Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Does Size Matter for Saucepans


Gaius46

Recommended Posts

Aside from considerations of how much stuff you're putting in it?

 

My daughter asked me this question this morning and it got me to thinking that maybe larger or smaller pans are more suited to different techniques or ingredients simply because of the area of the pan that's in direct contact with the heat source.   Or am I out in left field thinking that?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can think of a couple of things off the top of my head:

 

When boiling sugar, I like to have an extra tall pot. That allows for the rise in size due to the boiling, and also helps keep the kitchen clean by trapping all the crystals that get tossed out of the sugar/water mass on the sides.

 

When making rice, I adjust the amount of water used based on how deep the rice will be. (yes, I also adjust by type of rice and freshness) In other words, I use less water if I am making a lot of rice in a tall pan because the steam rises through the rice, helping to cook it. Whereas in a large flat pan the steam is released at a lower level.

 

I prefer to use a tall cast iron pan to deep fry in, or my wok. The high sides catch grease and help keep the kitchen clean. I know that people will chime in and say to not do this, that steam is trapped and a regular cast iron skillet is better, but, I hate the splatters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As discussed in slkinsey's excellent article (linked by heidih in Post #2), the main difference among saucepans of the same volume will be surface area vs. depth.  That is, most will be somewhat wide and shallow, though less so than saute pans, while others will be comparatively narrow and deep.  This can have a significant effect on evaporation.  Which is better depends on the application (and often it doesn't matter).  Further, a narrow saucepan can be easier to use if one plans to employ an immersion blender, e.g., when making purees or the Modernist Cuisine at Home cheese sauce.  This comes up often enough for me (maybe not so much for others) that I went to the trouble of tracking down a narrow 1-1/2 qt saucepan specifically for the purpose.  Also, similar to Lisa Shock, I find a narrow saucepan (in my case, a 4 qt stainless) best for deep-frying.  Ditto for blanching veggies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a followup on pbear's post, a traditional way saucepan makers control the ratio of volume to surface is with a tapered pan. Most serious sauciers will have at least one of these slope-sided pans, called a windsor pan or an evasée. These keep the ratio of surface to volume fairly constant, whether you're using the pan for different volumes of sauce or using it for reduction. The sloped sides also make it easier to reach the whole bottom with a whisk—especially handy with emulsified egg sauces.

 

225x116_2146%20Sauteuse%20evasee.jpg31BNhtBjIsL._SY300_.jpg

 

Another version of these pans has a curved bottom, to make whisking even easier. These are sometimes called a saucier or chef's pan. You give up some of the even taper. Both styles are great; the difference is a mater of preference.

 

My 1.5L evasee is my desert island saucepan. It's the one piece of copper I'd buy again if starting over. It's good for as little as 2 servings, or as many 18 or so. 

Notes from the underbelly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Vollrath saucier pictured to the right in paulraphel's post is one of the three pans in my kitchen that I would hate be without.

 

I had never seen the slkinsey's article and cookware and have just started reading it.

Porthos Potwatcher
The Once and Future Cook

;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how about thickness?  Would a heavy saucier, i.e., thicker material, be a better choice than a thinner one?  I'd think that a pan that would slow down temperature changes, and maintain a more even temp, would be a better choice.

Edited by Shel_B (log)

 ... Shel


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd think that a pan that would slow down temperature changes, and maintain a more even temp, would be a better choice.

Evenness of heating over the whole bottom of the pan is important. Evenness of heating over time isn't an issue for any pans on the stove. That's something you look for in a dutch oven or other braising vessel, so it can even out the huge temperature swings of an oven.

 

There aren't any advantages to a saucepan that responds slowly to temperature change. Generally the more responsive the better. But the importance of this depends on the kinds of sauces you make. If you make hollandaise family sauces, reduced cream sauces, chocolate sauces, or anything like a creme anglaise, responsiveness is important. If you make tomato sauces that just sit there and simmer, it makes very little difference.

 

The best materials for a sauce pan (at least the conductive part on the bottom) are thick copper or aluminum.

Edited by paulraphael (log)
  • Like 1

Notes from the underbelly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...