What is the best frying pan?

>>8614573

The most expensive frying pan in the world won't make your food taste any less shitty.

>>8614573
Careful when posting about metal objects on /ck/ because everyone loses their fucking shit. Every time.

>>8614573
cast iron

File: DSC_0092.jpg (2MB, 2000x3008px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x3008px

>>8614591
>presuming to have an opinion about my right to have an opinion
REEEEEEEE GET OUT GET OUT GET OUT

Also soy turkiye is best, down with the gullenists, or is it down with erdogan, I'm not really sure which side they fall on but down with whoever it is they oppose.

File: 0000_iron_handle_skillet_cherry.jpg (47KB, 600x500px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 600x500px

hmmmm?

>>8614573
Depends on what you're cooking faggot.

Either cast iron or teflon tho

>>8614636
ehh... pretty to look at but not as durable as the real deal

>>8614777
Doesn't Teflon flake off and get into the food if you burn the food though?

>>8614785
So don't burn your food dumb ass. It won't hurt you, anyway.

>>8614785
Yes. Don't listen to teflon shills. Just get stainless steel like everybody else.

File: 20170131_103549.jpg (1MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1440px

>>8614805
Exactly. Think you can't make a fine omelette in stainless? Think again.

>>8614912
oh look it's "I ruined some eggs and got laughed at" guy again

Restraunt grade steel saute pans. One Teflon or ceramic for some proteins.

>>8614912
Looks over dome on outside and under done on inside

>>8614930
Show yours from teflon, faggot. It better be time stamped like mine, dildoramus.

>>8614952
Dumbass, you can't even see inside. Show yours from teflon, timestamped or stfu.

NICE AND HOT is undoubtably the best pan you can have, all the chefs use it.

>>8614912
Wait, pans made from different material have different purposes? I always use teflon for everything. It doesn't flake if you use wood cooking utensils.

>>8614985
>I always use teflon for everything
Sucs is desirable.

>>8614573
for deep frying I'd say cast iron because it holds heat well and the temp won't fluctuate as much when you add the cold food

for pan frying I'd say carbon steel just because it's lighter but still has all the good properties of cast iron besides the greater heat retention

File: wojak.jpg (68KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 700x700px

>>8614991
Just read the wikipedia page. Wow, so much knowledge that I'm missing out on.

Carbon steel

>Light like stainless

>Durable & non-stick like cast iron

File: 100413_lodge_pan_1.jpg (100KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 620x413px

One of these and a stainless steel are all you need my friend.

>>8615067
Absolutely. I would add a dutch oven and you can cook anything, absolutely anything. Everything else? Superfluous unitaskers.

>>8614805
>>8614785
Stainless steel will eventually rust. Every pan but slid cast iron will eventually deteriorate. Not using non-stick pans because you're afraid of burning your food is pretty pathetic. If you burnt your food so bad that the teflon is flaking off your shit isn't edible in the first place.

Stainless steel pans are great when you want to make a pan sauce. That's about it.

Teflon is great for shit like scrambled eggs or sticky glazes. Clean up is a breeze.

Cast iron for almost everything else.

>>8615197
Forgot to mention, non-stick is also great for low fat cooking if you're into that sort of shit.

>>8615197
Teflon shill detected who's too incompetent to cook eggs in stainless.

Teflon is a dangerous and worthless unitasker. Get better, son.

>>8615221
>Teflon is dangerous
lmao you're a retard

2.5mm thick copper pan lined with tin. A cast iron skillet and Dutch oven, and a decent set of stainless. All you could ever want.

>>8615222
Butthurt teflon shill detected.

>>8615246
It's all I have except for the copper. What's that for?

>>8615272
yeah you got me, im mad because you are a retard. i also have a personal interest in the sales performance of teflon to /ck/ anons

>>8615279
heats evenly. stews and sauces. kinda stupid imo. just stir in a stainless steel pot a few times instead

>>8615279
Doesn't hold heat as well as cast iron, but you can be extremely precise with temperature. It heats up and cools down fast. Great for things like searing tuna and really anything that requires similar attention. The tin is great for its nonstick qualities and has almost as good of heat conductivity as copper. Can't use metal tools in it though. Stainless lining is also good for the extra durability and versatility at the expense of the tin's benefits.

Unlined copper is a no go though. Not dangerous or anything but it leeches and changes flavors.

Side note, a bare copper bowl is ideal for whipping egg whites. It's like magic.

>>8615315
I'd agree if that's what you were only going to use it for, but the fact that there's no hotspots or coolspots can be handy indeed

>>8615339
useless on induction stoves though

>>8615347
Yes. I should have mentioned that. And the copper pans with steel inserts are a meme.

>>8615358
they are pretty cool looking though. my grandma had one she'd always cook stews in and swore by it so i guess it just seems old fashioned to me.

>>8614983
That yellow liquid pooling around the crest is a blatant sign that you didn't cook it all the way, retard.

Cast iron and rolled steel pans have a much higher infrared emissivity than stainless steel. Even the parts of your food that are not in direct contact with the pan will get crisped up nicely. That, and the superior heat detention due to weight, are the reason why they are so great for frying, especially steaks and meat in general.

>>8615365
If you do decide to ever get one, it's important to spend the extra money and get it at least 2mm thick, preferably 2.5. If you don't, you're not really taking advantage of the material.

Cany anybody tell me if enameled cast iron pans like the newer Le Creusets take and hold a non-stick seasoning just like pure cast iron?

>>8615365
After frequent use they will need retinning on the inside though. Hardly anybody left who can do that. You can NOT cook in them when the copper is showing through.

>>8615398
>not mastering ye olde trades like tinning copper yourself

>>8615391
never, despite what they may advertise. personally i think it's a fucking meme. it's non-reactive sure but so is stainless steel.

Only get teflon if you feel like buying a new set of cookware every six months. Or if you don't cook - It's good for people that don't cook.

My dad has a friend who got hit in the head by his wife with an old school cast iron skillet. He was sleeping and she cracked him in the head with it, he was in a coma for two days.

Ceramic and cast iron are all you need in a kitchen.

Anodized aluminium. It's more expensive than a shitty Teflon type coating, but it will not scratch off. Just go to a restaurant supply store and get pans.

Cast iron you could in any environment and it's durable.

What about the "as seen on TV" copper pans? I'm a sucker for infomercials.

>>8616134
They're garbage. Real copper (2.5mm of pure copper, lined with 18/10 stainless) is tits. Anything that doesn't state the copper thickness can safely be assumed to be garbage.

The reason most people don't own copper is that you can get 90% of the way there with thick aluminum, which is cheaper. Not a lot cheaper, when you consider that decently thick aluminum lined with 18/10 stainless costs like 70% as much as good copper. But it is cheaper, and people are very price sensitive.

>>8616145
oh yeah and inb4 that guy who says "durr durr a 10mm thick aluminum pan is hurrrr"

Look at the actual products on the market before bleating like an autistic goat. Nobody sells alu that thick.

>>8616145
https://youtu.be/1oWHLaKPjps

>>8615762
id had a teflon pan for years

what are you talking about?

>>8617434
He probably used it for everything, used metal utensils on it, and then wondered why it didn't last

This is the problem with /ck/, we have a lot of retards on who think that since they figured out how to ruin food with a stove and some cookware, that they're elite chefs who know everything

>>8617442
like the dumb ass earlier complaining about teflon chipping if he burns food in it kek

File: pans at home.png (68KB, 999x341px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 999x341px

What do y'all think of these (or just anodized aluminum in general)? I have a 10-inch and 6-inch one and they've both been great for every day cooking.

>>8617537
stainless steel is better

File: all-clad.jpg (53KB, 500x307px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x307px

What are /ck/'s thoughts on all-clad? Overpriced garbage or GOAT?

>>8617562
both of those and everything in between

MC2 = GOAT
Copper Core = overpriced garbage

Most of the rest falls somewhere in the middle

>>8617579
The regular Stainless line is GOAT. MC2 doesn't work on induction, so the savings is moot.

>>8617601
>doesn't work on induction
That's like complaining that it doesn't work in space

Nobody who cares enough about cooking to inquire about specific lines of all clad pans will be caught dead using induction

>>8617621
Induction is common, ya country bumpkin.

>>8617621
>>8617601
Also the stainless line has about half the aluminum thickness, at a significantly higher price. It's not a terrible product in the grand scheme of things but I'd hardly call it GOAT

>>8617625
Cleetus please, I live in one of the most densely populated places on the planet

>>8617637
then you would know that almost all apartments are full electric.

>>8617647
Except they're not, you clearly have never been anywhere near a real city

Induction is for people who live too far from the gas main to have a real stove, but still like to think of themselves as "foodies" so they buy the next least shittiest thing to a coil stove

File: blackhawk_propane_residential_filling_pictures_063_medium.jpg (28KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 300x225px

>>8617675
>Induction is for people who live too far from the gas main
Flyover that has an LP tank in his front yard detected.

>>8617687
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_East_Village_gas_explosion

I suppose this was caused by fairy dust?

Wow, you sure look stupid now :^)

File: Smoker-Aritocrat-Vintage-Mobile-Home-Exterior-5-e1414961300579-930x483.jpg (141KB, 930x483px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 930x483px

>>8617713
>I just got a new home, jed. Come help me take the wheels off of it!

>>8617717
Whatever you need to tell yourself to compensate for your second-rate induction ''''stove''''

>>8617621
Induction is the preferred choice by most chefs. Way to expose your ignorance.

File: marea.jpg (72KB, 500x336px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 500x336px

>>8617731
Because it keeps the insurance costs down, see >>8617713

Non stick for quick meals
Stainless steel for whatever
Cast iron for the real shit

Also, gas is better for quickly controlling temperature

File: 1314855151605.jpg (64KB, 500x408px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 500x408px

>>8617731
>preferred choice by most chefs
>most chefs

>your ignorance

>>8617754
You see it a lot in the UK since electric fuel is cheaper than gas.

>>8617754
Not an argument.

>>8617748
It also changes heat instantly. Something no other stove can do.

>>8617687
The unregulated propane jew is the worst choice. In the first place during cold months they jack the price to mouthdropping levels. In the second place, the tanks have a gauge that has 3 readings: low, half, and full. Billy Bob comes out with his truck and "fills" your tank with 500 gallons. But you have no way of verifying it, because they have to leave 20% empty. So the gauge is in between half and full. In reality, he gave you 425 gallons and saved the 75 gallons for his buddy, Cletus. In the third place, the tank is owned by a particular propane company and if you want to switch companies, they charge a "tank removal fee" of $1200. They fuck you in every orifice. Sure is a good argument for deregulation benefiting the consumer!

I live in a propane area and I built my house all electric for specifically those reasons. My electric bill is 30% of my neighbors' with comparable square footage who are on propane.

File: magpro.jpg (6KB, 236x177px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 236x177px

>>8614573
Depends on what you're cooking, but for all-purpose use, I like Magnalite GHC Pro. Even heat, heats quickly, cooks beautifully. Just remember to use a towel or a handle cover, or you'll be sorry.

>>8617776
So flyovers are going full electric too?

File: questforfire51.jpg (16KB, 512x288px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 512x288px

>>8617768
They make these things called piezo igniters anon, pretty interesting technology. Basically, when you turn the knob, the gas touches it and you get instant fire

No more need to rub a stick in a hole like some nubile young paleolithic girl covered in ashes! Not that there's anything wrong with that

File: nevmbuzz.jpg (25KB, 640x352px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 640x352px

>>8614591
This is very true.

>>8617782
I am aware. Still not faster than magnetism.

You should research induction instead of just thinking it's stupid because it's new technology. It's great shit. The only, and I mean only, drawback compared to a gas range are you have to use ferrous pots. Everything else, cost, heat quality, safety, etc. is superior.

>>8617782
>being this obtuse.

bad troll.

>>8617797
>because it's newer

No, because I've used it at my 98 year old grandma's place since my aunt decided she shouldn't be allowed to have a real stove anymore so they forced an induction stove on her

Yes, it's cool that they will boil a huge pot of pasta water faster, and the insurance costs are lower if you're running a restaurant, and also you can't get gas without jumping through hoops if you live in some unincorporated area somewhere between the Hudson River and the Diablo Range

Aside from that, though, induction sucks because the temperature control is basically "turn the knob, pray, who knows what heat you'll get it's a surprise" which is why nobody in his right mind wants to cook with it. With a real stove you can tell how high the heat is, instantly. And boiling a huge pot of pasta water is not something most people do every day except maybe guidos and college students

>>8617819
>it sucks because I don't know how to use the knob
Wow way to go for the "I'm retarded" defense.

>>8617776
I hope you have a generator, or are you in a warm area? full electric in stormy summers/harsh winters can be awful with all the power outages.

>>8617832
>anon: the user interface is shit and everyone hates it, for instance there is no indication as to what the tool is doing, you have to wait several seconds and infer based on secondary behavior
>you: it's the user's fault! stupid user! you don't need that anyway! la la la I can't hear you!

Are you a software developer by any chance?

>>8617838
>it's shit because I say so
k

>>8617838
This nigga can't use a stove or a computer, lol.

>>8617863
>it's good because I needed to rationalize it
k
>>8617866
>a shitty user UI makes me smart
KDE user detected

>>8617871
>KDE
I3 tiling master race, go back to your Unity ease of use, pleb.

>>8617875
>spending hours a day ricing your desktop
>this makes me smart
>>>/g/

Stop cooking food through direct contact with heated metal and/or fire.

http://www.foodsafetymagazine.com/news/efsa-frying-baking-and-roasting-increases-risk-of-acrylamide-exposure-and-cancer/

EFSA: Frying, Baking and Roasting Increases Risk of Acrylamide Exposure and Cancer

The European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain has published its scientific opinion on acrylamide--a chemical that naturally forms in starchy food products during every-day high-temperature cooking--found in food, reconfirming previous evaluations that its presence in food does in fact increase consumer risk of cancer.

The panel’s findings are based on results from animal studies. Tests show that exposure to acrylamide was both genotoxic and carcinogenic, ultimately causing damage to DNA and triggering cancerous cells. While human studies evaluating the effect of dietary exposure to acrylamide have been initiated, the EFSA says that those outcomes are “currently limited and inconclusive”.

While the risk of cancer is a possibility in all age groups, research suggests that children may experience more exposure to acrylamide because they have lower body weights. Besides cancer, the panel also considered possible harmful effects of acrylamide on the nervous system, pre- and post-natal development and male reproduction. These effects were not considered to be a concern, based on current levels of dietary exposure.

Fried potato products, coffee, biscuits, crackers, and bread (crisp and soft) are all food items that are responsible for high acrylamide exposure--usually formed during processes such as frying, baking, roasting and methods generally relied upon to ‘brown’ foods. Acrylamide is also present in tobacco smoke.

Phaggot

>>8617832
Does your induction stove top have a glass surface? If so, it's shit.

>>8617899
Go back to your containment thread, dark roast autist

File: 2017-02-25-183054_2560x1440_scrot.png (276KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 2560x1440px

>>8617895
At least I know how to work a stove.

>>8617871
No, it's good for all the objective reasons I previously listed. You said it's not good because you can't figure out the knobs.

You're a moron.

>>8617915
Do you have any reasoning with that or are you just meme'ing?

File: capture.jpg (115KB, 630x420px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 630x420px

>>8617819
>though, induction sucks because the temperature control is basically "turn the knob, pray, who knows what heat you'll get it's a surprise"
Except any decent induction stove has an interface that tells you exactly what temperature you're at. How many gas burners do that? So what exactly is your argument against induction stoves for serious cooking?

>>8617781
>flyovers dropping the propane jew, too?

No, I don't think it's common. All of my neighbors are on the propane jew, and they just look at me open mouthed when I show them my electric bill for January. The real definition of flyover are those that do no critical thinking, and while more common in these bumfuck backwaters, there are a fair share on the coasts.

>>8617835
I have a wood burning stove and can go 100 yards and cut wood as needed. Electricity going out in the summer, while uncomfortable, wouldn't be a big deal. I can still cook in a fire pit.

>>8614573
Carbon steel master race.

File: ........jpg (75KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1440x1080px

>>8614930
>autism enters the thread

Well that was fast....

>>8618370
>decent induction stove has an interface that tells you exactly what temperature you're at

more like 'stove's best guess'. it measures the temp very indirectly. theres a thermistor in the center that touches the cooktop with a little thermal goop. the more thermal mass in the pan the better the estimate can be.

>>8618884
>technology is guessing
Sorry, I forgot fire tells you what temperature you're at. If you want to be obsessive about it use your own insta-read therm then faggot. Stop making up reasons to hate induction stoves.

>>8617754
>>8617621
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p6buePWKlI

But I'm sure you know more than professional chefs.

File: img-7731-1463022942-WidM-column-width-inline.jpg (109KB, 865x441px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 865x441px

This shit right here. Im serious, been through so many shit pans and good sets and ive always come back to my 30 dollar set from costco. Use until the teflon flakes off and buy a new one.

Literally any pan is perfect for any kind of cooking, unless you're dealing with some sort of special exotic ingredient that requires ridiculous amounts of care in order to avoid flavor cross-contamination.

>>8614978
Yours isn't timestamped, asshole.

>>8619004
>Literally any pan is perfect for any kind of cooking
try making a pan sauce from a non-stick pan then

i know this board is full of people who don't actually cook but try to be less obvious about not belonging here.

>>8619004
Try simmering a ragu Bolognese in a cast iron skillet for three hours

File: 4-Burner_Commercial_Induction_Range.jpg (20KB, 600x445px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 600x445px

>tfw can't afford a CookTek induction range

>>8615067
I've been told to try to find an older cast iron pan versus buying a new one at the store, how do I pick out a good, old cast iron pan? Or was my chain just being yanked by some hipster?

File: 1464796813728.png (63KB, 160x199px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 160x199px

>>8614577
but, that's exactly what good pans do...

Regarding induction, even as a fan and regular use of induction I have to admit that most inuctions cooktops, except maybe the most expensive ones, have poor temperature control, especially in the low range. One reason is that with induction temperature control doesn't work by actually regulating power output, but just by going full on/full off at various intervals. And even the lowest setting (400W on most devices) is not nearly low enough to get a real simmer going, unless you are using a really big pot.

>>8619097
Old cast iron pans are a treasure because they've been seasoned many times for you thus having superior nonstick and superior taste compared to a new one.

Things to look for:

1) minimal rust, preferably none. If you have to clean a bunch of rust off all that good seasoning is going with it
2) well-built. solid. thick. heavy. good shape.

that's it

How do I convince my friend to actually season her cast iron pan and stop scrubbing it with soap?

>>8619168
Take away her cast iron and put a stainless steel one in her hand.

>>8619101
>>8619097

Any older cast iron pan you get WILL be all rusted up.

The only desirable feature in older pans is the fact the inside is sanded, they don't do that any more. But it's not like the new ones can't be seasoned which is the real factor. And with no care, the rust in the old one might have made that sanded finish quite porous and irregular.

You're not getting any godly seasoning, you will have to strip, clean, polish and season whatever older pan you get.

For that effort, get a new cheap one for like $10 more and sand it's inside if you're that autistic. Cast iron is cheap brand new. But it's irrelevant, just season it well. Get something thick is all.

>>8619160
lol, no
>>8620262
more like this, also cast iron doesn't need to be super autistically seasoned and mirror smooth because we have a more effective tech now and it's called nonstick pans. if you're using a cast iron chiefly for its nonstick properties you've already fucked up.

titanium

>>8620276
>we have a more effective tech now
...that gets all scratched up when it comes into contact with metal tools and that cannot bear really high heat without getting soft and flaking off and releasing harmful substances into the air. And sooner or later they all wear out, no matter how much you baby them. Cast iron lasts a lifetime. Rolled steel too.

>>8620420
titanium is less sticky than teflon and more durable than iron.

>>8614573
They're all the same, just don't spend over $30 on one.

>>8620420
>...that gets all scratched up when it comes into contact with metal tools
so don't use metal tools
>and that cannot bear really high heat
situations that require heat that's high enough to damage teflon are not situations where teflon is actually useful
>And sooner or later they all wear out
my last teflon pan lasted me 10 years
>Cast iron lasts a lifetime
I don't recall the law that says you're allowed to own either a hammer or a screwdriver, not both. care to point that one out for me?

>>8620420

1. Don't use metal tools on non stick.

2. Cast iron last a lifetime with proper use and care. You can use whatever you want on it but I can leave an aluminum non stick pan soaking or even dirty for as long as I want. Wash it much more easily. Storage doesn't require vigilance as to avoid rusting either.

3. There are oven safe non stick pans. Safe up to 400f even.

If I had only one pan the best would be cast iron. But since I'm not need I have four (4) pans.
Two (2) All-clad stainless steel. Size 12" and 8" and these are my everyday workhorses and is why I have them in two sizes.
One (1) carbon steel omelette pan that is well seasoned with flaxseed oil and used only to cook food gently. This means fish and eggs. When I'm cooking fish I be sure to clean it aggressively and immediately after using.
Finally a 12" cast iron because they are cheap and good. But since I can afford to buy more than one pan this pan mainly is used for high heat applications like searing/pan roasting and high heat oven roasting

>>8620442
>a 12" cast iron because they are cheap and good.
if you think your cast iron pan was cheap and good it was neither. you probably have some lodge horseshit

>>8620422

Retains heat better than iron but sucks at transferring it.

Worst thermal conductivity of any pan material.

>>8620447

Tell me, cast iron sage.

What's so bad about Lodge?

>>8620436
>>8620432
>dont use metal
Having to buy special snowflake tools for your special snowflake pans.
I have a $25 metal fish spatula that use for everything, I'd be damned if I have to give it up because of a shitty pan.

>>8620447
Lodge is just fine for pan roasting and roasting veg at >400F you retarded vintage hipster faggot. Learn to season.

>>8620449
thermal conductivity depends mainly on the hob size of your stove in relation to the size of your pan if you're worried about even heating, otherwise low thermal conductive aids in browning of food. Cast iron/carbon steel both have low conductivity in relation to aluminum/copper, but they are the go to pans for browning meats.

>>8620465

>It's fine to have different pans, but different spatulas is where I draw the line

You were saying something about snowflakes.
Best tool for the job, anon, you wanna use one set for everything? Just cook everything on one griddle, cookie.

On the titanium, id use it as a replacement for iron, But I'd keep stainless and forego titaniums non stick properties due to its conductivity. That low conductivity means I have little fine control over the heat. It would take longer than even iron to heat up and then even longer to go down to the temp I want.

>>8620465
>special snowflake tools
jesus how poor are you

>>8620479
>>8620484
>Having to duplicate about 10 different cooking utensils for a pan
How cluttered are your kitchens? Do you live like an episode of hoarders?

>inb4 10 utensils LOL!
spatulas
turners
mashers
whisks
spiders
many in different sizes....etc.

>>8620487
>mashers
>whisks
>for a teflon pan
not just poor but also stupid

File: Screenshot from 2017-02-26 11-01-57.png (37KB, 371x309px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 371x309px

>>8620490
>never whisks or mashes in a pan
So you don't make refried beans or pans sauces.

Why are you here again?

>google knows everything.

File: People+laugh+at+this++_2a6e188589a804aa57aff03d3db969a2.jpg (40KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x500px

>>8620497
>making a pan sauce in a nonstick pan
>refried peans
>in a teflon pan
no one could be this dumb. are you just pretending for the (You)s?

>>8620503
So you are saying you can't do anything in a nonstick pan! wow! Must be why only retards buy them.

>>8620497

Sure I do.

I cook eggs too. I can do them conviniently in different types of pans suited for each purpose through materials shape and construction and also simultaneously since I dint rely on just one.

Different types spatulas and pans for different applications. It's how us fancy cityfolk live I guess

>>8620505
>I only cook the same 5 recipes over and over again
yeah, that's what I thought

File: 16976550.jpg (11KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 450x450px

>>8614636
just get this target brand one for $25, has a longer handle too

>>8620497
>not typing nigger in captcha

File: carbonsteel.png (137KB, 1139x608px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1139x608px

>>8620506
>conviniently
Lets face it, you live in HUD.

>>8620506
>>8620511
What if I told you I can have nonstick qualities and use metal utensils without worrying about scarring the beautiful and unique snowflake pan. There's no reason for nonstick unless you are in a pro kitchen where you right it off as an expense every 3 months.

>>8620525
>what if I told you my autistically seasoned pan is about 70% as nonstick as an actual nonstick pan?
I'd tell you I already knew that, and so did everyone else. and yet, we choose to spend $35 every ten years to get the job done right.

>>8620534
>$35 every ten years
Again, I can tell you don't cook. Why are you here?

>>8620541
just a reminder
>using a nonstick pan for pan sauces
there is no recovering from that, sorry bud. enjoy your hamburgers-and-porkchops diet

File: Screenshot from 2017-02-26 11-22-31.png (44KB, 600x245px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 600x245px

>>8620545
Reminder That I'm the one that wrote about sucs

enjoy being assblasted.

>>8620525
>unique snowflake pan

>>8614573
One that doesn't warp.

>>8620549
>got in a retarded argument 3 days ago
>actually saved a screenshot to document the event
so not only are you poor, stupid, and lacking in basic cooking skills, you also have no life

are you that fat homeless guy who shitposts his fast food reviews all the time?

>>8620553
>doesn't know it's referring to the shape of the pan
I could sear a chicken thigh roast it in a hot oven >450F and make a pan sauce in that pan; clean it and then make your mom and omellette.

>>8620555
>the post is from this thread. The one you're in now.
>>8614991
Reading is fundamental retard.

>>8620571
>using a nonstick pan in an oven
>using a nonstick pan for searing
it just keeps getting worse

are you one of those tards who uses a paring knife as a can opener and then goes crying to the manufacturer for selling a "defective" knife?

>>8620580
I think you've lost the plot, I don't use teflon. Unless you are calling carbon steel nonstick.

File: frog.jpg (214KB, 864x865px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 864x865px

>>8620571
I don't even own a non stick pan, I do all that in a ss pan. even eggs without sticking.

what is this obsession with using one pan for everything ? is it just poor people? if I cooked eggs more I'd probably buy a a non stick omelette pan, but ss and cast iron suits my needs enough. there is also more to a pan than material, subjective preferences.

>>8620583
>I don't use teflon
never suggested you did. but you've made it clear you have retarded ideas about what specific tools are for: >>8620497

what's it like being that guy whose product reviews get used as cautionary examples of retarded customers?

>>8620632
You've lost the plot. reread.
I was giving examples for why I would never buy a non-stick (teflon) pan. to recap:

You can't make pan sauces in a nonstick
you can't use metal utensils in a nostick
you can't put teflon pans in a hot oven
This is why you shouldn't buy one and should buy carbon steel instead. You can do all of those things and cook eggs/fish delicately.

File: 1454377590605.png (602KB, 963x720px) Image search: [Google]

602KB, 963x720px

>>8620694
>You can't make pan sauces in a nonstick

File: 1390740572029.jpg (661KB, 1296x968px) Image search: [Google]

661KB, 1296x968px

>>8620694
>you can only have one kind of pan

What did he mean by this?

>>8620694
not that anon but non stick pans have been improving over the years a lot, the nicer ones can be used in a hot oven. I'd only buy one for eggs so I don't really care about oven use though.

>>8620711
No you can't. there is nothing in the pan to deglaze.

>>8620843
>all pan sauces involve deglazing

>>8620852
Yes.
http://www.bonappetit.com/test-kitchen/how-to/article/perfect-pan-sauce

>>8620861
If you can't get fond to form in a nonstick pan, you shouldn't be cooking. Yes, it's slightly more difficult, but it can be done.

>>8620907
>I purchase things to make my life more difficult.
>I defy the only redeeming quality of the pan.

The mind of the retarded teflon user is fascinating.

>>8620907
Sorry dog, but >>8620915 is right.

Who the fuck tries to get food to stick to teflon? You're digging yourself into a deeper hole, just stop, turn off your computer, and go outside for a bit.

>>8620907
Which is it? You don't need to deglaze to make a sauce or Teflon is just fine for making a fond to deglaze?

>>8620915
>my life more difficult
For you. I have no problem with proper heat control.
>defy the only redeeming quality of the pan
The fond doesn't stick and the browning is much more even and controlled.
Have fun, brainlet.

>>8620944

>I burn my food and the charcoal debris falls off into the pan.

>call sucs fond
If you're going to use French then use it properly.
sucs is the brown bits
fond is stock (in this case a pan stock)

>>8620953
>>I burn my food and the charcoal debris falls off into the pan.
You should learn not to do that.
>French
I'm in the US, fond and sucs are used interchangeably. I don't give a shit about your literary autism.

>>8620963
>I'm in the US
Say no more! We found the root cause of your retardation.

>>8620944
>the fond doesn't stick
So you are burning the food in a teflon pan? Makes sense.

>>8620966
kek

>>8620966
Says the girl with no heat control.

>>8620970
Correct. A simple spatula wipe removes it clean from the surface of the pan.

>>8620963
>I'm in the US, fond and sucs are used interchangeably
no they aren't. stop pretending to be sophisticated by using foreign words incorrectly

File: autism.png (68KB, 642x211px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 642x211px

>>8620994

>>8621029
>wikipedia

>>8621064
>web 2.0 hipster bullshit
>http://www.thekitchn.com/what-are-sucs-and-should-we-care-culinary-school-diaries-207154
>Oftentimes in the United States the term "fond" and "sucs" are used interchangeably.
>I'm an engineer
http://www.cookingforengineers.com/article/244/Fond-of-Fond
>Oh how fond I am of fond! Fond is the highly flavorful, browned bits of meat stuck to the bottom of a pan after sautéing.
>blogshit
>http://www.reluctantgourmet.com/deglazing-what-it-is-and-why-do-it/
>Those brown bits are where all the flavors are, and it is called “fond.”
>AOL era cooking site
>https://whatscookingamerica.net/Glossary/F.htm
>fond – A classic French culinary term meaning the browned caramelized and concentrated bits or residue that remains in the pan after cooking meat.
>some American cook
>http://www.gjsentinel.com/lifestyle/articles/want-to-turn-up-your-home-cooking-turn-to-pan-sauc
>Resist the temptation to clean out the pan after searing your protein. You’ll need these bit called fond to create a pan sauce.

>>8618346
Late reply. Glass surface stove tops can't handle large pots. Even if they are able to handle the weight (rare and expensive for a glass top to be rated for a 5 gallon pot), scratching of the surface becomes an issue. This can decrease the durability even more.

In addition, if you ever plan on canning, you are in more trouble than just the weight because of the automatic shut-off feature most induction tops have.

>>8621115
Do Americans really do this?

>>8620994
Looks like you got BTFO. I think you need to tuck your head in shame, quite frankly.

>>8614912
>eggs overdone

File: jacques.png (113KB, 788x417px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 788x417px

>>8621154
The only people who should hold there head in shame are the people who gather information about cooking from the web. Buy a book, especially one written by a Frenchman.

fond = stock. Not sticky bits.

>muh old cast iron

And how the cast iron became old ? By being new once. So stop being fucking autistic about it. Buy new.

>>8614573
Wow. /ck/ is just FILLED with people who don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

1) Don't deglaze in nonstick. You can do it but you have to burn your food because that's the only way you're getting it to stick in a properly seasoned or any decent teflon pan. Burned food is not good food.

2) Other than price, I honestly have no idea why anyone would choose carbon steel over cast iron. They have pretty much the same qualities, but cast iron will last you a lifetime.
>muh sloped sides
If you want to saute things, use stainless steel.

The only reason I could see a justifiable use for carbon steel over cast iron is if you have a weak wrist and need a lighter pan.

3) Teflon is inferior for everything except eggs and very sticky sauces. Teflon is great for making cooking and cleaning these things easier. A good cook is always efficient. Use the right tool for the job.

4) Old cast iron is superior to modern cast mass-produced cast iron. If you can get your hands on old cast iron do it. Years of seasoning and superior craftsmanship have made that fucker more non-stick than you could ever hope to get from a brand new one. The flavor will always be better.

5) I have used 5 gallon pots on glass surfaces many times. That sounds like a myth to me or use of incredibly cheap glass-top stoves.

6) Being proud that you use words wrong because other people do it too is retarded. Use the correct words for things. As a fellow American, I am sick of the stereotype that we are all ignorant people for reasons like a few bad eggs using foreign words incorrectly.

7) Do not use highly acidic foods in cast iron or carbon steel. They are reactive and the metal will leech into your food.

>>8621232
This is probably the stupidest post I've seen so far. Why would you intentionally spend more money on an inferior product? That's autistic.

>>8621252
>Wow. /ck/ is just FILLED with people who don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

first day here? welcome.

>>8621252
>This is probably the stupidest post I've seen so far. Why would you intentionally spend more money on an inferior product? That's autistic.

I don't buy USED products.

>>8621252
>carbon steel wont last a lifetime.

amerilard that likes to sit on his pans?

>>8621252
>you have to burn your food because that's the only way you're getting it to stick
You don't want it to stick in a nonstick. Just let it brown nice and slow.

>>8621279
>this retard again.

>>8621286
>this retard again.

>>8621209
>I found a tidbit that I don't understand in the whole context
The literal translation of fond is background. In cooking context it is meant to imply the substance creating the base of the flavor profile, typically as a component of sauce making.

>>8621293
>reeeeeee

The fond means foundation. The foundation of all sauces is typically stock. Thus fond = stock in culinary terms. This is indisputable.

>>8621270
>I don't buy USED products.
Such an arbitrary line of reasoning baffles me. It's your money, however, throw it away how you want.

>>8621274
Depending on how much you cook with high heat, eventually your pan will warp. Cast iron does not suffer from this. I suppose I made a flaw by generalizing and should have been more specific.

>>8621279
You need sucs to deglaze a pan. Sucs does not exist unless it sticks to the bottom of a pan.

>>8621301
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>typically stock
>not always
Like in pan sauces where you use the "sticky bits" or drippings.

>>8621315
The sticky bits are used to make the fond (pan stock) yes. But not by themselves. You must deglaze with a liquid and thus forms a stock (fond).

It's not pan stock until you deglaze.

>>8621306
>>8621306
Fond will form on the bottom of the pan but not really stick like in a regular pan. You can easily swipe the pan clean with a spatula if you wish to save the brown bits. A regular pan requires the addition of liquid to remove it cleanly since the fond is actually stuck to the pan. You can still add liquid to dissolve the fond if you wish to form a sauce but it's not deglazing as the fond is not stuck to the surface as a glaze is.

>>8621332
>Fond will form on the bottom of the pan but not really stick like in a regular pan.
Then where does it come from if not from sticking food?
If it doesn't stick how does it get there?

>>8621324
Oh, I see what you're saying. I missed >>8621029
that part of the conversation.
Wikipedia is stupid. There is more to the parts in the pan than the brown bits. There is typically the meat juice as well. If there isn't, you have completely reduced the stock until your fond is dry, in which case you are reconstituting your fond through the deglazing process.

>>8621252
I should also mention, deglazing (and boiling in general) in cast iron is bad. Metal will leech into your food.

>>8621332
Wow. Why are you even on this board? The entire purpose of using sucs (not fond) is because they have been caramelized. You aren't getting caramelized food by letting it brown "nice and slow". What you would be doing is making a very small and very bland stew.

ikea ones are pretty good at a cheap price

>>8621346
The juices from the meat contains proteins. Vegetables release sugars and complex carbohydrates. Proteins, sugars, and complex carbs do indeed brown in nonstick pans.

>>8614573
Is an 8 inch skillet enough for an omelet? Surface is more like 6 inches which feels a tad small to me but I haven't actually tied it. Came with this stainless steel set I got for Christmas

>>8621365
Of course. Even a very small pan will be big enough. It just depends on how much egg you use.

>>8621353
edit: I shouldn't have said
>reduced the stock
because I still don't agree with that use of the term
a stock is more complex than pan juice and drippings
I should have said
>reduced the drippings

>semantic autism
perhaps

>>8621373
Alright thanks anon. I remember I tried making them when I was younger, but always fucked em up. Tried one recently in a 12 inch skillet but was way too huge to fold properly.

Gonna saute up some onions and bell peppers and load it the fuck up

>>8621412
Take your time. Omelettes are tricky to master. Get all your prep done and watch some quality videos. Learn your stove. 15 seconds can be the difference between undercooked and overcooked.

>>8621354
>The entire purpose of using sucs (not fond) is because they have been caramelized.
Caramelized bits are not what I want. Caramelization creates bitter flavors. I want lots of Maillard reactions and little caramelization.

I just use ceramic pans.
Works for me, the brand is BK (I'm in the Netherlands). I just use metal tools.

IKEA 365+ pots and my 100+ year old cast iron wadjan do everything perfectly.

>>8621462
>Caramelization creates bitter flavors
That is completely wrong and it's obvious you do not know the slightest thing about cooking. Caramelization is sweet, not bitter.

>I want lots of Maillard reactions and little caramelization.
These are two different things. Maillard reaction happens with proteins and sugars. Caramelization happens with sugars only. Both produce sweet flavors.

I was being colloquial not scientific so perhaps that confused you. But rest assured, if you want maillard reactions you will need a nonstick pan and a source of protein. You will not get maillard reactions by browning nice and slow. And the sucs from a protein source are caused by maillard reactions.

I really suggest you stop posting because every post you've made has been objectively wrong.

1 non stick
1 cast iron
1 stainless steel

The holy trinity.

>>8621495
>I really suggest you stop posting because every post you've made has been objectively wrong.
Do you honestly believe everyone disagreeing with you is samefagging?

>>8621495
But rest assured, if you want maillard reactions you will need a pan that is not nonstick*

>>8621511
It's obvious we're having a discussion. If someone else is pretending to be him that's not my fault.

As far as "disagrees". What I am saying is objectively correct.

>>8621495
>sweet
That's even worse. I'm glad I don't do that.
>>8621495
>But rest assured, if you want maillard reactions you will need a nonstick pan and a source of protein.
Great, because that's what I use.
>>8621495
>You will not get maillard reactions by browning nice and slow.
It works for me. I have the pan surface temperature at a nice 318-322F. I go slow and it doesn't burn.

>>8621520
nevermind >>8621511 here

>you will need a pan that is not nonstick*
I'm glad you made that correction as I thought you were the nonstick guy.

>>8621524
>That's even worse. I'm glad I don't do that.
Well that's exactly what happens with maillard reactions.

>Great, because that's what I use.
It was a typo. You need a pan that is not nonstick.

>It works for me. I have the pan surface temperature at a nice 318-322F. I go slow and it doesn't burn.
That's irrelevant. Your food needs to reach that temperature not the pan. If you are cooking your meat to 300 degrees F your meat will be completely dried out. Please learn how to cook before posting on this board.

>>8619160
>are a treasure because they've been seasoned many times for you thus having superior nonstick and superior taste compared to a new one.
>that's it
you fucking retard
old ones are good not because they're seasoned, they're good because the surface finish is superior. it was a more expensive and toxic process, which is why we don't do it that way anymore.

>>8621543
>it was a more expensive and toxic process
No they stopped because they needed the rough texture for their factory preseasoning process.

Cast iron used to not be seasoned from the factory.

>>8621543
i specifically said "well-built".

>>8621551
there was a gap between those of like 25 years and I don't see how a pan that is easier to season would be harder to preseason while manufacturing.

>>8621562
>i dont see how craftsmanship goes down with mass production
Ray Charles?

>>8621557
you specifically said
>Old cast iron pans are a treasure because they've been seasoned many times for you thus having superior nonstick and superior taste compared to a new one.
which is dumb nonsense

>>8621564
I said nothing of the sort. did you even mean to reply to me?

>>8621566
what about that is wrong? because i didnt mention they have a better finish initially?

>>8621536
>Well that's exactly what happens with maillard reactions.
Yet, it's extremely savory and not sweet.
>>8621536
>It was a typo. You need a pan that is not nonstick.
It works for me.
>If you are cooking your meat to 300 degrees F your meat will be completely dried out.
It's a good thing that I don't do that.

>>8621571
>what about that is wrong?
everything about it. the right griswold fresh out of the dishwasher can be superior to anything lodge ever made with a couple evenings of attention.

>>8621588
>Yet, it's extremely savory and not sweet.
The nuances of cooking. When you sear a steak the same thing happens. Like it or not it's getting sweeter. Learn how to cook.

>It's a good thing that I don't do that.
Yes which is why you do not get the maillard reaction. You're calling browning meats the maillard reaction for some reason. That's just cooking meat. You aren't getting any reaction.

At this point you've just said false shit over and over and now you're ending with: "well it works for me!". Why are you even on this board if you don't want to learn how to cook better? Just leave. At the very least stop giving out advice when you're incompetent.

>>8621592
Why are cast iron users the most inarticulate? Is it the years of inbreeding?

>>8621359
So are the Amazon Basics ones.

>>8621592
which is what i said that old cast irons are superior

what exactly is your point?

>>8621605
Browning of meat is a maillard reaction. Clearly, you have no idea what you're talking about. Meat can be cooked without browning, that's just cooking of meat.
At this point, you've continued to lie about this and say that it doesn't work for you so it must not work for me. Why are you even on this board if you don't want to learn how to cook better? Just leave. At the very least stop giving out advice when you're incompetent.

>>8621692
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maillard_reaction
>The reaction is a form of non-enzymatic browning which typically proceeds rapidly from around 140 to 165 °C (280 to 330 °F).
Is your meat reaching a temperature of 300F?

File: stargazer.jpg (46KB, 692x389px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 692x389px

>>8621592
>>8621620
I'm not meaning to directly counter anything that's been said, but you are aware that you can buy new pans that have the same, if not better, finish as a vintage Griswold without the retarded collectors market prices, right?
I vouch for pic related

>>8621715
Heh. not hime but, You're not thinking internal serving temps are you? Because my pan hits higher temps than that sometime.

>>8621722
>$80
>two month wait

You don't own one and you know it.

>>8621723
He uses nonstick so the meat must that temp range on the surface. I find it very unlikely that he's getting good caramelization from a teflon pan.

>>8621715
Yes. The outside surface reaches to 315-319F. The pan temperature ranges from 318-322F.

>>8621734
I don't yet because I'm about a month into the waiting period. I used one for a catering gig at a friend's place and purchased two after.

>>8620262
The only valuable old cast iron is from professional chefs who actually took care of it right. The pan someone's grandma used you got in a yard sale isnt worth it unless your time it's worthless for the reasons you stated

>>8621747
Not from teflon no. Teflon is bad at doing that sort of thing, that's why no chef uses teflon to sear meat. But apparently you know better than professional chefs, right?

>>8621747
>The outside surface reaches to 315-319F.
>The pan temperature ranges from 318-322F.
Please tell me how you control heat to within 4 degrees.

Are there thicker stainless steel pans and pots that don't burn as easily?

>>8621772
all-clad

Will soy sauce or oyster sauce ruin my seasoning?

>>8621772
stainless steel begins to burn at temperatures above 1000F. What exactly are you cooking? jet fuel?

>>8621692
>Meat can be cooked without browning
?????

>>8617621
This. Fuck off inductcucks.

>>8621772
Do you want pure steel for some reason? There are lots of thick ply pans. If you're looking for pure steel, De Buyer makes some hefty carbon steel pans in the Mineral B line, but they don't have the same heating properties of a really thick pan (cast iron, ply, or whatever).

>>8621803
>>8621772
this

what are you cooking that requires high heat and stainless?

>>8621783
>Jet fuel
> melting steel
Steel melts at 1500 C which Jet Fuel can't even reach you fucking spook

>>8621826
spotted the 9/11 conspiracist

>>8621816
In my steel pot even something like rice gets burnt on the bottom at low heat and it's much hotter at the bottom in significant hotspots compared to aluminum pots. I think the thickness is due to this.
I don't use stainless steel for anything but sauce anymore because of this

>>8621850
sounds like an incredibly cheap pot.

>>8621850
I make rice in my 2qt all-clad all day long. It's tall and narrow so it's perfect for rice.

>>8621766
They don't use enough heat then. If you don't have enough BTUs in a single burner, your pan is going to cool down too much when you add the meat.
>>8621770
I have the weight of the meat, type, it's temperature, and approximate surface area. From that you can use ANSYS to model the amount of heat you would need to keep the pan and meat surface temperature within that range. I measured the corresponding BTU range on my burner and marked them on the handle. Once the pan is to temperature, I want to turn the heat up quite high and then quickly add the meat. Then I'll lower the heat in intervals from my ANSYS output. I have a laser probe that measures the surface temperature constantly. I've been working on some standard tables that will make it easier.
>>8621795
You can boil meat. It's not tasty, but it will be cooked. You have heard of boiling before, right?

>>8621871
>professional chefs are just cooking wrong!
(You)

File: 43.jpg (1MB, 3008x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3008x2000px

>>8621871
>boiled meats aren't brown

cast iron

>>8621891
>pink, white, gray
>brown

>>8621906
(You)

>>8621906
>color fight

>>8621832
kek

>>8621832

>>8621891
lets do the math.
what temp does water boil at typical atmospheric pressures?
What temp does miallard reactions occur?

>>8621940
212 F vs. ~300F

Are you suggesting the Maillard reaction occurs when you boil meat?

>>8621963
Why would I suggest that?
Are you retarded?

>>8621967
Because you said: "Browning of meat is a maillard reaction"

But when you boil meat it turns brown. By your own logic...

>>8621970
Where did I say that?
Is this your first day on 4chan?

>>8621976

>>8621795
>Meat can be cooked without browning
????

>>8621871
>You can boil meat. It's not tasty, but it will be cooked. You have heard of boiling before, right?


>inb4 not me

>>8621970
>But when you boil meat it turns brown.
not it doesn't.

>>8621988
I've been getting trolled for the past hour, haven't I?

I've never cooked anything but noodles: The Thread

>>8621999
Are you defining meat strictly as red meat? Because oxidation is not the same thing as Maillard reaction.

>>8622023
that's entirely my point.. the idiot said meat only turns brown because of the Maillard reaction... why are you jumping into reply chains without reading?

>>8621692
>Browning of meat is a maillard reaction

>>8622028
>Browning of meat is caramelization

>>8622028
Well perhaps you were getting trolled, because they did get you to say that meat doesn't turn brown when boiled. >>8621988
Some meat does, via oxidation, some meat doesn't.

>>8622043
Yes, that's what he said. And I agree, he's retarded.

>>8622046
That's a different poster. I didn't say that.

>>8621826
jet fuel cant melt steel beams

>>8620915
I hope you never ever cook. I can tell you would be a horrible chef

>>8621772
I'd buy demeyere if I had to buy pots and pans now but I had some all-clad given to me that is nearly as good. don't have any issues with burning anything.

File: autismo-9000.png (461KB, 864x1185px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 864x1185px

>>8621871
buy pic related to reach your final form

>>8622173
>demeyere
Have you used one much?
I like being able to scrub the fuck out of my pans with a scotch pad and abrasive. I don't care about micro scratches as much as the ease of keeping them clean. Seems like that would be a no-go with the supertechnowizardry surface treatment Demeyere uses, though.

>>8622233
you don't need to do that to your pans bro what is wrong with you

>>8622233
no I don't own any, only looked at one at a store. I think you can still use bar keeper's friend on them but idk for sure. I use steel wool on my all clad fry pan a couple times a year.

>>8622239
>need to
Of course not. I could deal with spending a lot more time cleaning them with just the abrasive and a sponge or rag, or deal with discoloration and cooked on oil and whatnot. I prefer to not spend so much time and keep them clean.

>there are people on this board that cook steaks on teflon
Why?

>>8622199
>paying $1,800 for a consumer range that can only fit a single pot or pan

>>8622318
It was a troll by Raymond Blanc years ago and they took it serious to become more like a "serious chef." Wait till they start deglazing a teflon pan with water.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGUwDi3k-hY

>>8622502
this mother fucker deglazed a teflon pan lmao

>>8622540
...with water.

>>8622576
is there sauce that it was him trolling? i mean i saw another video where he cooks the steak properly

>>8622585
Nigga, he uses teflon
fries the steak in butter from beginning
deglazes with water
and says he never uses olive oil for saute due to the low smoke point.

and you need sauce that he's trolling?
It hit all the /ck/ trolls.

>>8622592
he could just be retarded

>>8622623
Look him up. He has 2 stars.

>>8622502
>troll
/ck/ just can't accept that teflon pans are perfectly fine for cooking meat and making pan sauces.

File: 1482536456159.gif (2MB, 245x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 245x320px

>>8622752
>teflon pans are perfectly fine for cooking meat and making pan sauces.

>>8622199
>basically a science lab induction plate for cooking
That's really neat, but holy fuck it's over the top. At least it's more useful than those sous vide set-ups costing the same.
>plus or minus 1°f accuracy from 32°f to 572°f
It's even accurate enough to use as a sous vide heater.

>>8614598
TPBP

>>8621772
Dou you mean stainless steel pans that dont burn FOOD as easily? If the food sticks to your stainless steel pan it has nothing to do with the thickness of the bottom, you are simply using your stainless wrong. Look up "seasoning stainless steel" on youtube, it will change your life.

>>8614912
Sorry but that omelette looks like its swimming in oil or some other liquid.

Soo many NEETS on this its not even real;

If you dont really care that much about cooking, and want a pan for mostly everything, get a thick aluminium non stick pan.

If your into cooking get a few;

A non stick as above, use this for eggs, fish, anything delicate.

A Carbon steel pan - This is excellent for searing meats and for hob to oven cooking. Lighter than cast iron and heats up quicker. Also needs seasoned before use. Cheap

A Stainless skillet - use this for anything acidic, such as tomatoes, citrus etc.. very good for making tomato based pan sauces in. Doesn't really season so you need to be careful of temp. Look for one that is fully lined with aluminium and not just a disk on the base.

Don't buy into the whole meme of a seasoned pan is as non-stick as Teflon, it isn't, not nearly, and will never be. Your non stick pan should cost about £25-30 use either wood, plastic or silicone on it. It'll last about 3 odd years, when its done through it out and get a new one.

>>8624393
Properly seasoned pans can be close to non-stick, close enough to have very little practical difference. It's a bit of a trade off in care and durability.
Not meaning to shill, but I really was impressed when I got to use >>8621722
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH_mWzpR0bs
It sticks like tar out of the box, but then he seasons it better.

File: griswold-10.jpg (796KB, 1346x910px) Image search: [Google]

796KB, 1346x910px

My vintage 1920s 12-inch cast iron pan. Slock as silk. Simply the best fucking frying pan ever made.

>>8624428
that thing look heavy af

>>8614573
Kiwame frying pans

>>8621722
This makes my dick rock hard.

>>8615169
>Everything else?

A pressure cooker.

>>8622199
>$900 off

You'd be stupid NOT to buy one