Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Cooking Equipment (rec.food.equipment) Discussion of food-related equipment. Includes items used in food preparation and storage, including major and minor appliances, gadgets and utensils, infrastructure, and food- and recipe-related software. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 16:01:24 -0400, Tony P.
> wrote: >The thing about plastics is that they'll outgas within a decade or so >leaving a chalky surface. Ewwwww. Howdy, In my experience, that depends on the quality... I have a Mercedes wagon for nearly 18 years and on the day that it went off to another happy life the interior looked and felt as it did on the day I bought it. All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
"Del Cecchi" > wrote in message ... > >> > Calling a Lambo and a Honda both "automobiles" is stretching the > definition. A deuce and a half would make a terrible choice as a family > car, but it makes a hell of a vehicle for delivering relief supplies in a > flood. Consumer reports uses criteria that relate to average person and > their use. So cars that foul plugs or don't start in the winter or can't > carry the groceries are down rated relative to those that can, whether or > not they have real walnut on the dash or can go 200 mph. I exaggerated to make a point, but the reality is the same. CR often down products because it does not fit their agenda. If you know up front what their agenda is, you can use the other information they provide. |
|
|||
|
|||
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "Del Cecchi" > wrote in message > ... > > >>Calling a Lambo and a Honda both "automobiles" is stretching the >>definition. A deuce and a half would make a terrible choice as a family >>car, but it makes a hell of a vehicle for delivering relief supplies in a >>flood. Consumer reports uses criteria that relate to average person and >>their use. So cars that foul plugs or don't start in the winter or can't >>carry the groceries are down rated relative to those that can, whether or >>not they have real walnut on the dash or can go 200 mph. > > > I exaggerated to make a point, but the reality is the same. CR often down > products because it does not fit their agenda. If you know up front what > their agenda is, you can use the other information they provide. > It;s not like they go out of their way to hide their criteria. It's usually explained in one or two paragraphs of the article. Matthew -- Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game You can't win You can't break even You can't get out of the game |
|
|||
|
|||
What happened to stoves? I still don't understand why one has to be
Mario to cook well on a Viking commercial-style stove. Or with copper. I got my first copper pots and was ecstatic at the difference they made. Bliss |
|
|||
|
|||
> When I was looking for a stove, I looked > at Consumer Reports. They put the > commercial style stoves down at the > bottom, based on ease of cleaning, > convenience and features. They > recommended them if you don't care about > price, and want the look. They are also > very sturdy, in case you use them for > blacksmithing. >> While I certainly agree that the >> commercial style stoves are overpriced >> fluff, please do not ever believe >> anything you read in CR, they are one of >> the most biased, baseless publications >> around. Take the time to research the >> product in question yourself and you'll >> be far better off. > > Pete C. That would be "research," as in reading, (then pontificating in) Usenet? Apparently Usenet provides the "scientific" information that rescues us from the evil grasp of CR-like "fluff"? We are indeed fortunate to have you. |
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
"Matthew L. Martin" wrote:
> > Pete C. wrote: > > wrote: > > > >>>When I was looking for a stove, I looked > >>>at Consumer Reports. They put the > >>>commercial style stoves down at the > >>>bottom, based on ease of cleaning, > >>>convenience and features. They > >>>recommended them if you don't care about > >>>price, and want the look. They are also > >>>very sturdy, in case you use them for > >>>blacksmithing. > >> > >>>>While I certainly agree that the > >>>>commercial style stoves are overpriced > >>>>fluff, please do not ever believe > >>>>anything you read in CR, they are one of > >>>>the most biased, baseless publications > >>>>around. Take the time to research the > >>>>product in question yourself and you'll > >>>>be far better off. > >>> > >>>Pete C. > >> > >>That would be "research," as in reading, (then pontificating in) Usenet? > > > > > > Nope. > > > > > >>Apparently Usenet provides the "scientific" information that rescues us > >>from the evil grasp of CR-like "fluff"? > > > > > > If CR was simply "fluff" it wouldn't be the problem it is. > > > > Problem? CR is a magazine that has a well publicized mission. If you > think that mission is a problem, I suspect you have plenty of problems > of your own. I suppose I do have a problem with an outfit that rigs and fabricates tests, uses non scientifically valid testing methodology and publishes inaccurate and biased results. Pete C. |
|
|||
|
|||
Viking range quality
|
|
|||
|
|||
Viking range quality
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Questions regarding Viking Range | General Cooking | |||
Viking range quality | General Cooking | |||
Wolf Vs Viking Range | Cooking Equipment | |||
Viking Range Or Thermadoor | Cooking Equipment | |||
Viking Range Or Thermadoor? | General Cooking |