4 ms·

> I started by timing how long it took the pans to bring a cup of water to a boil over the maximum gas flame on my stovetop. The copper and the cast iron each t

> I started by timing how long it took the pans to bring a cup of water to a boil over the maximum gas flame on my stovetop. The copper and the cast iron each took 3 minutes, the aluminum-stainless combination 2.5, and the thin nonstick aluminum just 2 minutes. Light and cheap win for speed. Not sure that's the right test... speed isn't what you're going for. For example, aluminum foil would very quickly conduct heat straight to the water opposite the flame, rather than distribute it broadly across the surface. Because heat transfers fastest across the gradient where the temperature difference is greatest, foil would win the day even though it's a terrible cooking surface. A heavy copper pan would evenly distribute the heat it's given to the sides and all over the bottom rather than straight to the bottom. That's kind of the point.

mdergosits 11y ago
I thought the same thing. There could've been more scientific tests, maybe an infrared camera to see the heat distribution rather than the burn marks on the parchment paper.
rtkwe 11y ago
> The heavy copper and the light aluminum pans produced evenly toasted heat maps. The stainless-clad aluminum did pretty well, too. But the cast-iron pan scorched a small area, and the pattern was familiar. Two paragraphs later in the article the author talks about the heat gradients of the different pans.
draw_down 11y ago
Easy, easy. There are other tests after that one. Gotta keep reading.
Consultant32452 11y ago
It also depends on what you're trying to do, you might not want a pan that gives up all its heat so quickly. For example, if you want to sear a steak and then cook it in that pan you don't want a pan that will lose all its heat as soon as you put that steak on it. For a task like that you want probably cast iron or at least stainless or something. Though good stainless pans generally have copper linings to help more evenly distribute the heat. If I were just frying an egg or something then aside from the lack of non-stick your aluminum foil would be just fine.

mdergosits 11y ago

I thought the same thing. There could've been more scientific tests, maybe an infrared camera to see the heat distribution rather than the burn marks on the parchment paper.

rtkwe 11y ago

> The heavy copper and the light aluminum pans produced evenly toasted heat maps. The stainless-clad aluminum did pretty well, too. But the cast-iron pan scorched a small area, and the pattern was familiar. Two paragraphs later in the article the author talks about the heat gradients of the different pans.

draw_down 11y ago

Easy, easy. There are other tests after that one. Gotta keep reading.

Consultant32452 11y ago

It also depends on what you're trying to do, you might not want a pan that gives up all its heat so quickly. For example, if you want to sear a steak and then cook it in that pan you don't want a pan that will lose all its heat as soon as you put that steak on it. For a task like that you want probably cast iron or at least stainless or something. Though good stainless pans generally have copper linings to help more evenly distribute the heat. If I were just frying an egg or something then aside from the lack of non-stick your aluminum foil would be just fine.