FoodBanter.com - View Single Post

Dave Bell

Alan wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:56:18 -0600, Eric Jorgensen
> > wrote:
>
>
>>On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:58:26 -0500
>>Alan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:47:59 GMT, Mike H >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Alan wrote in
>>>>news:7656e25b25ev1o0oek7j4uplk810lf7v2k@ 4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I think that aluminum has a better conductivity rating than cast
>>>>>iron. That's what a post in rec.food.cooking (?) said when they
>>>>
>>>>were > discussing cast iron frying pans vs. cast aluminum ones.
>>>>
>>>>Beter conductivity, but not better retention. Cast iron will stay
>>>>hotter longer.
>>>
>>>And this is an advantage because . . . . .
>>
>>
>> Better for searing meat.
>
>
> Actually, I thought you wanted to give the heat up to the meat, in
> which case better conductivity would seem to accomplish the goal.
>
> I would guess that the iron "staying hotter longer" means it isn't
> getting the heat onto the meat.
>
> Alan

No. In this case, "staying hotter longer" is another way of saying "has
greater thermal mass". You preheat the pan, and when you drop the steak
on it, it still has enough kick to sear the other side, too.