On Mar 26, 10:22 pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>
> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
> Lou

Pizza?

"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
...
> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>
> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>

How weird. It looks like a pizza pan with a stovetop handle.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:22:05 -0600, Lou Decruss >
wrote:

>After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
>Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>
>http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
Could be for big crepes. Personally, that would work for me. You
could also cooks eggs on it... bacon, whatever. I'm not a big fan of
dedicated pans for anything. Multi-task, son, multi-task.

sf
a crepe & omelet maker who gave the dedicated crepe and omelet pans
away a long time ago


--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.

Here's a picture. Any thoughts?

http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg

Lou

Lou Decruss <Lou Decruss >> wrote:

> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?

The #1101 is a heavy duty grill scraper:

<http://www.globeequipment.com/Vendors/Wear+Ever/Kitchen+Supplies/Kitchen+Utensils/WER!1101.html>

Err, maybe not. It just a shallow pan. Good for heating tortillas
I guess, but not much else I'd cook with that, or any aluminum pan.
I wouldn't even use that as a fajita pan. Shape and size is right,
but not in aluminum.

-sw

On Mar 26, 10:22*pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. *This is what she came
> home with today. *(2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. *It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. *Wear-Ever #1101. *It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? *
>
> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
> Lou
>

Like all aluminium pots and pans, this one should be perfect at giving
you Alzheimers.

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:19:00 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

>On Mar 26, 10:22*pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. *This is what she came
>> home with today. *(2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. *It's
>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. *Wear-Ever #1101. *It seems it would be
>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>
>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? *
>>
>> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>>
>> Lou
>>
>
>Like all aluminium pots and pans, this one should be perfect at giving
>you Alzheimers.

Surely you jest!
http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/7...oilhat2cy2.jpg

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

Lou Decruss wrote:
> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>
> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg


Crepes. Definitely crepes. They can be almost any size.
It would also work for omelets.


--Lia

"Julia Altshuler" > ha scritto nel messaggio
. ..
> Lou Decruss wrote:
>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>
>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
>
> Crepes. Definitely crepes. They can be almost any size.
> It would also work for omelets.
>
>
> --Lia

I would not be happy with 1/8" think omelets! I wouldn't want to make
crepes on this piece of aluminum, either, but maybe I will have to one day
when the iron gets too heavy to swirl and twirl.

On Mar 27, 1:22�am, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. �This is what she came
> home with today. �(2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. �It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. �Wear-Ever #1101. �It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? �
>
> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
> Lou


The retro style bakelite handle and that the aluminum is stamped
rather than spun tells me that pan is from the mid 1940s... was
typically used as a pancake/grilled cheese griddle back then (there
were square versions following), but that's the extent of its
interest, it has absolutely no culinary value today except possibly a
defroster.

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:32:32 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:



> Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them so
> I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. What's the
> objection to aluminum?

Heh. In my younger (and more stupid) days I had some aluminum pots and
pans. Bloody awful things. They warped, stained easily (I found them a
b*tch to clean) - and I am almost convinced they were not good for my
health either... Needless to say, I don't own any aluminum cookware
anymore. Good quality SS is the way to go, IMHO.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Monday is a lousy way to spend one seventh of your life.

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:32:32 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>
>
>> Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them so
>> I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. What's the
>> objection to aluminum?
>
> Heh. In my younger (and more stupid) days I had some aluminum pots and
> pans. Bloody awful things. They warped, stained easily (I found them a
> b*tch to clean) - and I am almost convinced they were not good for my
> health either... Needless to say, I don't own any aluminum cookware
> anymore. Good quality SS is the way to go, IMHO.
>

Adding to the above, aluminum conducts heat really well, which means it
burns food rather easily. Stainless is much better for controlling
temperature, cleanup, and so on. If you really want the heat distribution
of aluminum, get a SS pan with an aluminum core, like a basic All-Clad, or
Calphalon Tri-ply.

Sharon

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:59:35 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>Lou Decruss <Lou Decruss >> wrote:
>
>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>
>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>
>The #1101 is a heavy duty grill scraper:
>
><http://www.globeequipment.com/Vendors/Wear+Ever/Kitchen+Supplies/Kitchen+Utensils/WER!1101.html>

Ya. I did that google too.

>Err, maybe not. It just a shallow pan. Good for heating tortillas
>I guess, but not much else I'd cook with that, or any aluminum pan.
>I wouldn't even use that as a fajita pan. Shape and size is right,
>but not in aluminum.

Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them
so I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. What's the
objection to aluminum?

Lou

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:26:15 -0400, Julia Altshuler
> wrote:

>Lou Decruss wrote:
>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>
>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>>
>> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
>
>Crepes. Definitely crepes. They can be almost any size.
>It would also work for omelets.

I planned crepes for tomorrow anyway so I'll give it a try. Thanks!

Lou

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:48:25 +0100, "Giusi" >
wrote:

>"Julia Altshuler" > ha scritto nel messaggio
...
>> Lou Decruss wrote:
>>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>>> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>>
>>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>>
>>
>> Crepes. Definitely crepes. They can be almost any size.
>> It would also work for omelets.
>>
>>
>> --Lia
>
>I would not be happy with 1/8" think omelets!

The aluminum is 1/8" thick silly <g>

>I wouldn't want to make
>crepes on this piece of aluminum, either, but maybe I will have to one day
>when the iron gets too heavy to swirl and twirl.

This isn't as heavy as cast, but it's still heavier than it looks.

Lou

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:53:58 -0700 (PDT), Sheldon >
wrote:

>On Mar 27, 1:22?am, Lou Decruss > wrote:
>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. ?This is what she came
>> home with today. ?(2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. ?It's
>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. ?Wear-Ever #1101. ?It seems it would be
>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>
>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? ?
>>
>> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>>
>> Lou
>
>
>The retro style bakelite handle and that the aluminum is stamped
>rather than spun tells me that pan is from the mid 1940s... was
>typically used as a pancake/grilled cheese griddle back then (there
>were square versions following), but that's the extent of its
>interest, it has absolutely no culinary value today except possibly a
>defroster.

Excellent. That's what I was looking for. I'll probably try it and
see how it works and then gift it. LOL Unless it works well for
crepes. I've already got a crepe pan I haven't tried so I'll see
which one works best.

Lou

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:19:00 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

>On Mar 26, 10:22*pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. *This is what she came
>> home with today. *(2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. *It's
>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. *Wear-Ever #1101. *It seems it would be
>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>
>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? *
>>
>> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>>
>> Lou
>>
>
>Like all aluminium pots and pans, this one should be perfect at giving
>you Alzheimers.

Aren't you just a ray of sunshine.

Lou

Lou Decruss wrote:
> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>
> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>

We have shallow pans like that to make pancakes/crepes on.

Lou Decruss wrote:
>
> This is more a curiosity thing. I've got lots of SS and cast. I just
> want to know what the aluminum is like to cook with. Kinda like a
> spice I'm not familiar with.


There are more variables than just the type of metal.
Aluminum is generally nice to cook with because it's relatively
inexpensive and can therefore be made thicker which distributes heat
evenly. On the other hand, thicker can mean heavier which can be a
disadvantage for things like flipping pancakes.
There's also how well the pan is made, whether the bottom is even,
whether the surface is smooth. There's good quality aluminum and bad.
You're going to have to try your pan and get back to us with how you
liked it.


The main Alzheimer's objection to aluminum is based on a tiny news story
that spun out of control until it became urban myth. More information he

http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/valentino.asp


Take especial look at the last paragraph.


--Lia

Ophelia wrote:
> Lou Decruss wrote:
>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>
>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>>
>> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>>
>
> We have shallow pans like that to make pancakes/crepes on.
>
>
I have a similar TFAL pan I use to make spring roll wrappers.

On Mar 27, 9:59�am, "Sharon" > wrote:
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:32:32 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
> >> Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them so
> >> I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. �What's the
> >> objection to aluminum?
>
> > Heh. In my younger (and more stupid) days I had some aluminum pots and
> > pans. Bloody awful things. They warped, stained easily (I found them a
> > b*tch to clean) - and I am almost convinced they were not good for my
> > health either... Needless to say, I don't own any aluminum cookware
> > anymore. Good quality SS is the way to go, IMHO.
>
> Adding to the above, aluminum conducts heat really well, which means it
> burns food rather easily. �

Actually the better the heat conduction the more evenly the heat
distribution the less likely food will burn... which is why quality
stainless steel cookware will contain a copper/aluminum core
bottom ... anyway all burning, regardless which cookware, even if food
is cooked on a stick over a flame, is due exclusively to the inability
of the cook and no other reason whatsoever.

On Mar 27, 12:22*am, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. *This is what she came
> home with today. *(2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. *It's
> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. *Wear-Ever #1101. *It seems it would be
> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> Here's a picture. Any thoughts? *
>
> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
> Lou

I have one just like that, from some auntie or grandma - I use it
mainly as an extra home-made pizza pan; it could be used for anything
you'd use a griddle for - eggs, bacon, pancakes, etc. - but it's
small.

N.

On Mar 27, 10:58*am, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:48:48 +0200, ChattyCathy
>
> > wrote:
> >On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:32:32 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
> >> Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them so
> >> I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. *What's the
> >> objection to aluminum?
>
> >Heh. In my younger (and more stupid) days I had some aluminum pots and
> >pans. Bloody awful things. They warped, stained easily (I found them a
> >b*tch to clean) - and I am almost convinced they were not good for my
> >health either... Needless to say, I don't own any aluminum cookware
> >anymore. Good quality SS is the way to go, IMHO.
>
> This is more a curiosity thing. *I've got lots of SS and cast. *I just
> want to know what the aluminum is like to cook with. *Kinda like a
> spice I'm not familiar with.
>
> Lou

My grandmothers and mother (long-lived) used aluminum pans their whole
lives, as I do - that long-ago aluminum-will-kill-you "scientific"
study that was widely reported and subsequently taken as Gospel truth
was revealed also a long time ago to be seriously flawed.

Nobody has shown any relationship between ill health and aluminum
cookware. I use mine all the time, although I like my stainless
better, for performance reasons - the stainless has aluminum within.

You might as well quit eating fish because of all the mercury and
because farmed fish are worse for you than wild fish in most cases.

N.

<sf> wrote in message ...
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:19:00 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
>>On Mar 26, 10:22 pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
>>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>>> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>>
>>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>>>
>>> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>>>
>>> Lou
>>>
>>
>>Like all aluminium pots and pans, this one should be perfect at giving
>>you Alzheimers.
>
> Surely you jest!
> http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/7...oilhat2cy2.jpg
>

Who is this? And more importantly, who is the cat?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:26:10 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
><sf> wrote in message ...
>> On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:19:00 -0700 (PDT),
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mar 26, 10:22 pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
>>>> After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
>>>> out for one at the resale stores she frequents. This is what she came
>>>> home with today. (2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. It's
>>>> 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. Wear-Ever #1101. It seems it would be
>>>> good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>>>>
>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>
>>>Like all aluminium pots and pans, this one should be perfect at giving
>>>you Alzheimers.
>>
>> Surely you jest!
>> http://img212.imageshack.us/img212/7...oilhat2cy2.jpg
>>
>
>Who is this? And more importantly, who is the cat?

it's a googled image found by using "tin foil hat" as the search term.


If you look at his shirt, it says gwally.com. Most likely that's ole
Wally himself with his trusty sidekick, Kitty Kat.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

Lou Decruss wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:48:48 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:32:32 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them so
>>> I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. What's the
>>> objection to aluminum?
>> Heh. In my younger (and more stupid) days I had some aluminum pots and
>> pans. Bloody awful things. They warped, stained easily (I found them a
>> b*tch to clean) - and I am almost convinced they were not good for my
>> health either... Needless to say, I don't own any aluminum cookware
>> anymore. Good quality SS is the way to go, IMHO.
>
> This is more a curiosity thing. I've got lots of SS and cast. I just
> want to know what the aluminum is like to cook with. Kinda like a
> spice I'm not familiar with.
>
> Lou

They warp easily and require massive attention to prevent burning food.

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:48:48 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:32:32 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>
>
>> Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them so
>> I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. What's the
>> objection to aluminum?
>
>Heh. In my younger (and more stupid) days I had some aluminum pots and
>pans. Bloody awful things. They warped, stained easily (I found them a
>b*tch to clean) - and I am almost convinced they were not good for my
>health either... Needless to say, I don't own any aluminum cookware
>anymore. Good quality SS is the way to go, IMHO.

This is more a curiosity thing. I've got lots of SS and cast. I just
want to know what the aluminum is like to cook with. Kinda like a
spice I'm not familiar with.

Lou

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:58:46 -0600, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
> This is more a curiosity thing. I've got lots of SS and cast. I just
> want to know what the aluminum is like to cook with. Kinda like a
> spice I'm not familiar with.

Fair enough, and it did only cost 2 bucks...

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Monday is a lousy way to spend one seventh of your life.

Lou Decruss wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
> <cathy1 wrote:
> > Lou Decruss wrote:
>
> >> Someone here was saying how nice the heat distribution was with them so
> >> I wanted to try cooking in one as I've never used one. �What's the
> >> objection to aluminum?
>
> >Heh. In my younger (and more stupid) days I had some aluminum pots and
> >pans. Bloody awful things. They warped, stained easily (I found them a
> >bitch to clean) - and I am almost convinced they were not good for my
> >health either... Needless to say, I don't own any aluminum cookware
> >anymore. Good quality SS is the way to go, IMHO.
>
> This is more a curiosity thing. �I've got lots of SS and cast. �I just
> want to know what the aluminum is like to cook with. �Kinda like a
> spice I'm not familiar with.
>
> Lou

Most commercial kitchens use a lot of aluminum cookware, especially
large pots and bakeware (sheet/roasting pans), but it's much heavier
gauge than the kind used in home kitchens. Heavy commercial aluminum
cookware is still reasonably light weight for larger sizes, whereas
you'd need body by Arrrnold to handle 40 qt pots. Aluminum is an
excellent material for cookware, its only drawback is that it's highly
reactive, which is really the only reason I have none. Commercial
kitchens use no cast iron cookware, there's no cooking benefit plus
it's highly reactive, requires maintenence, and is much too heavy...
commercial cooking is in of itself plenty physically demanding
enough... if you want to pump iron join Gold's Gym. Commercial
stainless steel cookware with a thick aluminum core will always beat
cast iron for even heat and heat retention.... some cooks who prefer
light weight and ease of manuverablity with ultra sensitivity for
precision egg cookery choose quality carbon steel pans. Cast iron is
strictly for those whose kitchen skills are on par with fast food
burger flippers... even with molded baked goods quality cast aluminum
(Nordicware) beats cast iron. Cast iron cookware porcelainized with
stylized hues is for those with more dollars than brain cells who
can't cook a lick but belie the fact with chic kitchen decor. Cast
iron is like cookware with training wheels.

On Mar 27, 11:08�am, "Ophelia" > wrote:
> Lou Decruss wrote:
> > After reading here about aluminum pans I asked Louise to keep an eye
> > out for one at the resale stores she frequents. �This is what she came
> > home with today. �(2 bucks) I'm not sure what it was made for. �It's
> > 1/8" thick and 12 1/4" wide. �Wear-Ever #1101. �It seems it would be
> > good for crepes, but I thought they were a smaller pan.
>
> > Here's a picture. Any thoughts?
>
> >http://i25.tinypic.com/eajr14.jpg
>
> We have shallow pans like that to make pancakes/crepes on.

"Ophelia" > wrote:
>
> We have shallow pans like that to make pancakes/crepes on.

Do you mean "on" as opposed to off?

One would think someone from the UK would have at least a modicum of
English language skills... Ofailure she be tawkin' ebonics.

Sheldon wrote:
> "Ophelia" > wrote:
>>
>> We have shallow pans like that to make pancakes/crepes on.
>
> Do you mean "on" as opposed to off?
>
> One would think someone from the UK would have at least a modicum of
> English language skills... Ofailure she be tawkin' ebonics.

LOLOL that really is very funny coming from you)))

yes btw, we do cook the crepes ON the pan. What do you cook on, the
handle??

If you really want to play this game.. watch out)

Sheldon <Sheldon >> wrote:

> Commercial
> kitchens use no cast iron cookware, there's no cooking benefit plus
> it's highly reactive, requires maintenence, and is much too heavy...

They don't use it because they have more efficient heating and
because it's too heavy for all-day use. But for the casual home
cook, cast iron is great for searing steaks and retaining heat.

You'll never realize this, though, since you're ignorant.

I didn't have cast iron until just a couple years ago and I'm glad I
discovered it. My opinion was of course undecided until then.

-sw

> They warp easily and require massive attention to prevent burning food.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Only if you don't know how to behave in a kitchen.

N.

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:13:32 -0700 (PDT), Sheldon >
wrote:

>. anyway all burning, regardless which cookware, even if food
>is cooked on a stick over a flame, is due exclusively to the inability
>of the cook and no other reason whatsoever.

You can blame it on the crystal palace.

Lou

In article >,
Julia Altshuler > wrote:

> There are more variables than just the type of metal.
> Aluminum is generally nice to cook with because it's relatively
> inexpensive and can therefore be made thicker which distributes heat
> evenly. On the other hand, thicker can mean heavier which can be a
> disadvantage for things like flipping pancakes.
> There's also how well the pan is made, whether the bottom is even,
> whether the surface is smooth. There's good quality aluminum and bad.
> You're going to have to try your pan and get back to us with how you
> liked it.

As you say, the way the pan is made is most important. Still, it's
interesting to look at the basic metal also.

Aluminum is one of the most expensive of the common metals. It runs
something under a dollar a pound (US dollar). It is a also the lightest.

Copper is a little more expensive, more like a dollar a pound.

Steel is about twenty cents a pound.


http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pu...prices1998.pdf

[and yes, it's more expensive ten years later]


> The main Alzheimer's objection to aluminum is based on a tiny news story
> that spun out of control until it became urban myth. More information he
>
> http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/valentino.asp


And to this day, many people still won't use aluminum cookware because
"they've heard bad things about it".

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel <Dan Abel >> wrote:

> Copper is a little more expensive, more like a dollar a pound.

We had a guy in Austina couple weeks ago who fried himself nearly
to death breaking into a electric substation to steal copper wire.
He didn't do it for $1/lb. More like $4/lb.

Of course the years of skin grafting and hospital bills will be in
the millions, all at taxpayers expense (since he's technically in
custody for burglary and theft).

Dan Abel wrote:
>
> As you say, the way the pan is made is most important. Still, it's
> interesting to look at the basic metal also.
>
> Aluminum is one of the most expensive of the common metals. It runs
> something under a dollar a pound (US dollar). It is a also the lightest.
>
> Copper is a little more expensive, more like a dollar a pound.
>
> Steel is about twenty cents a pound.


Good information to have, thanks. That's the cost of the raw
ingredient. What about differences in cost for forging the metal into
cookware? Usually, the cost of the ingredients in only a small part of
the cost of the finished product. There's also: labor, transportation,
equipment to make the product, supply and demand considerations. (If
gadgient metal is less expensive in its raw state and less expensive to
produce, but no one wants it because they prefer widgient cookware, the
cost of a finished widgient pot in a gourmet store might be less because
the factory is producing widgient pots by the hundreds of thousands
where they're only producing gadgient pots by the hundreds.)


Like everyone else, I had to make decisions on what cookware to own
based on cost, what I already had, what I like, and shelf space. I
don't have a different pot for every dish. I have heavy stainless pots
and pans, one quite heavy cast iron fry pan, an iron and enamel dutch
oven, and I bake in glass.


--Lia

"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
>
> Aluminum is one of the most expensive of the common metals. It runs
> something under a dollar a pound (US dollar). It is a also the lightest.
>
> Copper is a little more expensive, more like a dollar a pound.
>
> Steel is about twenty cents a pound.
>
>
> http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pu...prices1998.pdf
>
> [and yes, it's more expensive ten years later]

Not just a little, but incredibly higher. Check out metal prices today and
you'll be shocked. Try buying steel pipe for $15 to $50 a foot depending on
size. Copper tubing will put you in shock.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
>>
>> Aluminum is one of the most expensive of the common metals. It runs
>> something under a dollar a pound (US dollar). It is a also the
>> lightest. Copper is a little more expensive, more like a dollar a pound.
>>
>> Steel is about twenty cents a pound.
>>
>>
>> http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pu...prices1998.pdf
>>
>> [and yes, it's more expensive ten years later]
>
> Not just a little, but incredibly higher. Check out metal prices
> today and you'll be shocked. Try buying steel pipe for $15 to $50 a
> foot depending on size. Copper tubing will put you in shock.

We have theft of copper wire and tubing around here. Construction sites are
locked down, locked up and have security 24/7.
Janet