a product used in manufacturing PTFE. PFOA popped up on the radar screen because traces of it were found in the blood of humans, newborn babies and even Polar Bears! In order to make it "newsworthy", it had to be associated with something the Consumer could relate to. "Ah, ha! Teflon nonstick is made with PFOA!" Well, yeah, but so are a lot of other things - like stain repellents for clothing, upholstery and carpeting. One big difference between these uses of PFOA and that of nonstick coatings is that when nonstick coatings are applied to cookware they are baked on a temperatures over 700 degrees F. PFOA is totally incinerated, not evaporated, incinerated, at around 525 degrees F. Any PFOA that might have been in the coating is gone. In those other uses of PFOA the highest temperature reached is what - 140 degrees F in a closed car in the summer sun? It's still there available to be absorbed through the skin or by inhalation. There are your main sources for the PFOA found in the environment. Even the original "whistle blowers" have backed down on nonsticks being the source of environmental PFOA. Unfortunately, that becomes Page 6 news.

Now that I have righted another wrong, I can go back to "Fighting for Truth, Justice and the American way!" :-)

Nonstick

Thanks for your reply, Nonstick. Very interesting, too. I rather
figured the PTFE-PFOA issue was a bit of a 'flash in the pan' thing.

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!


Nonstick wrote:
>
> Sky - I went back and read the article thanks to the link you provided.
> The article is a great example of taking a little bit of information and
> extrapolating from there. First a few facts -
> A. There is Teflon and there is "teflon". Teflon is a registered
> tradename of DuPont for a polymer they make. The chemical name for the
> polymer it is PolyTetraFluoroEthylene (abbreviated PTFE thankfully!)
> B. There are quite a few other manufacturers of PTFE that do not have
> the strong brand recognition of the Teflon name. The Teflon brand is so
> strong that it has become synonymous with "nonstick" much as Kleenex for
> tissue and Ping Pong for table tennis.
> C. Virtually all of the high-performance nonsticks contain PTFE. The
> PTFE is what makes them nonstick. DuPont has gotten a lot of bad
> publicity because of the strong brand recognition, but the other PTFE
> manufacturers face the same issues.
>
> OK, enough background facts. Back to your question -
>
> The article mentions PFOA - a product used in manufacturing PTFE. PFOA
> popped up on the radar screen because traces of it were found in the
> blood of humans, newborn babies and even Polar Bears! In order to make
> it "newsworthy", it had to be associated with something the Consumer
> could relate to. "Ah, ha! Teflon nonstick is made with PFOA!" Well,
> yeah, but so are a lot of other things - like stain repellents for
> clothing, upholstery and carpeting. One big difference between these
> uses of PFOA and that of nonstick coatings is that when nonstick
> coatings are applied to cookware they are baked on a temperatures over
> 700 degrees F. PFOA is totally incinerated, not evaporated, incinerated,
> at around 525 degrees F. Any PFOA that might have been in the coating is
> gone. In those other uses of PFOA the highest temperature reached is
> what - 140 degrees F in a closed car in the summer sun? It's still there
> available to be absorbed through the skin or by inhalation. There are
> your main sources for the PFOA found in the environment. Even the
> original "whistle blowers" have backed down on nonsticks being the
> source of environmental PFOA. Unfortunately, that becomes Page 6 news.
>
> Now that I have righted another wrong, I can go back to "Fighting for
> Truth, Justice and the American way!" :-)
>
> Nonstick
>
> Sky;1508675 Wrote:
> > Nonstick wrote:-
> >
> > I may end up being very sorry that I posted this offer, but there seem
> > to be a lot of questions about nonstick coatings. I have spent the
> > past
> > 28 years in the industry and am willing to share what I have learned
> > regarding cookware in general and nonsticks in particular. Ask away!
> > :-)-
> >
> > Thanks for your post and many helpful replies regarding nonstick
> > coatings. A 'long time ago' (OK, that's relative, g) in 2003, a
> > former coworker shared an article with me from USA Today ("Out of the
> > frying pan, into a fire" on 4/24/2003 by Elizabeth Weise -
> > 'USATODAY.com - Out of the frying pan, into a fire'
> > (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/...lon-usat_x.htm) - or
> > 'USATODAY.com - Out of the frying pan, into a fire'
> > (http://tinyurl.com/2a4rfny)). He seemed concerned about nonstick
> > coatings (speficially Teflon, I believe?) when it's used in and exposed
> > to the high-heat conditions of extreme cooking (?). I'm just curious
> > what you think of this rather old article my coworker shared and how it
> > may correlate with the nonstick coatings currently used in cookware
> > 7-years later after this article. TIA.
> >

"Sky" > wrote in message ...
| Thanks for your reply, Nonstick. Very interesting, too. I rather
| figured the PTFE-PFOA issue was a bit of a 'flash in the pan' thing.

Very nicely said, Sky...

pavane

"Nonstick" > wrote in message
...
>
> Nonstick;1507262 Wrote:
>> Which one is best for high temperature stovetop cooking?
>>
>> pavane
>>
>> It depends on what you mean by "High Temperature". Foods can be seared
>> at a high-medium setting, but if you want to really crank up the heat,
>> look to cast iron or uncoated stanless. Heating nonstick coated pans
>> to
>> over 550F will shorten the life of the nonstick. There are some new
>> "ceramic" coatings that will withstand 850F, but their nonstick
>> properties fade quickly. The coating itself will survive fine, but the
>> nonstick characteristics will be gone.
>>
>> I've been using a Circulon pan for blackening fish and chicken for many
>>
>> years. Pan goes over a high heat for a minute or two before it even sees
>> the
>> protein and it is still perfectly non-stick.
>>
>> Jon[/i][/color]
>
> I'm not surprised that you have had good results. You are using the pan
> properly. A minute or two on high is not going to hurt the nonstick. The
> problem is when you get distracted and the minute or two becomes 10 or
> 12! Both gas and electric stoves are capable of getting hot enough to
> actually melt an aluminum pan!
>
> Another thing you have going for you is that the Circulon pan is well
> constructed and of a decent thickness. The record-like circular pattern
> in the bottom also helps to protect the nonstick from damage by
> implements. Good choice!
>
> Nonstick
>[/i][/color]
Sorry, lost track of the thread.

Although the pan works well because of the ridges, It's not my favorite pan
due to the mars they leave on the food I'm searing. It is also difficult
making an omelet in this pan. It's a small matter, but I would love to find
a non-stick pan that would hold up to this type of use that was flat. Most
of the time I resort to my cast iron pans for this.

Jon

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Nonstick" > wrote
>>
>> Larry and Sky - I am absolutely positive about that set being made in
>> the US. You are right about some of their cookware being made in Brazil,
>> but that is generally their lighter weight stock. The heavier gauge
>> stock is made in Wisconsin in the old Mirro cookware factory. Check out
>> the sets at Costco and Sam's Club. Very little (if any!) of the
>> Tramontina aluminum cookware is made in China.
>> --
>> Nonstick
>
>
> http://www.tramontina-usa.com/global.html
> Global Innovations...Made For The U.S.
> U.S. Manufacturing Enables Tramontina to Increase Market Share, Better
> Serve Customers
>
> Tramontina USA, Inc. has emerged as a leading manufacturer of houseware
> products that are not only beautiful and functional but represent a very
> high-level of quality, craftsmanship and value for retailers and
> consumers.
>
> As a company with both U.S. and global manufacturing capabilities,
> Tramontina is uniquely positioned to fill customers' orders for a wide
> range of cookware, cutlery and hollow ware products with unparalleled
> efficiency, accuracy and speed. Since 1986, the company has steadily
> invested in personnel, facilities and equipment to develop an
> infrastructure that delivers superior responsiveness to the demands of an
> ever-changing retail marketplace.
>
> If you click on the PDF link on that page yo find some other good
> information about the company
> Made in the U.S.A. In 2005, Tramontina refitted and
> reopened a former Mirro factory in Manitowoc, Wisconsin, and
> created a new company, Tramontina U.S. Cookware, Inc. This
> effort affirmed Tramontina's commitment to a strong and
> growing manufacturing presence within the United States and
> highlighted its commitment to providing its customers with the
> highest levels of customer service. This state-of-the-art factory
> manufactures aluminum nonstick cookware in a wide variety
> of exterior colors and finishes, including porcelain enamel,
> commercial satin finish and colored enamel for both
> consumer and commercial foodservice cooking.
> Cookware vessels are produced in Wisconsin, where the
> nonstick coating and exterior finishes are both applied. The
> company has made enormous investments in new finishing lines
> equipped with machines utilizing the latest technology available.
> These machines accurately perform the final steps in finishing
> the cookware and automatically assembling the cookware
> fixtures. This initiative allows Tramontina to customize
> cookware vessels with a variety of handle designs to match
> customer needs, price points and expectations.
> Vessels are then finished and packaged at the company's U.S.
> headquarters in Sugar Land, Texas, enabling Tramontina to
> deliver orders with unmatched speed and precision.


I have their 12" sauté (SS, not coated) with helper handle and lid which I
picked up for $30 at Costco. Absolutely gets the most use of any pan in my
kitchen. Heavy as hell with a very thick bottom, but heats very evenly and
cleans up nicely.

Jon

The manufacturer of Circulon (Meyer Housewares) also makes a line called Anolon. Same kind of quality, but without the ridges. You might want to try that out.
I think I have mentioned before that no matter which nonstick pan you buy, the better you treat it, the longer it will last. It has also been found that consumers don't begin to abuse the nonstick surface until the surface begins to lose the nonstick performance. That Tramontina 3 piece frying pan set that I have mentioned before has a new coating on it that has outstanding release. You should be able to use it for a loooong time before it disappoints you.

Nonstick

On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 11:31:41 -0400, "Zeppo" > wrote:

>I have their 12" sauté (SS, not coated) with helper handle and lid which I
>picked up for $30 at Costco. Absolutely gets the most use of any pan in my
>kitchen. Heavy as hell with a very thick bottom, but heats very evenly and
>cleans up nicely.

Yes, I've had the 12 and the 10" without helper hande for many years.
Much better than All Clad stainless saute pans, which I got rid of.

-- Larry

Zeppo/Larry - There is nothing wrong with uncoated stainless steel cookware if you know what you're doing and you guys sure seem to! Cookware is a lot like autos. Ford may make the Lincoln, but they have to have The Fusion, Focus, Edge, etc. in order to be able to meet the needs and budget constraints of their customers. Cookware manufacturers are the same. They make killer sets at the high end, but they have to have lesser versions so that all groups can say, "I cook on XXX, too." No matter what the metal of the cookware, you will seldom go wrong buying the best of a brand that you can afford.

Having said that, you can also over-pay just to have the brand. There are a number of manufacturers (it would be impolitic of me to name them :-)) that have what is almost a "cult" following. Sort of like Apple on the electronics side.

Nonstick

In article >,
Nonstick > wrote:

> Having said that, you can also over-pay just to have the brand. There
> are a number of manufacturers (it would be impolitic of me to name them
> :-)) that have what is almost a "cult" following. Sort of like Apple on
> the electronics side.

That is why I don't have a good encased style stainless pan in my vast
collection of many branded pans (all of which I either bought used in
very good shape or through a combination of sale prices and reductions
including an employee discount I used to have). I have top of the line
pans from Calphalon, Analon, Circulon and a couple other brands that I
have gotten for far less than retail because I refuse to pay those
prices. I have never found an encased style of stainless used or on
some form of cheap. The bottom plate style stainless, over common, and
not what I want. But I cannot bring myself to pay the cult price for
even one skillet.

And BTW: I am an Apple Mac user since I first used one at work in 1984,
not because Apple is some mystical creation, but because I never liked
the IBM confusables since I saw unit number 4 of the first 8 off the
production line, sent out on a series of 8 tours to introduce the line
in 1982.

jt

On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 09:22:39 -0500, jt august
> wrote:

>..... The bottom plate style stainless, over common, and
>not what I want....

"over common"? Why wouldn't you like that style?

If a pan is designed to use heat from its bottom only, like a saute
pan, then a bottom plate pan is not only just as good, it is superior,
because its sides conduct less heat away from the pan bottom and
radiate less heat into the air.

That is why I've kept my Tramontina saute pans and junked the All
Clad. They hold heat better.

>And BTW: I am an Apple Mac user since I first used one at work in 1984,
>not because Apple is some mystical creation, but because I never liked
>the IBM confusables since I saw unit number 4 of the first 8 off the
>production line, sent out on a series of 8 tours to introduce the line
>in 1982.

You haven't stated any objective basis for preference there. Do you
still buy Studebakers because you didn't like the first Ford Woody you
say in 1952?

(FWIW, I've about thirty computers in the house, including several
Macs. But most of them are Windows or Linux boxes, simply because
there's much more software for those boxes that does what I need to
do.)

-- Larry

"jt august" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Nonstick > wrote:
>
>> Having said that, you can also over-pay just to have the brand. There
>> are a number of manufacturers (it would be impolitic of me to name them
>> :-)) that have what is almost a "cult" following. Sort of like Apple on
>> the electronics side.
>
> That is why I don't have a good encased style stainless pan in my vast
> collection of many branded pans (all of which I either bought used in
> very good shape or through a combination of sale prices and reductions
> including an employee discount I used to have). I have top of the line
> pans from Calphalon, Analon, Circulon and a couple other brands that I
> have gotten for far less than retail because I refuse to pay those
> prices.

It pains me to buy anything with a celebrity name on it, but some years ago,
K Mart carried the Martha Stewart tri-ply cookware. On sale it was a great
price for really good quality ware. It was about 20% of the price of All
Clad at the time.

On 8/1/2010 11:49 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>
> It pains me to buy anything with a celebrity name on it, but some years
> ago, K Mart carried the Martha Stewart tri-ply cookware. On sale it was
> a great price for really good quality ware. It was about 20% of the
> price of All Clad at the time.

I bought one of those pans, on clearance. Excellent quality, fantastic
price!

In article >,
wrote:

> >..... The bottom plate style stainless, over common, and
> >not what I want....
>
> "over common"? Why wouldn't you like that style?
>
> If a pan is designed to use heat from its bottom only, like a saute
> pan, then a bottom plate pan is not only just as good, it is superior,
> because its sides conduct less heat away from the pan bottom and
> radiate less heat into the air.
>
> That is why I've kept my Tramontina saute pans and junked the All
> Clad. They hold heat better.

I have one bottom plate skillet, but I seldom use it. I have a set of
Commercial Annodized Cookware including skillets and sautes (get a 17
piece set at a thrift store for $41 at a thrift store on a half price
sale day several years ago). This was the original name of Calphalon,
and this is the style that is hard annodized on the inside and out, no
non-stick surface. I prefer this one over the bottom plated stainless,
as the heat carries up the sides and to me it does a beter job. I have
used a friend's Calphalon Tri-Play and All-Clad cookware, and I like
those for the same reasons. To me, though, fish seem to cook better on
stainless than my Hard Anno. I got a Kitchen-Aid bottom plte stainless
and the results were not the same. It seems to me that heat radiating
from the sides helps envelope the food better and gets better results.

I wish I could have bought one of those All_Clads you "junked."

> >And BTW: I am an Apple Mac user since I first used one at work in 1984,
> >not because Apple is some mystical creation, but because I never liked
> >the IBM confusables since I saw unit number 4 of the first 8 off the
> >production line, sent out on a series of 8 tours to introduce the line
> >in 1982.
>
> You haven't stated any objective basis for preference there. Do you
> still buy Studebakers because you didn't like the first Ford Woody you
> say in 1952?

I liked the way the Mac performed for what I wanted to do over anything
I saw on a DOS box pre-win-95. And by the time Win 95 and later 98 got
out, Mac OS was even better for what I like to do. It was really only
at Vista that I decided Win matched my likes, but I find the learning
curve is such that I don't do much with Windows besides play some games.

> (FWIW, I've about thirty computers in the house, including several
> Macs. But most of them are Windows or Linux boxes, simply because
> there's much more software for those boxes that does what I need to
> do.)

Between computers and video games, I have over 180 machines and over
3000 games - some of which are a couple of older Win and DOS boxes.
Haven't ventured into Linux yet, however.

jt

Does any manufacturer still offer hard anodized cookware _without_
the non-stick coating???? Just hard anodized inside and out.

UOTE='S Viemeister[_2_];1512650']On 8/1/2010 11:49 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


It pains me to buy anything with a celebrity name on it, but some years
ago, K Mart carried the Martha Stewart tri-ply cookware. On sale it was
a great price for really good quality ware. It was about 20% of the
price of All Clad at the time.

I bought one of those pans, on clearance. Excellent quality, fantastic
price![/quote]

Some of the people who have posted on this string obviously know what they are talking about, and that is the secret to buying good cookware. Forget the brands and look at the cookware. "Celebrities" like Martha Stweart don't make cookware, they "lend" their names to cookware manufacturers or importers. If they have associated themselves with a good manufacturer, the result is apt to be good cookware - a little more expense ("lend" is a loose term!), but good. Some tele-marketers shop for the lowest cost they can pay for their goods. When some of the lesser manufacturers know their brand is not going to appear on the cookware, they are willing to cut a lot of corners to cut costs. Their main criteria is to have cookware that looks good!

For example, all stainless steel is not the same. There are 18/10, 18/8 and 18/0. What? Stainless steel is an alloy of several metals. You start with steel.
To make the steel less prone to corrosion (i.e. rusting) you add chromium. Typically you add 18% chromium. (a minimum of 10.5% chromium must be in the alloy in order for metalurgists to consider it to be "stainless" steel.)That provides the steel with a protective coating that is far more resistant to corrosion. To make it even more corrsion resistant, a third metal is added - nickle. Nickel also gives the final alloy a much brighter luster. Nickel is added at different percentages - typically 10%, 8% or 0%. So there is the second number in 18/10, 18/8, 18/0 - the nickel content.

There is another factor involved in these alloys - magnetic properties. Steel is very magnetic. Chromium isn't. Neither is nickel. The more chromium and nickel you add to steel, the less magnetic it becomes. So what? Well, it makes a big difference if you are going to use an induction stove. 18/10 and 18/8 will not heat up on an induction stove because induction cooking depends on a rapidly changing magnetic field to cause the atoms of the metal to vibrate - vibrate fast enough that they generate heat - the heat you use to do the cooking! The bottom plate you see on stainless (and aluminum) cookware that says it is suitable for induction cooking is magnetic 18/0 stainless steel. That is what makes it heat.

Well, I have probably bored 98% of the people who will read this "lecture" on stainless steel, but the bottom line is - to get what you pay for, know what you are buying.

Nonstick

On 8/1/2010 9:30 PM, Nonstick wrote:

> There is another factor involved in these alloys - magnetic properties.
> Steel is very magnetic. Chromium isn't. Neither is nickel. The more
> chromium and nickel you add to steel, the less magnetic it becomes.
>
Are you _quite_ sure about nickel not being magnetic?

>> Sorry, lost track of the thread.
>>
>> Although the pan works well because of the ridges, It's not my favorite
>> pan
>> due to the mars they leave on the food I'm searing. It is also difficult
>>
>> making an omelet in this pan. It's a small matter, but I would love to
>> find
>> a non-stick pan that would hold up to this type of use that was flat.
>> Most
>> of the time I resort to my cast iron pans for this.
>>
>> Jon
>
> The manufacturer of Circulon (Meyer Housewares) also makes a line called
> Anolon. Same kind of quality, but without the ridges. You might want to
> try that out.
> I think I have mentioned before that no matter which nonstick pan you
> buy, the better you treat it, the longer it will last. It has also been
> found that consumers don't begin to abuse the nonstick surface until the
> surface begins to lose the nonstick performance. That Tramontina 3 piece
> frying pan set that I have mentioned before has a new coating on it that
> has outstanding release. You should be able to use it for a loooong time
> before it disappoints you.
>
> Nonstick
>
>
>
>
> --
> Nonstick

Unfortunately, I don't always remember it's a coating and end up using metal
utensils on it, which eventfully proves fatal (to the pan). I might give
that Analon pan a try, though.

Thanks for all the info.
Jon

OK, OK, I thought I had droned on long enough with the metallurgy lesson, so took a bit of a short-cut. Nickel does improve the corrosion resistance and luster and is magnetic, but significantly less so than the steel. Induction cooking, which relies on the cookware being magnetic, does not work properly with 18/10 or 18/8. However, I thank you for keeping me honest. No more short-cuts. :-)

Nonstick

Stainless steel is poor conductor of heat. A plain stainless frying pan would develop serious hot-spots. In order to overcome this drawaback to a metal which has much going for it as cookware, the manufacturers incorporate a much more conductive element to help spread the heat. In most cases that is aluminum, but it could be (and has been) copper.
Initially the aluminum plates were "brazed" onto the bottom of the pans. This caused some problems as, if it wasn't done properly, water could get behind the plate during washing and turn to steam the next time the pan was used. This resulted in some incidents where the steam actually blew the plate off the bottom of the pan! The plates also had a nasty habit of falling off if the pan was severely overheated. The next step was to "impact-bond" the plate when they were pressing the cookware. This gave a much more secure system. Usually they also impact bond another thin stainless plate to the bottom to protect the softer aluminum of the pan bottom and often to make them induction compatible.
Then they figured out tri-ply - a way to sandwich the aluminum completely between two sheets of stainless steel. All Clad was the pioneer in perfecting this process. One of the previous posters to this string said that he felt having the aluminum run all the way up the sides drew the heat away from the bottom. This true, it does. But that also helps to make the spread of the heat more even and uniform.
One of the unseen benefits you take advantage of with some of the higher priced cookware is one heck of a lot of engineering. All Clad is a good example of that.

I guess that this is going to become my "signature" closing, but as I said before, "To get what you pay for, know what you're buying."

Nonstick

On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 20:49:26 +0000, Nonstick
> wrote:


>... One of the previous posters to this
>string said that he felt having the aluminum run all the way up the
>sides drew the heat away from the bottom. This true, it does. But that
>also helps to make the spread of the heat more even and uniform.

You've been giving us a whole lot of great information, for which I
thank you. But I don't believe that last sentence above. Can you explain
why I should?

-- Larry

Larry - No problem.
With an aluminum bottom plate, the heat is concentrated in the plate area. With the poor thermal conductivity of the stainless steel, the sidewalls will not pull the heat up from the bottom. With nowhere to go sideways, the heat has to go straight through to the food. With gas or electric, there are always hotter and cooler areas of the flame or the heating element. This causes hot spots across the pan bottom.
With the tri-ply, a more even heat flow occurs across the bottom of the pan as the heat is more easily conducted up the sidewall.
I don't know if I have made a believer of you or not, but you can probably prove it for yourself by making crepes in the two types of pans. Try keeping the times and heat settings the same, and I believe that the crepes from the tri-ply pan will be a more uniform brown across the entire crepe.

Nonstick

jt august wrote:
>
> That is why I don't have a good encased style stainless pan in my vast
> collection of many branded pans (all of which I either bought used in
> very good shape or through a combination of sale prices and reductions
> including an employee discount I used to have). I have top of the line
> pans from Calphalon, Analon, Circulon and a couple other brands that I
> have gotten for far less than retail because I refuse to pay those
> prices.

We have a wide assortment of good quality copper from watching for it
at garage sales across a few decades. Folks buy them for the
performance, add them to the garage sale items for the maintenance
effort required to use them. Because of the maintenance effort we
nearly always use them as decor. We also have some of the enamelled
cast iron items that seem to get heavier every year as we age so they
too are mostly used as decor.

> I have never found an encased style of stainless used or on
> some form of cheap.

This is a good argument in favor of the stainless clad aluminum types.
They are expensive to buy yet easy enough to maintain that folks never
seem to add them to the garage sale items.

Having learned how to use "stick resistant" pans stainless clad is my
dream type for a bit over half of my cooking tasks. Long ago I had a
set from one of those demos at a home show but my ex got them in the
divorce.

> The bottom plate style stainless, over common, and
> not what I want. But I cannot bring myself to pay the cult price for
> even one skillet.

The right tool for the job - There are jobs where the bottom plate type
is the right tool for the job. It's a minority of cooking tasks maybe
about as common as needing cast iron.