On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:15:57 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:
>
> sf wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 21:40:06 -0700, isw > wrote:
> >
> > > I've just become the proud user of a double convection oven -- A
> > > kitchenAid.
> > >
> > > Seems to work OK, but the instructions are a bit sparse at best.
> > >
> > > The user manual suggests that cooking time and temperature can both be
> > > cut by using the convection mode, which is fine, but does that mean that
> > > I could/should use the convection mode always, for everything?
> > >
> > > Or are there some things that come out better if *not* cooked using the
> > > convection mode?
> > >
> > > Any suggestions appreciated.
> > >
> >
> > I wouldn't cook a souffle or anything that resembles a souffle (like
> > Dutch Babies, Yorkshire pudding or popovers) in a convection oven.
>
> Well, in a standard convection oven. The same goes for most cakes as
> well as the unidirectional fan driven airflow will tend to make them
> lopsided. Some high end commercial convection ovens reverse the fan(s)
> every minute or so to prevent lopsided baking. Most everything else will
> do nicely with convection on since it helps keep the temperature more
> even in the oven.

I am a home cook and wouldn't use the convect mode for anything I
wanted lift on because they simply do not get as high with convection
mode as they do when the heat comes only from the bottom. I don't
even like to bake cookies on convect. My ovens heat evenly and I
don't have hot/cold spots, so that part is moot.

I don't use convect when roasting whole chickens either, because
turning the heat up to 400-425° and using a vertical roaster works
well for me. They come out evenly cooked, juicy (including the white
meat) and well browned. Maybe convect has a purpose in a commercial
setting, but I am not a commercial baker, I don't like commercially
baked cookies and I haven't found convect to be a useful option when
baking or roasting.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.