boilsover

Sounds about like a skydiving anvil to me, FG. But the colors must be purty. Theoretically, coating a blade with PTFE might make it transit the melon easier, as does a PTFE-coated bullet. Beyond that and color, I don't get it. Would it be folly to ask MIL?

Hi, junkbot: Go ahead and get the aluminum if you want. I have a porthole cutout in 5/8" that works well on low heat. Just be aware that aluminum's melting point is only 1220F. I'm not entirely sure how hot a calrod coil gets on High, but it maxes out my IR gun (>1022F). Copper's melting point is substantially higher, namely 1984F. The thick aluminum slab works great as defroster, too.

Thermoworks sells one that is not too expensive.

Hello, Jeff: With the exception of the steamer, I have all of these pans, but not necessarily by Mauviel. I find them all useful, if somewhat specialized tools. In my opinion, a Pommes Anna pan can be used as a gratin (actually two), but it isn't an ideal shape. It can also be used as a very small saute (actually two), but the "ear" handles are a PITA. And it can be used as a mini-rondeau in the oven in a pinch. Finally, I think you could use it as a Tatin pan, although the vertical walls might complicate unmolding. In other words, if I were going camping or on vacation and had to take 1 copper pan, this (these) might be the one(s) I'd take. I have an old Lamalle Pommes Anna that is a full 3mm in the base and 2mm in the top; I do not know the thickness of Mauvie's recent production. Regarding the braisers, as Tim has said, the boxy shape saves oven room, but I'm not sure they function any better than an oval daubiere, except that the lid overhangs a little more. With a little imagination, even this shape can be put to more versatile use. The joke about these among collectors is that these boxes usually bring more used on eBay than they cost new in France. W-S's prices were/are outrageously high, and my guess is that these things are the ultimate eyecandy wallhangers in most kitchens. The new manufacture braisers tend to be thin. The steamer is an interesting vessel, and looks well-suited to steaming many things, especially asparagus. The only dual uses I can think of is a wine bucket or vase. IMO, the confiture pan is useful only for confectionary and preserve use (or as a basin). But they are typically too thin for serious confectionary work. I am going to partially disagree with Sam about the paella pan. The carbon steel pans are traditional because they are inexpensive, and because the traditional way of cooking in them was on a grate over an open fire or on a solid surface cooktop. Paella in a big pan on a smaller hob(and who makes 18" hobs?) will be problematic in most pans, but I submit that a copper one will be less of a problem than a carbon steel one, all other things being equal, because overhanging portions will still be getting near their fair share of the hob's output. The thick Al-disk pan might well be just as good. I am also going to wholeheartedly agree with Sam about gratins. They are arguably the most versatile pans in anyone's batterie. They are excellent at baking and roasting, good at saute and frying (especially fish), and make fine serving pieces. Finally, I'd like to say that all these pieces, being rendered in copper, are going to hold responsiveness advantage over other materials. Many things cooked in all these pieces can benefit from faster cooling. Whether that responsiveness is worth it to you, only you or those you cook for can answer. Mauviel is somewhat cagey about thicknesses on their tinned pieces. If I remember right, they only give a ridiculously-wide range, like 1.8-3.5mm. To some extent this is due to the planishing, but if I were you, I'd weigh and measure. Let's just say that many vintage pieces are heavier, some much heavier. Hope this helps!

Andie: These larger flame-tamers from Bella might also solve the problem of uneven heating that plagues most stovetop griddles. Have you used them under griddles as well? Thanks!

Having recently moved in to a 1907 Craftsman with an unheated kitchen and pantry (that's what the Monarch wood/coal cookstove was for!), I can tell you that I have resorted to the oven-ajar method. As someone else here has pointed out, your 240V oven is going to put out more heat without killing itself or your wiring than will one of these dinky 1500W (essentially a hair-drier) under-desk boxes. That being said, I typically only use this method to take the chill out until my cooking itself warms the room. And it is a temporary measure until I find the right wood/vcoal unit to go back in. So far no ugly surprises on the electricity bill or in the range itself. As to cost, when I researched the alleged energy savings of converting to induction ($27 per year for the average American family at average rates), I discovered the statistic that the average American family's electric range consumes only $240 in juice per year, and that this small percentage of the annual consumption is why there is no Energy Star rating for ranges and cooktops. I conclude from these things that (a) you're not going to go broke heating your kitchen with your oven; and (b) it's going to take decades to save enough money to have induction pay for itself.

Hi, Edward J: "Only a diamond can cut another diamond, and only something as hard as the knive's [sic] steel can damage the edge of the knife." False and false. Diamonds are cut with a rap on a steel wedge, and cutting enough tomatoes can damage the edge of a knife. You can cut diamonds with water, and you can erode hardened toolsteel with plastic beads. The manila rope used in bladesmith certifications is always softer than any of the tested blades, but it dulls blades fast. Heck, even cardboard is hell on knives--that's why it makes a good strop. In my opinion, DWers are just physical and chemical sandblasters, albeit weak ones. Some things, like SS-clad cookware, hold up pretty well, but they are wearing infinitessimally, too. Glass fares OK--for awhile. Wood, even impregnated and laminates, is usually the first to go bad under the onslaught. To me, washing anything valuable in a DW is like washing a nice car using a pressure washer. Folks would also do well to remember that "stainless" steels are rarely completely so--this comes as an expensive shock to those who have lost a $$$ Falk saucier to mere table salt (Falk will not replace it, and rightfully so).

I believe the nickel-plated pan will exhibit the same cooking properties as barenaked cast iron, with the exception of the effect of seasoning. I.e., the "stickiness" of the seasoned bare iron will be different from the nickel surface. Nickel is probably less sticky than tin, but a well-seasoned bare pan approaches a worn-out PTFE pan, and therefore I'd expect the nickeled pan to be slightly stickier. I would therefore expect that the advent of nickel-plating cast iron pans had more of a convenience than an aesthetic motive. It would remove the bane of rust, make cleaning easier, and obviate the need to protect and renew the seasoning layer. Is the plating on your Griswold in good condition? If so, can you post a photo? All these pans that I have seen have badly-degraded plating. You may have a rarity on your hands. If it is not in good condition, there is a company that will replate your Griswold. I think if you search on the "other" foodie website, you can find a link.

Hi, ScoopKW: Are there any photos forthcoming of your copper trove?

Hi, Pep: From the size/weights you gave, you have bought best-grade pans, perhaps more than 2.5mm. If you don't have a micrometer or decent caliper, do the coin test. I have a 24cm pan I have good reason to believe is also a Bougeat, but bears no mark; it mikes out at 3.1mm. If you do the coin test on the flared rim, subtract about 25% Cheers

Hi, andie: I think you did a pretty good job on your retinning. Peter at Rocky Mountain is really good, really fast, and reasonable. Unlike many retinners, he does both hand tinning and electroplating. When I visited his shop, I noticed a bunch of shipping boxes--from other tinners! He may also still have some of the new 4-pc planished saucepan sets, one of which I purchased from him. These are advertised as being 3mm, but my set mikes out at 2.8. I think the set is only $260, $340 with matching rimmed lids. An exceptional bargain.

Hi, David: PTFE-coated copper that lives for TEN years? If it wasn't you saying so, I'd doubt it. But if you say so, it must be true. Can I still buy one somewhere? Concerning responsiveness, perhaps you've seen this video, but Falk has a lab setup where they take about 6" ribbons of metals to compare with copper. They put a Bunsen burner at one end, and a thermocouple at the other, and compare the times to reach "even" heat. I defy anyone who watches the steel vid to stay awake through to the end. I think you are spot-on about 2mm copper being very, very good, at least in comparison to anything other than thicker copper or silver. Frankly, in debates over 2mm vs. 2.5mm, the marginal returns are relatively small when the dreck that is 90% of cladware is running in the race. 'Win' and 'place' are pretty much foregone conclusions; 'show' is what's left for clad to struggle to claim. >4mm aluminum is the dark horse, and when that's considered, clad is reduced to Miss Congeniality-- awarded strictly on the basis of convenience. Cheers, I enjoy your posts, and always learn something from you. Thanks.

Hi, Sam: "The point I'm making is that it's more complicated to figure out what you're getting than walking around with a pocket full of coins." Yes, you are making that point. But no, it's not all that complicated. Flared rim = may be 25% thinner than the edge appears. Straightwall = what you see is what you get. Either way, two pennies or two dimes = you're not wasting your money--and any remaining disputations occur somewhere between the 98th and 99th percentiles of cookware. But hey, I don't consider 4 coins a pocketful, either, so we may disagree. You take care.

Hi, andie... You and Sam are both right, in a sense. Your 2.5mm Bourgeat appears approximately 3.1mm thick at the rim because when the very edge was sheared off, the shear fell vertically but at a point in the flare's radius before it reached horzontal. This whole process can be seen in the short video available at Falk's website. And you two both being right, now we're back to the point where a coin test makes sense (again). If your flared-rim Falk or Bourgeat appears two pennies "thick" (3.1mm) at the rim, you know the sheetstock from which it was formed is 2.5 mm. Applying the same ratio (1.24), a 2mm pan would appear 2.5mm thick, which is just a little thinner than two dimes (2.7mm). And just so we don't have to do this again, a 1.5mm wall will appear 1.86mm thick, ceteris paribus, which is about as thick as a Quarter (1.76mm). I confirmed with the Falk distributor, Michael, that all the bimetal sheetstock is in one of three thicknesses: 1.5mm, 2.0mm, and 2.5mm. Hope this helps.

"Most rims nowadays are, however, flared and/or finish-ground on a bias. To the best of my knowledge, only Mauviel (and only certain lines of Mauviel) have rims that are straight and squared off. As you acknowledge, it's nontrivial to compare the thickness of a coin (or anything else, for that matter) to the thickness of a flared/bias-finished rim." Hi, Sam: Careful with the ampersand and overstatement. IMO, most copperware's rims aren't flared AND ground on a bias, i.e., parallel to the bottom. Falk's aren't, and I don't believe Matfer-Bourgeat's are, either. As for makers of straight-wall pans, you can add to Mauviel (the vast majority of whose copperware is straight and squared) the houses of Ruffoni, Baumalu, Paderno World Cuisine, Mazzetti, Spring (some models, including saucepans), deBuyer (Prima Matera line) and a host of other smaller makers worldwide. I have no sales statistics to back this up, but my opinion is that there are probably fewer flared+bias-finished copper pans sold worldwide than straightwall/squared. Finally, someone (preferably nearsighted) with a Falk, a micrometer and a machinist's rule should measure their pan's wall and its edge, so that we may know whether and how much "thicker" the edge appears. Then 'coin triviality' may be restored.

Hi, paulraphael: "The 2.5mm standard is closer to copper's ideal thickness than the 2.0mm standard." Yes, you're right, at least as formulae go. The actual "ideal" thickness for copper is 2.87mm. And that theoretical value is the basis for Falk-Culinaire's semi-snobby pronouncement that if thicker gauge made a difference, they'd use it. Nevermind that the F-C thicker bimetal is 2.3mm of copper and 0.2mm of stainless, or that (as Sam I think correctly surmises) the total 2.5mm thickness is about as thick as they can fuse together--or stamp (The thicker vintage pieces, at least after about 1880, were turned on lathes and chucks). However, IMHO, there are applications where copperware 3mm and > is better, the theory notwithstanding. The exceptions have less to do with copper's conductivity, and more to do with its specific heat. That is, when pan thickness is equal, copper stores about the same heat as cast iron. So in applications where you would want good responsiveness (up and down), good evenness, AND good heat retention, mondo-thick copper can be just the ticket. Many cooks don't appreciate this because it's not production made anymore, and therefore there are few opportunities to actually cook in/on it. FWIW

Hi, Sam: Umm, if you have two pennies to rub together, that makes 3.1mm, about the thickness of the older Dehillerin and Gaillard sautes. And if you're a tightwad like me in not tipping the barrista, you also have two dimes (2.7mm) with which to compare. Pan about a nickel-thick? 2mm. Closer to 2 dimes? 2.5mm And unless the pan's rim is flared and finish-ground on a bias, i.e., if it is squared off, it's very easy to compare the pan with a coin. You take care.

Hi, Tim: I think you need a new micrometer. A US Nickel is 5 hundredths of a mm under 2mm, or 1.95mm. If you could find a Half Dollar, that would be better (2.15mm). My point remains: for a quick test, if the wall gauge is thicker than a nickel, it's OK to get excited. Two pennies thick? Call your banker.

I know I've jumped in here twice today already, but I wanted the OP to consider another SS-lined copper option: deBuyer Prima Matera. This line *is* induction capable (by virtue of the ferritic disk bonded to the bottom), and the rest of the construction is pretty much like the Falk and Bourgeat bimetal pans. The disk will slow the pan's responsiveness a bit on conventional hobs, YBTJ if too much. Expensive, but truly all-hob.

Hi, Skoop: You are right insofar as most resellers (CK, eBay, antique/thrift shops, etc.) call ANY copperware "extra thick" and "very heavy". But reputable retailers would not be party to passing off table-service pans as extra thick or heavy. For instance, if you order from organiccookware.com, frenchcopperstudio, or E. Dehillerin, you can be assured they know the difference betweek schlock and "extra fort". You just have to get used to asking the specific weights of pans, and have the experience to make snap judgments. For example, a 10" saute that weighs 12 pounds is "extra thick", and that's not an opinion. Boilsover

Hi, Sam: With respect, there *is* a pretty easy way to assess thickness without a caliper of micrometer: The change you carry around in your pocket. A dime? Run away. A Penny? Maybe for table service. A nickel? Get excited. I've been collecting 1st-grade copperware on eBay for a long time now. Most sellers are happy to make the "coin" comparison for bidders, and most will also supply weights. Once you get the feel for it, it's hard to miss the dreadnaughts. Cheers PS Falk and M-B bimetal are interchangeable in my book, except for the itty-bitty loop handles on the Falk. Maybe Belgians' hands are smaller? The OLD Bourgeat was tip-top, on a par with the defunct greats, e.g., Gaillard.

Hi, Barb: The Prima Matera line seems an excellent choice for everything you want, except perhaps the DW. If you get any, please write a review? Thanks!

Hi: I was at Bargreen Ellingson over the weekend and saw for the first time the Eneron "Turbo" aluminum stockpots. They have what can only be described as an electronics-style heatsink fin array on the bottoms. PG&E has reportedly tested these, and they are allegedly 29% more energy efficient (on gas). Not particularly expensive, either. Don't know if there's an 8Q--that's kinda small.

"Propane burns...hotter than natural gas." Really? Then why do all gas ranges, HWHs and heat stoves that can be re-jetted for LP say LP is 10% LESS hot than NG?

Not exactly what you ask for in the body of your post, but the most useful grilling tool I own is a "pigtail" turner. I'm embarrassed to say that while I've been grilling for 30+ years, only this year did I ever condescend to try one. I bit at my state fair, where a blacksmith was pounding out ornate ones for $15. Best $15 I ever spent (except buying a drink for the beauty who became my wife).