Roasting Pans: The Topic

[paulraphael]

This is the pan I mentioned earlier in the thread. It's turned out to be the best roasting pan I've ever used (for large things ... a turkey, a pair of chickens, stock bones, etc.).

You can ignore the 7-ply marketing buzzwords. Here's what's great about it:

1) low sides. this improves air circulation and keeps the sides from blocking radiant heat. you get better browning.

3) the right color. dull-finish, light colored metal absorbs just the right amount of radiant heat to properly brown foods on the bottom without burning them

3) stainless interior. Ideal for deglazing and making pan sauces (that web link says it's nonstick, but that's a printing mistake)

4) useable on the stovetop for pan sauces. The clad construction gives very even heat distibution. I've even used it as a gridde for some tasks, where having higher sides than a regular griddle were helpful.

5) oven safe to 640°. my oven doesn't go that high, but I wish it did!

And a couple of downsides:

1) pricey

2) high tech looking handles can get in the way, and don't seem to offer any advantages.

For smaller roasting pans I use 10" or 12" stainless lined skillets or saute pans. They work perfectly, although the long handle on the 12" pans can be a nuissance. I can see the utility of a medium sized, rectangular roasting pan built like the Viking, but I don't have one.

Incidentally, for anyone squeamish about Viking because of their dismal record on appliances, rest assured that they don't actually make their cookware. It's made by Demeyere of Belgium.

[Octaveman]

I've got the Cuisinart that tim mentions, and for the most part think it's great. The clad bottom conducts heat very well, but because of it's shape is not as efficient on an electric range as on a gas, since it is raised in the center. That said, it only spends a few minutes on the range, and the heat conduction is good enough that deglazing has never been a problem with it.

←

That's what I was thinking too with regard to being able to deglaze the goodies. Just throw the pan on top of the stove for a few minutes and boom, you're done. But why would anyone want to spend a lot of money on a pan when the deglazing can be accomplished just as well with a cheap pan and then transfer to a sauce pan? One certainly doesn't need a pan costing $180 when the food just sits on a rack on top of it. I have a cheapo on-sale roasting pan I bought from Macy's Home and while the construction is simple it serves it's purpose of roasting anything and then get it hot enough to deglaze on my electric stove. I've actually used a big foil roasting thing and deglazed on the stove. Worked fine. Out of all the type of pots/pans I would spend a lot of money on a roasting pan would not be one of them. I just don't see the benefit.

[slkinsey]

Yes. Having a roasting pan with advanced thermal properties for the stovetop, because there's no need to deglaze and reduce in the roasting pan. I'd think the money would be better spend on a cheap roasting pan and a really good saucepan. Just deglaze and then pour the fond into the saucepan for further reduction, keeping warm, mounting, whatever (this has the added advantage of freeing up considerable stovetop real estate). Meanwhile, the saucepan has many other uses, so you get much more bang for your buck.

[Marlene]

Yes.  Having a roasting pan with advanced thermal properties for the stovetop, because there's no need to deglaze and reduce in the roasting pan.  I'd think the money would be better spend on a cheap roasting pan and a really good saucepan.  Just deglaze and then pour the fond into the saucepan for further reduction, keeping warm, mounting, whatever (this has the added advantage of freeing up considerable stovetop real estate).  Meanwhile, the saucepan has many other uses, so you get much more bang for your buck.

←

You must not wash the dishes in your house. Why would I want to dirty another pot, when I can do everything in the roasting pan and just have one pan to clean? My roasting pans get plenty of use and I'm an advocate of buying a good one.

[paulraphael]

Yes.  Having a roasting pan with advanced thermal properties for the stovetop, because there's no need to deglaze and reduce in the roasting pan.

If you go this route than I think the best choices are unclad aluminum commercial pans. Many are available in the best shape (low sides) and the best color (dull metal). Like some of these.

I do like the option of using the the roasting pan on the stovetop for certain kinds of browning tasks. It's a bit of a luxury but has come in handy. For this kind of thing having a conductive pan with stainless interior has been great.

[slkinsey]

Yes.  Having a roasting pan with advanced thermal properties for the stovetop, because there's no need to deglaze and reduce in the roasting pan.  I'd think the money would be better spend on a cheap roasting pan and a really good saucepan.  Just deglaze and then pour the fond into the saucepan for further reduction, keeping warm, mounting, whatever (this has the added advantage of freeing up considerable stovetop real estate).  Meanwhile, the saucepan has many other uses, so you get much more bang for your buck.

You must not wash the dishes in your house. Why would I want to dirty another pot, when I can do everything in the roasting pan and just have one pan to clean? My roasting pans get plenty of use and I'm an advocate of buying a good one.

My point is that a heavy gauge stainless steel roasting pan to the tune of around 33 bucks (such as this one) will work just fine for deglazing, etc. so long as you don't plan on simmering a starch-thickened gravy in there for 20 minutes. Meanwhile, with the extra $47 to $87 you'll save over the pans Tim suggests (not to mention $167 saved versus an All-Clad roaster) can be used on a really nice saucepan. If the deglazing or whatever is going to be short duration, there is no difference between how these pans will perform. If the liquid is going to be reduced, manipulated, etc. as the sauce as made -- yea, I'll dirty another pan. It takes about three seconds to clean a saucepan that's been used to make a sauce (or less, if you toss it in the dishwasher). Meanwhile, you get a whole lot more functionality out of your money.

(Fixed formatting)

Edited October 8, 2008 by slkinsey (log)

[Chris Hennes]

I'll be honest, even though I have one of the aforementioned fancy-pants roasting pans (I probably bought it because Cook's Illustrated gave it a favorable review), I still transfer the deglazing liquid back to a saucepan before actually making anything but the simplest sauce, simply because it is easier to work with on my non-gargantuan stovetop. In retrospect, I'm certain I could have gotten by just fine with the pans that slkinsey is suggesting.

[jgm]

But. . .but. . .but. . .I was saving up!

Come to think of it, you guys do have a good point. It's just hard to accept that the acquisition of an expensive roaster isn't going to help my Thanksgiving gravy turn out better. Looks like I'm going to have to substitute practice and skill and actual ability for a nice, shiny pan. And since I'll be using the same pan I've always had, I won't have that "I'm not used to this pan!" excuse.

[sigh.] Okay. Back to re-reading the stuff on gravy that I've acquired. Oh well. I need an instant-read thermometer anyway. And a chinois. And an Edge Pro. And. . .

[onrushpam]

For smaller turks, I just use the bottom of the broiler pan that came with the house/oven before we replaced the oven! It's just one of those "speckled" pans. I set a rack in it and roast away. It's very shallow.

Then, I put the speckled roasting pan on the stove and deglaze, make the gravy, etc., etc...

I've never had a problem with it.

For a BIG turk, I use my old fashioned specked roasting pan. It has high sides and I don't like it so much. Someday, I'll get a big one with lower sides. But, it still works. I've never actually made gravy in it... When I have to use it, I deglaze and dump into a different pan for making the gravy.

[Octaveman]

For smaller turks, I just use the bottom of the broiler pan that came with the house/oven before we replaced the oven!  It's just one of those "speckled" pans.  I set a rack in it and roast away.  It's very shallow.

I like this idea.

I've used doubled-up foil roasting pans with the rack in it and that worked just fine too and for only $4 it's hard to beat. BTW, when I made turkey doing it this way, I made the gravy ahead of time with the "extra's" you get with the bird and just added in the fond/juices from the roasting pan. Worked great.

Edited October 9, 2008 by Octaveman (log)

[paulraphael]

For a BIG turk, I use my old fashioned specked roasting pan.  It has high sides and I don't like it so much.  Someday, I'll get a big one with lower sides.  But, it still works.  I've never actually made gravy in it...  When I have to use it, I deglaze and dump into a different pan for making the gravy.

←

I've used those speckled things in a pinch, but I don't like the way enameled surface behaves for deglazing pan drippings. For one thing, they often don't stick, so they float away with the fat. But worse, when they do stick, they're camouflaged by the speckled surface, so it's hard to tell browned from burnt. And worse than that, the thin metal/dark surface captures a lot of radiant heat, so it's much more likely that your pan drippings will burn before the meat is cooked.

I'm a big fan of light colored metal and heavy gauges for these reasons.

Edited October 9, 2008 by paulraphael (log)