The incredible amazing Chefmate saucepan and more

[Robert Schonfeld]

Then what about my second question?

[Varmint]

Density, Steven, density. Do the figures have anything to do with that?

[Ruth]

I am all a-quiver at the thought of that 16 quart stockpot and have been trying to call the Target stores in Brooklyn and Queens to see if they have it in stock. Keep getting cut off. Has anyone actually seen this pot?

Ruth Friedman

[Fat Guy]

Two percentage points difference in nickel content? No I don't think it makes a damn bit of relevant difference to density. They're all about the same. Maybe a serious scientist would measure them differently, but we're talking a couple of decimal places in. If we are observing that 18/10 products are denser than 18/8 products -- and I'm not saying I necessarily agree -- that's a manufacturing decision and not an inherent property of the metal.

[Fat Guy]

I can't believe Varmint actually made me look up a metallurgy chart:

http://www.espimetals.com/tech/stainlesssteel.pdf

Yes they're all .29 pounds per cubic inch it seems, if I'm reading this right.

[Varmint]

"Metallurgy" -- The surprising thing is that this is the fifth thread on eGullet where that word has been used. The breadth of discussions on this site astounds me.

[Dave the Cook]

A little clarification:

In the expressions 18/8 and 18/10, the first number refers to chromium, the second to nickel.

Since these are percentages, the two-point difference infers a substitution for some other element in the composition. In the case of stainless steel, this is iron. Hence the negligible difference in weights.

Chromium is mainly responsible for the stainless property.

Nickel content may be manipulated in order to create a material that is more or less malleable at lower temperatures. Note that the high-carbon stainless steel used to make knives (which is much harder than the steel use to make pots, pans and utensils) usually has no nickel at all.

[Robert Schonfeld]

Thanks, Dave. So if the difference is negligible, why make the substitution? Is there a business reason? In your opinion, is the uninformed public, like me, led to believe that the higher second number implies a product that is somehow "better"?

[Matt Seeber]

i don't know about you guys and gals, but i'll be cooking in my pots, not splitting atoms in them or subjecting to stress tests... i think the durability issue is negligible.

in a nutshell and as far as pots and pans go, 18/10 is more shiny than 18/8. it matters more when your purchasing silverware (flatware) for your dining room set. the shiny stuff scratches less and cost more.

my chicken stock isn't gonna care either way!

[Fat Guy]

Thanks, Dave. So if the difference is negligible, why make the substitution? Is there a business reason? In your opinion, is the uninformed public, like me, led to believe that the higher second number implies a product that is somehow "better"?

Robert, I think that's probably why 18/8 isn't typically sold as such anymore. It's now usually called 300-series or some such.

[Dave the Cook]

Matt has it right about the properties.

Fat Guy is right about availability. I rarely see 18/8 anymore.

There are a whole bunch of different SS mixtures used for many different purposes. I suspect that the "300-series" that FG refers to denotes the engineering descriptions of these products according to the American Iron and Steel Institute (other countries have their own standards organizations and numbering systems). For instance, 18/10 steel is also AISI 304; AISI 316 is 19% Cr, 12% Ni, 3% molybdenum; other formulae include different amounts or alternate components like carbon, titanium, etc.

[Rachel Perlow]

amazon.com has the chefmate 4 gallon stockpot for $30.  i just ordered one!  thanks fat-guy! 

Chefmate Professional Stainless Steel Stockpot - 16 qt.

I'm planning on ordering it too, since I've been looking for a large stock pot. We checked at our local Target last night and they didn't have it. Keep in mind that the shipping for this item is around $11, so the final cost is $41. Still, that seems like a good price, since I've been shopping around at restaurant supply stores & stuff too.

[Matt Seeber]

Keep in mind that the shipping for this item is around $11, so the final cost is $41.

yes rachel, the shipping is a third the cost of the pot, but still worth it

$44.26 exactly to NYC.

[Ruth]

In case anyone is interested I finally found the 16 qt stockpot at Target in Elmhurst, Queens. It is important to get the professional version; they have an even cheaper pot the same size which seems pretty flimsy. It's a big relief that I won't have to start off my next batch of demi-glace in two pots. I had my eye on the $90 Allclad so I've saved $60!

Ruth Friedman

[Fat Guy]

Our experts have acquired a saucepan and will post an analysis shortly. Stay tuned.

[jhlurie]

I'm planning on ordering it too, since I've been looking for a large stock pot. We checked at our local Target last night and they didn't have it. 

Since you probably went to the same one as Fatus (he said Hackensack, right?), you should try the OTHER local one in Edgewater, NJ. I'll bet he and Eddie bought Hackensack out.

Edited February 5, 2003 by jhlurie (log)

[Fat Guy]

I have cleaned out Hackensack, Edgewater, and Princeton. Don't even bother looking for 3-quart saucepans at any of those locations until such time as they restock. There was one professional stockpot left in Edgewater, though, as of early afternoon today.

[Jason Perlow]

Fat Guy gifted me one of these saucepans yesterday, its a really heavy duty sucker:

http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4290716983

[mamster]

I already have an All-Clad saucepan in that size...but now I kind of wish I didn't!

[Dave the Cook]

Fat Guy gifted me one of these saucepans yesterday, its a really heavy duty sucker:

http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4290716983

Jason's picture has at least cleared up the mystery of why this pan is so inexpensive. It's now clear that these are factory seconds -- they've riveted the lid handle on upside down.

[Jason Perlow]

actually no, thats how the thing is packaged, with the cover inverted, I presume to prevent knocking around during shipping and when people handle it in the store. You'll notice there is still heatshrink cling wrap still on it.

[Dave the Cook]

I knew I should have used a smilie.

[jhlurie]

I have the funniest image of Fat Guy, from Target store to Target store, roving all around New Jersey in his quest for pots and pans.

[snowangel]

My local Target (FG must not have made it to Minneapolis yet) had a nice supply. In addition to the 16 quart stockpot, they also have a set with 16, 12 and 8 quarters for $69.00. They also had several of the 3 quart sauce pans, and a 7 or 8 piece set with 2 sauce pans, dutch oven, and a couple of omelet pans. I can't imagine why a person would spend more at Target for their cheap Calphalon.

These are very nice; they seem very similar to the Emerilware by All Clad at a fraction of the price.

[Matt Seeber]

I have cleaned out Hackensack, Edgewater, and Princeton. Don't even bother looking for 3-quart saucepans at any of those locations

does the phrase "obsessive - compulsive" come to mind?

proof positive that fat-guy is a "true" chef!