So recently I happened to open up a crockpot that had been gifted

>>1136991
>These already suck up a shit ton of electricity,

>crockpot

wat?

>>1136991
You expect chink shit to be throughfully designed?

>>1136991
>These already suck up a shit ton of electricity
Tell me, do you expect that you pay more or less than ten cents for the electricity to make a slow-cooked meal?

>Can you think of any reason why this *wouldn't* be a good idea?
Because the cooker is designed to maintain a suitable thermal equilibrium at its heat output to slow cook food and keep itself cool enough to avoid internal damage. Adding insulation would produce lower side wall temperatures and higher internal temperatures. This could in principle lead to unsuitably hot cooking and damage to wiring.

Sometimes when i'm cooking my pots and pans get real hot, so hot that you'd burn yourself if you touched the outside of them!

Has anyone thought of putting insulation around them?

Or like, a handle?

>>1136991
You're going to burn your food. As already mentioned, they are designed to achieve a specific heat transfer rate in regards to losses and power input with no insulation in mind.

>>1137066
The risk of getting burned wasn't really the point, although there's a difference between the outside of a pot or pan getting hot and the outside of an appliance getting hot.

The risk of overheating is a real one, but personally I'm pretty sure the lack of insulation is due to cost and company apathy more than necessity from tight temperature specifications.

As I said I have this spare one that I don't care about, so I think I might give it a try. Likely I'll measure the interior temps before and after and consider it a failure if they're too different.