Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.

I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
~24".

Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
the think about the heat distribution.

Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
butter.

I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
or oil, begin saute or whatever.

Anyone have a process they'd care to share? - Mike

On Sun 25 Dec 2005 09:04:07a, Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it Michael
Horowitz?

> Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
>
> I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> ~24".
>
> Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> the think about the heat distribution.
>
> Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> butter.
>
> I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> or oil, begin saute or whatever.
>
> Anyone have a process they'd care to share? - Mike

Preheat the skillet in the oven, the transfer to a medium or medium-low
burner to maintain the heat.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
__________________________________________________ ________________
And if we enter a room full of manure, may we believe in the pony.

Duh'Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it Michael Horowitz?
>
> > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> >
> > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> > ~24".
> >
> > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> > the think about the heat distribution.
> >
> > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> > butter.
> >
> > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
> >
> > Anyone have a process they'd care to share? - Mike
>
> Preheat the skillet in the oven, the transfer to a medium or medium-low
> burner to maintain the heat.

Why can't the pan be heated over a med-low heat top burner to begin
with, *before* dropping in the butter??? Even you gotta admit using an
oven to heat a pan is more than a bit Rube Goldbergish. Heat up an
entire oven just to heat a pan... this just proves you never cook
anything... what an idiot! In all my years I've never seen anyone heat
a pan in the oven and then proceed to cook with it on the stove top...
duh!

And just to illustrate to everyone on the planet just what a low IQ
******* Duh'Wayne truly is... no residential oven will accept a 24"
diameter pan and still allow the door to close... typically 18" front
to rear is the limit, a very few ovens will accept 19", but even that's
stretching it, more like 18 1/2" is the outer limit... how yoose gonner
heat that other 6" of pan, shove it up your dumb butt?

See how simple it is to catch the big mouth bassturds who never passed
their GED, just let em yammer and they catch themselves.

On 25 Dec 2005 09:27:32 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:


>And just to illustrate to everyone on the planet just what a low IQ
>******* Duh'Wayne truly is... no residential oven will accept a 24"
>diameter pan and still allow the door to close... typically 18" front
>to rear is the limit, a very few ovens will accept 19", but even that's
>stretching it, more like 18 1/2" is the outer limit... how yoose gonner
>heat that other 6" of pan, shove it up your dumb butt?
>
>See how simple it is to catch the big mouth bassturds who never passed
>their GED, just let em yammer and they catch themselves.


Merry Christmas to you too, grinch.


jim

In article >,
Wayne Boatwright > wrote:



> Preheat the skillet in the oven, the transfer to a medium or medium-low
> burner to maintain the heat.

I would just heat on top of the stove. That should work fine.

--
Dan Abel

Petaluma, California, USA

Michael Horowitz wrote:
> Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
>
> I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> ~24".
>
> Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> the think about the heat distribution.
>
> Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> butter.
>
> I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> or oil, begin saute or whatever.

Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
temperature.

But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.

In article .com>,
"Sheldon" > wrote:

> Michael Horowitz wrote:
> > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> >
> > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> > ~24".
> >
> > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> > the think about the heat distribution.
> >
> > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> > butter.
> >
> > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
>
> Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
> temperature.
>
> But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
>

I was kinda wondering about that...

My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
just use it in the oven for roasting.

I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
batches of stuff on the stove top.

It's plenty big enough...

My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.

Why would you really need anything larger?

Cheers!
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> In article .com>,
> "Sheldon" > wrote:
>
> > Michael Horowitz wrote:
> > > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> > >
> > > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> > > ~24".
> > >
> > > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> > > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> > > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> > > the think about the heat distribution.
> > >
> > > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> > > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> > > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> > > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> > > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> > > butter.
> > >
> > > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> > > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> > > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
> >
> > Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
> > temperature.
> >
> > But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> > burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> > back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> > inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> > mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> > kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> > diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> > center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> > stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> > of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> > space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> > Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
> >
>
> I was kinda wondering about that...
>
> My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
> stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
> just use it in the oven for roasting.
>
> I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
> batches of stuff on the stove top.
>
> It's plenty big enough...
>
> My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.
>
> Why would you really need anything larger?

Even those rectangular two burner griddles are only 9" X 18".

It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
8" a gal could choke to death! LOL

On 25 Dec 2005 09:40:59 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:

>
>OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
>> In article .com>,
>> "Sheldon" > wrote:
>>
>> > Michael Horowitz wrote:
>> > > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
>> > >
>> > > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
>> > > ~24".
>> > >
>> > > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
>> > > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
>> > > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
>> > > the think about the heat distribution.
>> > >
>> > > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
>> > > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
>> > > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
>> > > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
>> > > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
>> > > butter.
>> > >
>> > > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
>> > > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
>> > > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
>> >
>> > Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
>> > temperature.
>> >
>> > But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
>> > burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
>> > back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
>> > inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
>> > mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
>> > kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
>> > diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
>> > center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
>> > stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
>> > of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
>> > space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
>> > Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
>> >
>>
>> I was kinda wondering about that...
>>
>> My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
>> stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
>> just use it in the oven for roasting.
>>
>> I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
>> batches of stuff on the stove top.
>>
>> It's plenty big enough...
>>
>> My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.
>>
>> Why would you really need anything larger?
>
>Even those rectangular two burner griddles are only 9" X 18".
>
>It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
>stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
>understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
>8" a gal could choke to death! LOL

My bad. I went back and measured. 15".
It just looked like 24"
Horse can relax.

- Mike

Michael Horowitz wrote:
> On 25 Dec 2005 09:40:59 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:
>
> >
> >OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> >> In article .com>,
> >> "Sheldon" > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Michael Horowitz wrote:
> >> > > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> >> > > ~24".
> >> > >
> >> > > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> >> > > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> >> > > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> >> > > the think about the heat distribution.
> >> > >
> >> > > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> >> > > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> >> > > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> >> > > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> >> > > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> >> > > butter.
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> >> > > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> >> > > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
> >> >
> >> > Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
> >> > temperature.
> >> >
> >> > But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> >> > burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> >> > back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> >> > inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> >> > mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> >> > kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> >> > diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> >> > center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> >> > stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> >> > of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> >> > space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> >> > Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I was kinda wondering about that...
> >>
> >> My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
> >> stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
> >> just use it in the oven for roasting.
> >>
> >> I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
> >> batches of stuff on the stove top.
> >>
> >> It's plenty big enough...
> >>
> >> My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.
> >>
> >> Why would you really need anything larger?
> >
> >Even those rectangular two burner griddles are only 9" X 18".
> >
> >It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
> >stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> >understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> >8" a gal could choke to death! LOL
>
> My bad. I went back and measured. 15".
> It just looked like 24"

I knew all along you were exaggerating. Next time use that pan to
straddle two burners, use med-low heat, and get it up to temperature
*before* adding butter.

In article >,
Michael Horowitz > wrote:

> On 25 Dec 2005 09:40:59 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:
>
> >
> >OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> >> In article .com>,
> >> "Sheldon" > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Michael Horowitz wrote:
> >> > > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> >> > > ~24".
> >> > >
> >> > > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> >> > > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> >> > > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> >> > > the think about the heat distribution.
> >> > >
> >> > > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> >> > > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> >> > > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> >> > > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> >> > > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> >> > > butter.
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> >> > > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> >> > > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
> >> >
> >> > Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
> >> > temperature.
> >> >
> >> > But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> >> > burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> >> > back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> >> > inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> >> > mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> >> > kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> >> > diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> >> > center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> >> > stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> >> > of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> >> > space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> >> > Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I was kinda wondering about that...
> >>
> >> My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
> >> stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
> >> just use it in the oven for roasting.
> >>
> >> I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
> >> batches of stuff on the stove top.
> >>
> >> It's plenty big enough...
> >>
> >> My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.
> >>
> >> Why would you really need anything larger?
> >
> >Even those rectangular two burner griddles are only 9" X 18".
> >
> >It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
> >stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> >understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> >8" a gal could choke to death! LOL
>
> My bad. I went back and measured. 15".
> It just looked like 24"
> Horse can relax.
>
> - Mike
>

Heh. ;-)
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

In article .com>,
"Sheldon" > wrote:

> OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> > In article .com>,
> > "Sheldon" > wrote:
> >
> > > Michael Horowitz wrote:
> > > > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> > > >
> > > > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> > > > ~24".
> > > >
> > > > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> > > > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> > > > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> > > > the think about the heat distribution.
> > > >
> > > > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> > > > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> > > > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> > > > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> > > > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> > > > butter.
> > > >
> > > > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> > > > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> > > > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
> > >
> > > Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
> > > temperature.
> > >
> > > But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> > > burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> > > back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> > > inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> > > mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> > > kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> > > diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> > > center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> > > stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> > > of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> > > space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> > > Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
> > >
> >
> > I was kinda wondering about that...
> >
> > My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
> > stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
> > just use it in the oven for roasting.
> >
> > I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
> > batches of stuff on the stove top.
> >
> > It's plenty big enough...
> >
> > My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.
> >
> > Why would you really need anything larger?
>
> Even those rectangular two burner griddles are only 9" X 18".
>
> It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches!

ROFL!!!
And guys wonder why women have trouble estimating sizes. ;-)

> Even a
> stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> 8" a gal could choke to death! LOL

Or just say "ouch!!!". ;-)

Cheers!


>
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> In article .com>,
> "Sheldon" > wrote:
>
> > OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> > > In article .com>,
> > > "Sheldon" > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Michael Horowitz wrote:
> > > > > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> > > > > ~24".
> > > > >
> > > > > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> > > > > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> > > > > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> > > > > the think about the heat distribution.
> > > > >
> > > > > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> > > > > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> > > > > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> > > > > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> > > > > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> > > > > butter.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> > > > > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> > > > > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
> > > >
> > > > Yup, that's it... use med-low heat until entire pan reaches the correct
> > > > temperature.
> > > >
> > > > But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> > > > burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> > > > back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> > > > inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> > > > mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> > > > kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> > > > diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> > > > center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> > > > stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> > > > of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> > > > space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> > > > Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I was kinda wondering about that...
> > >
> > > My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
> > > stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
> > > just use it in the oven for roasting.
> > >
> > > I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
> > > batches of stuff on the stove top.
> > >
> > > It's plenty big enough...
> > >
> > > My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.
> > >
> > > Why would you really need anything larger?
> >
> > Even those rectangular two burner griddles are only 9" X 18".
> >
> > It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches!
>
> ROFL!!!
> And guys wonder why women have trouble estimating sizes. ;-)
>
> > Even a
> > stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> > understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> > 8" a gal could choke to death! LOL
>
> Or just say "ouch!!!". ;-)

You think? You'll be lucky to emit a weak gurgle. LOL

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:

> In article .com>,
> "Sheldon" > wrote:

> > It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches!
>
> ROFL!!!
> And guys wonder why women have trouble estimating sizes. ;-)


Depends - is the guy wearin' pantz...???


> > Even a
> > stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> > understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> > 8" a gal could choke to death! LOL
>
> Or just say "ouch!!!". ;-)


Oh now I dunno...big penises are kinda fun, think along the lines of a
B - I - G triple super - duper banana split on a stick...LOTS to lick
and savor!

)

--
Best
Greg

Sheldon wrote:

> It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
> stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> 8" a gal could choke to death! LOL


Hey, yer forgettin' about Catherine the Great...and haven't you heard
of those wild creatures called "nymphomaniacs"...I hear tell "Om" here
is one of those ;-D

--
Best
Greg

In article om>,
"Gregory Morrow" > wrote:

> Sheldon wrote:
>
> > It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
> > stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> > understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> > 8" a gal could choke to death! LOL
>
>
> Hey, yer forgettin' about Catherine the Great...and haven't you heard
> of those wild creatures called "nymphomaniacs"...I hear tell "Om" here
> is one of those ;-D

Down boy! Down!!! ;-D
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

Sheldon wrote:
>
> It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
> stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> 8" a gal could choke to death! LOL

I have seen one in person, and I think the person who bought it said it
was to use on her barbecue grill.

Melinda Meahan wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
> >
> > It's a guy thing... some like to exaggerate... but 24 inches! Even a
> > stallion would have trouble getting a date, that's why I always
> > understate.. gals really don't want to hear about more than 6"... with
> > 8" a gal could choke to death! LOL
>
> I have seen one in person, and I think the person who bought it said it
> was to use on her barbecue grill.

Never said it doesn't exist, just that it wouldn't fit on a stovetop.

Go he
http://www.readingsuccesslab.com/Rea...alReading.html

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
>
> Why would you really need anything larger?

You should know that, given your handle.
Ostrich omelet, sunny side up.

In article >,
Mark Thorson > wrote:

> OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
> >
> > Why would you really need anything larger?
>
> You should know that, given your handle.
> Ostrich omelet, sunny side up.

Quiche. ;-)

Oven.

'nuff said!
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

In article >,
OmManiPadmeOmelet > wrote:



> I was kinda wondering about that...
>
> My largest Cast Iron pan is a #14 Griswold and I never use it on the
> stove top. It's large enough to hold a turkey or a large roast, so I
> just use it in the oven for roasting.
>
> I normally use the #8 for regular cooking and the #10 (10") for larger
> batches of stuff on the stove top.
>
> It's plenty big enough...
>
> My griddle for pancakes and such is a #8.
>
> Why would you really need anything larger?


Some things are better cooked in a single layer, some people have more
than two in their household. We like piccata. You smash the meat up
really thin. That takes up a lot of real estate in the frypan for not
much food.

--
Dan Abel

Petaluma, California, USA

In article .com>,
"Sheldon" > wrote:


> But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.

I don't know about cast iron, but otherwise it isn't a problem. There
is a safety issue, because, as you say, there is major overhang.

I took the tape measure to my stove. Of course, I have a standard
consumer stove, just like you do. Maybe this guy has something
different. My brother has one of those "gourmet" cooktops. It has five
burners, with the one in the middle the biggest. Perhaps it would fit a
24 inch pan with little or no overhang.

--
Dan Abel

Petaluma, California, USA

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article .com>,
> "Sheldon" > wrote:
>
>
>
>>But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
>>burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
>>back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
>>inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
>>mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
>>kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
>>diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
>>center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
>>stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
>>of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
>>space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
>>Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
>
>
> I don't know about cast iron, but otherwise it isn't a problem. There
> is a safety issue, because, as you say, there is major overhang.
>
> I took the tape measure to my stove. Of course, I have a standard
> consumer stove, just like you do. Maybe this guy has something
> different. My brother has one of those "gourmet" cooktops. It has five
> burners, with the one in the middle the biggest. Perhaps it would fit a
> 24 inch pan with little or no overhang.
>
My Jenn Air has a *large size* burner specifically for oversized pots
and for canning. We have already ordered one and it should be waiting
for us when we get back from holidays. The nice thing about Jenn Air is
you can mix and match and customize, totally cool for us. We have 4
burners, one of those can be replaced by the oversized burner, and a
grill as well as downdraft. The oversize burner will more than
accomadate my pressure canner IMO gourmet cooktops are about the
only way to go right now. I can have 4 reg burners, 3 reg burners with
one oversize, 2 reg burners with 2 smooth top, 4 smooth top, a grill
with either smooth top or reg burners, or some combination there of.
Then the halogen cartrigdges come into play. Heck, IMO it is one really
good deal.

"~patches~" > wrote in message
...
> Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article .com>,
>> "Sheldon" > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
>>>burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
>>>back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
>>>inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
>>>mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
>>>kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
>>>diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
>>>center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
>>>stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
>>>of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
>>>space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
>>>Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
>>
>>
>> I don't know about cast iron, but otherwise it isn't a problem. There is
>> a safety issue, because, as you say, there is major overhang.
>>
>> I took the tape measure to my stove. Of course, I have a standard
>> consumer stove, just like you do. Maybe this guy has something
>> different. My brother has one of those "gourmet" cooktops. It has five
>> burners, with the one in the middle the biggest. Perhaps it would fit a
>> 24 inch pan with little or no overhang.
>>
> My Jenn Air has a *large size* burner specifically for oversized pots and
> for canning. We have already ordered one and it should be waiting for us
> when we get back from holidays. The nice thing about Jenn Air is you can
> mix and match and customize, totally cool for us. We have 4 burners, one
> of those can be replaced by the oversized burner, and a grill as well as
> downdraft. The oversize burner will more than accomadate my pressure
> canner IMO gourmet cooktops are about the only way to go right now. I
> can have 4 reg burners, 3 reg burners with one oversize, 2 reg burners
> with 2 smooth top, 4 smooth top, a grill with either smooth top or reg
> burners, or some combination there of. Then the halogen cartrigdges come
> into play. Heck, IMO it is one really good deal.

I have an older (1988) Jenn Air with a down draft. It is absolutely
worthless for any pot that might be high enough to call a canner or pressure
cooker canner because the downdraft will not pull the steam -- it has not
enough power to do it for taller pots; and the steam goes everywhere.
I hope you haven't the problem that I have and I've heard some other speak
of in this regard.
But -- congratulations on purchasing a new stove. I'm expecting to do the
same next spring. A big decision.
Dee Dee

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article .com>,
> "Sheldon" > wrote:
>
>
> > But now explain how you fit a 24" pan on your stove top over one
> > burner... that size pan would would necessitate covering both front and
> > back burners and due to the backsplash would still leave a full four
> > inches of pan hanging out past the front edge of the stove... not to
> > mention that about 8" of pan would be hanging out sideways over your
> > kitchen counter. The industry standard for kitchen ranges is 9"
> > diameter grates (regardless of burner diameter) placed 9" center to
> > center... any pan over 18" would overhang the two grates. The entire
> > stove depth including backsplash is 24", the typical stove only has 20"
> > of useable space front to rear before something has to hang out into
> > space - most stoves have even less space due to thicker backsplashes.
> > Sorry, but I just don't believe your story.
>
> I don't know about cast iron, but otherwise it isn't a problem. There
> is a safety issue, because, as you say, there is major overhang.
>
> I took the tape measure to my stove. Of course, I have a standard
> consumer stove, just like you do. Maybe this guy has something
> different. My brother has one of those "gourmet" cooktops. It has five
> burners, with the one in the middle the biggest. Perhaps it would fit a
> 24 inch pan with little or no overhang.

Nope.

There are stoves that are wider than the typical 30 incher; 36", 48",
60"... some even have extra large burners, fifth burners even, but all
are the same depth front to back, none will accomodate more than an 18"
diameter pot without frontal overhang. To accomodate larger diameter
cookware one would need to go to a true commercial stove, even the
commercial-style stoves are configured size-wise exactly the same as
ordinary stoves, in fact commercial-style stoves are ordinary stoves,
only they are gussied up with doodads to appear commercial and cost
like three times as much, but they are for those with more dollars than
brain cells because in reality they are simply ordinary sheep stoves in
wolf clothing.

Michael Horowitz wrote:

> Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
>
> I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> ~24".
>
> Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> the think about the heat distribution.
>
> Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> butter.
>
> I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> or oil, begin saute or whatever.
>
> Anyone have a process they'd care to share? - Mike
>

The problem is inherent with cast iron - it is a relatively poor
conductor of heat. Other than oven heating, I cannot think of a solution.

Peter Aitken

P.Aitken wrote:
> Michael Horowitz wrote:
>
> > Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
> >
> > I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> > ~24".
> >
> > Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> > hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> > some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> > the think about the heat distribution.
> >
> > Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> > the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> > the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> > parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> > skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> > butter.
> >
> > I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> > heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> > or oil, begin saute or whatever.
> >
> > Anyone have a process they'd care to share? - Mike
> >
>
> The problem is inherent with cast iron - it is a relatively poor
> conductor of heat. Other than oven heating, _I cannot think_ of a solution.

You and Duh'Wayne have the same daddy... idjit genes.

In article >,
"P.Aitken" > wrote:


> The problem is inherent with cast iron - it is a relatively poor
> conductor of heat. Other than oven heating, I cannot think of a solution.

It depends what you are cooking and how you cook it.

--
Dan Abel

Petaluma, California, USA

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> "P.Aitken" > wrote:
>
>
> > The problem is inherent with cast iron - it is a relatively poor
> > conductor of heat. Other than oven heating, I cannot think of a solution.
>
> It depends what you are cooking and how you cook it.

Nope, cast iron does not morph into some other rmaterial regardless how
it's used.
Cast iron is actually a relatively good heat conductor, not as good as
say silver, copper or even aluminum but at least as good as stainless
steel, and holds heat about equally well... in fact stainless steel of
the same thickness holds heat better than cast iron, in other words
stainless and cast are for all intents and purposes of cooking are
equally responsive... only thing stainless is typically thinner and and
so therefore more responsive and so is the better choice, and that just
on the grounds of conductivity and responsiveness. But where stainless
really shines is in reactivity. Stainless is by far the best all
around cookware, needs no care of any kind whatsoever... and for those
who actually know how to cook nothing sticks to stainless. I can cook
an omelet in a stainless pan with no added fat and no sticking
whatsoever... won't taste nearly as good as an omelet cooked with
butter but for me sticking is not an issue. And yes, stainless can be
seasoned, in fact stainless steel cookware *must* be seasoned.

In article . com>,
"Sheldon" > wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "P.Aitken" > wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The problem is inherent with cast iron - it is a relatively poor
> > > conductor of heat. Other than oven heating, I cannot think of a solution.
> >
> > It depends what you are cooking and how you cook it.
>
> Nope, cast iron does not morph into some other rmaterial regardless how
> it's used.


If you are cooking potatoes and deep-frying them, then the oil will
conduct the heat and it isn't a problem. If you are making something
that is like a stew with lots of liquids then the liquid will conduct
the heat.

Others foods may be a problem, I don't know.

--
Dan Abel

Petaluma, California, USA

Dan Abel > wrote:

> "Sheldon" > wrote:

>> > It depends what you are cooking and how you cook it.

>> Nope, cast iron does not morph into some other rmaterial regardless how
>> it's used.

>If you are cooking potatoes and deep-frying them, then the oil will
>conduct the heat and it isn't a problem. If you are making something
>that is like a stew with lots of liquids then the liquid will conduct
>the heat.

>Others foods may be a problem, I don't know.

This may be obvious, but when cooking on the stovetop
with cast iron I reposition the pan every few seconds,
so that a different area is over the burner, that way
it heats evenly.

Also you can shove stuff to one side, add oil to the
empty area of the pan and put that area over the burner
to fry a newly added ingredient, much as you would do
with a wok.

Steve

On 25 Dec 2005 19:12:19 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:

>And yes, stainless can be
>seasoned, in fact stainless steel cookware *must* be seasoned.

Same technique as cast iron? Or??
(never before heard of seasoning SS, but it makes sense)

--
-denny-
"Do your thoughts call ahead or do they just arrive at your mouth unannounced?"

"It's come as you are, baby."

-over the hedge

Denny Wheeler wrote:

> On 25 Dec 2005 19:12:19 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:
>
>
>>And yes, stainless can be
>>seasoned, in fact stainless steel cookware *must* be seasoned.
>
>
> Same technique as cast iron? Or??
> (never before heard of seasoning SS, but it makes sense)
>

No it doesn't. You cannot season stainless and there is no need to
anyway. Where do people get these ideas? Oh, it was sheldoon - the
village idiot. Never mind.

Seasoning stainless steel - that's rich! Next he'll be seasoning glass
and enamel.

Peter

Sheldon wrote:
> Dan Abel wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "P.Aitken" > wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The problem is inherent with cast iron - it is a relatively poor
> > > conductor of heat. Other than oven heating, I cannot think of a solution.
> >
> > It depends what you are cooking and how you cook it.
>
> Nope, cast iron does not morph into some other rmaterial regardless how
> it's used.

Brilliant!

> Cast iron is actually a relatively good heat conductor, not as good as
> say silver, copper or even aluminum but at least as good as stainless
> steel, and holds heat about equally well...

So SS and CI are the same?

>in fact stainless steel of
> the same thickness holds heat better than cast iron,

So SS is better?

>in other words
> stainless and cast are for all intents and purposes of cooking are
> equally responsive...

So SS and CI are the same?

>only thing stainless is typically thinner and and
> so therefore more responsive and so is the better choice, and that just
> on the grounds of conductivity and responsiveness.

So SS is better?

>But where stainless
> really shines is in reactivity. Stainless is by far the best all
> around cookware, needs no care of any kind whatsoever... and for those
> who actually know how to cook nothing sticks to stainless. I can cook
> an omelet in a stainless pan with no added fat and no sticking
> whatsoever... won't taste nearly as good as an omelet cooked with
> butter but for me sticking is not an issue. And yes, stainless can be
> seasoned, in fact stainless steel cookware *must* be seasoned.

Actually, the heat transfer rate of grey (cooking grade) CI is 80w/mK,
304SS (cooking grade SS) is 16.3w/mK, so CI transfers heat 5 times as
readily as SS. The heat content is irrelevant in cooking, except as it
effects the time to heat up and cool down.
I won't bother to explain metallurgically why SS can't be seasoned.
This moron wouldn't begin to comprehend.
Never ceases to fascinate me, the people who come online and tout
themselves as experts in areas about with they know less than nothing.

salgud wrote:
>
> I won't bother to explain metallurgically why SS can't be seasoned.
> Never ceases to fascinate me, the people who come online and tout
> themselves as experts in areas about with they know less than nothing.

Ohhhh, my goodness... I'm soooo sowry... I just got here... scuuuuse
me!

Stainless steel cookware certainly can be seasoned, in fact for it to
perform properly it MUST be seasoned, and properly. Not all knowledge
begins and ends with yours. In fact those who think all knowledge
begins and ends with their own are the most ignorant. You are truly
ignorant, especially when it comes to metals. You sound exactly like
some jerk who spends all their time doing classroom theory but has
never actually picked up a slab of steel and used it for something
other than a doorstop.

salgud wrote:

<snipped>

> Actually, the heat transfer rate of grey (cooking grade) CI is 80w/mK,
> 304SS (cooking grade SS) is 16.3w/mK, so CI transfers heat 5 times as
> readily as SS. The heat content is irrelevant in cooking, except as it
> effects the time to heat up and cool down.

Not true. The high "heat content" - actually it is called specific heat
- of CI is one of its main virtues. When you heat up a CI pan and add
the food it stays hot much better than most other pan materials,
permitting a good sear rather than a steam.

> I won't bother to explain metallurgically why SS can't be seasoned.
> This moron wouldn't begin to comprehend.
> Never ceases to fascinate me, the people who come online and tout
> themselves as experts in areas about with they know less than nothing.
>

No comment.

Peter

salgud wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
> > Dan Abel wrote:
> > > In article >,
> > > "P.Aitken" > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > The problem is inherent with cast iron - it is a relatively poor
> > > > conductor of heat. Other than oven heating, I cannot think of a solution.
> > >
> > > It depends what you are cooking and how you cook it.
> >
> > Nope, cast iron does not morph into some other rmaterial regardless how
> > it's used.
>
> Brilliant!
>
> > Cast iron is actually a relatively good heat conductor, not as good as
> > say silver, copper or even aluminum but at least as good as stainless
> > steel, and holds heat about equally well...
>
> So SS and CI are the same?
>
> >in fact stainless steel of
> > the same thickness holds heat better than cast iron,
>
> So SS is better?
>
> >in other words
> > stainless and cast are for all intents and purposes of cooking are
> > equally responsive...
>
> So SS and CI are the same?
>
> >only thing stainless is typically thinner and and
> > so therefore more responsive and so is the better choice, and that just
> > on the grounds of conductivity and responsiveness.
>
> So SS is better?
>
> >But where stainless
> > really shines is in reactivity. Stainless is by far the best all
> > around cookware, needs no care of any kind whatsoever... and for those
> > who actually know how to cook nothing sticks to stainless. I can cook
> > an omelet in a stainless pan with no added fat and no sticking
> > whatsoever... won't taste nearly as good as an omelet cooked with
> > butter but for me sticking is not an issue. And yes, stainless can be
> > seasoned, in fact stainless steel cookware *must* be seasoned.
>
> Actually, the heat transfer rate of grey (cooking grade) CI is 80w/mK,
> 304SS (cooking grade SS) is 16.3w/mK, so CI transfers heat 5 times as
> readily as SS. The heat content is irrelevant in cooking, except as it
> effects the time to heat up and cool down.

One exception to that is if someone is cooking on a stove burner that
doesn't put ot enough BTUs (like electric, or a cheest gas one with a
wimpy flame. Then you could want the stored heat for searing. THese
days the high quality non stick coatings are so good that I'd never buy
stainless again, and CI, you can have my share. It's filthy.

> I won't bother to explain metallurgically why SS can't be seasoned.
> This moron wouldn't begin to comprehend.
> Never ceases to fascinate me, the people who come online and tout
> themselves as experts in areas about with they know less than nothing.

Some guy on a NG today said that the salt ina roast beef sandwich was
just as bad for your health as trans fats. People should post what
they know, not what they kind of figure they know.

--Bryan

In article >,
Michael Horowitz > wrote:

> Assume all skillets are properly seasoned.
>
> I have a collection of cast iron skillets ranging in size from ~9" to
> ~24".
>
> Thinking I was going to duplicate the flat surface resturants use for
> hamburgers, pancakes, almost everything, I took down the 24" dropped
> some butter in the center and turned the heat on med-low. Then I began
> the think about the heat distribution.
>
> Obviously the flame (gas stove) doesn't evenly cover the bottom of
> the skillet. If I turn the stove to high, the part of the skillet over
> the flame will get very hot (and hurt the seasoning) before the other
> parts of the skillet get warm. So, there must be a process to get the
> skillet uniformly hot and not burn the seasoning or clarify the
> butter.
>
> I'm thinking the process might be : cold skillet placed over med. low
> heat until the heat has spread uniformly over the skillet. Add butter
> or oil, begin saute or whatever.
>
> Anyone have a process they'd care to share? - Mike

The Frugal Gourmet always said:

hot pan - cold oil - food won't stick


Some people don't agree, but it always works for me.

I don't use cast iron, though. I have a big skillet, maybe 16 inches.

I would advise giving it a try with something cheap, like oil and small
pieces of potatoes, until you get it down or find out it won't work.

--
Dan Abel

Petaluma, California, USA

Dan Abel wrote:
> [snip preceding]
> The Frugal Gourmet always said:
>
> hot pan - cold oil - food won't stick
> [snip]
Logically, this has never made sense. But I've always believed it was
nevertheless a sensible thing to tell people because it got them to pay
attention to getting the pan hot. Putting food in the pan before it is
hot enough is the first mistake to avoid. How fast a little bit of oil
heats up in a hot pan is just a detail. It doesn't matter much whether
you heat the oil with the pan or add it to heat fast just before the
food goes in. -aem

aem wrote:
> Dan Abel wrote:
> > [snip preceding]
> > The Frugal Gourmet always said:
> >
> > hot pan - cold oil - food won't stick
> > [snip]
> Logically, this has never made sense. But I've always believed it was
> nevertheless a sensible thing to tell people because it got them to pay
> attention to getting the pan hot. Putting food in the pan before it is
> hot enough is the first mistake to avoid. How fast a little bit of oil
> heats up in a hot pan is just a detail. It doesn't matter much whether
> you heat the oil with the pan or add it to heat fast just before the
> food goes in.

The Frug gave great tips for the non cook.

Mostly people walk off and forget to tend to business, the oil
overheats, it degrades, and also makes whatever is subsequently cooked
in it taste shitty... like the OP did by putting butter into that cold
pan and then turned up teh heat full on, overheated butter is awful. I
place fat into a cold pan all the time, but I heat with low and never
walk away. In fact the best way to start bacon is with low heat in a
cold pan, the rashers practically separate themselves... pulling apart
cold bacon rashers stretches and distorts them, is what makes then
curl. Yoose last professional cooking tip for the year... don't
stretch the bacon.