Dear Everyone:

I am thinking to buy a few new pots. There are basically two types to
select: the ones with non-stick coating (presumably
polytetrafluoroethylene) and the stainless ones.

I mostly use the pots to boil things with lots of water in which case
burning is not a concern. Sometimes, however, I make a thick porridge
with, for instance, corn grits or oats, or I may cook some vegetables
with very little water at the bottom of the pot. In these latter
cases, burning may occur if I am not careful enough.

The non-stick pots may prevent burning to some extent, but in time,
the non-stick coating gets degraded and worn off, and apparently, you
eat some of it with your food. And I also read that there might be
safety concerns with the coating chemicals.

The stainless cookwares are shiny and look lovely, but I have little
experiences with them. They are inexpensive. And I have even heard
about STAINLESS NON-STICK cookwares.

Generally speaking, what are the pros and cons for non-stick as well
as stainless cookwares? How about the Stainless Non-Stick ones if
there indeed such things?

Thank you for reading and replying!

--Roland

"qquito" > wrote in message
>
> Generally speaking, what are the pros and cons for non-stick as well
> as stainless cookwares? How about the Stainless Non-Stick ones if
> there indeed such things?
>
> Thank you for reading and replying!
>
> --Roland

For pots, you can't beat good stainless steel for 99.9% of all uses. Easy to
clean and keep nice looking. Buy a good brand and it will last you 40 to 75
years. Buy a coated pot and toss in in a couple of years.

Oh pshaw, on Sun 25 Nov 2007 04:21:38p, Edwin Pawlowski meant to say...

>
> "qquito" > wrote in message
>>
>> Generally speaking, what are the pros and cons for non-stick as well
>> as stainless cookwares? How about the Stainless Non-Stick ones if
>> there indeed such things?
>>
>> Thank you for reading and replying!
>>
>> --Roland
>
> For pots, you can't beat good stainless steel for 99.9% of all uses.
> Easy to clean and keep nice looking. Buy a good brand and it will last
> you 40 to 75 years. Buy a coated pot and toss in in a couple of years.
>
>
>

I have and use only 1 non-stick pan, and that's used almost exclusively for
scrambling eggs with no added fat or release spray.

--
Wayne Boatwright

Date: Sunday, November 25th,2007

*******************************************
Countdown 'til Christmas
4wks 7hrs 30mins
*******************************************
Bad Command: (A)bort (R)etry (T)ake
RAM hostage
*******************************************

> For pots, you can't beat good stainless steel for 99.9% of all uses. Easy to
> clean and keep nice looking. Buy a good brand and it will last you 40 to 75
> years. Buy a coated pot and toss in in a couple of years.

True.

On Nov 25, 3:21 pm, "Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote:
> "qquito" > wrote in message
>
> > Generally speaking, what are the pros and cons for non-stick as well
> > as stainless cookwares? How about the Stainless Non-Stick ones if
> > there indeed such things?
>
> > Thank you for reading and replying!
>
> > --Roland
>
> For pots, you can't beat good stainless steel for 99.9% of all uses. Easy to
> clean and keep nice looking. Buy a good brand and it will last you 40 to 75
> years. Buy a coated pot and toss in in a couple of years.

In rec.food.equipment qquito > wrote:
> Dear Everyone:
>
> I am thinking to buy a few new pots. There are basically two types to
> select: the ones with non-stick coating (presumably
> polytetrafluoroethylene) and the stainless ones.

I believe you have more choices than that: In particular, there are some
hard-anodized aluminum utensils which claim and may in fact have advantages
over other types. Calphalon is one popular brand, but pricey.

In my experience, don't count on stainless as a low-stick surface unless it's
kept very clean and well oiled. My personal favorite for low moisture cooking
is cast iron, but it too must be well oiled. For delicate things like eggs,
Teflon is hard to beat (and easy to scratch!) but lets one minimise fats.

Stainless pots have their uses, but they're not the only choice. Mild carbon
steel works well also, just don't wash it too carefully 8-)

bob prohaska

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:52:55 -0500, "Janet" > wrote:

>Non-stick is only useful for eggs, IMNSHO.

I'm not a big lover of non-stick either, but it is interesting to me the high
number of television chefs (both PBS and Food Channel) using non-stick pans for
everything, even searing meat. If they don't want the fond for a sauce, they use
non-stick, even pre-heating to temps that I would never consider.

-- Larry

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> pltrgyst > wrote:
>
>> I'm not a big lover of non-stick either, but it is interesting to me the
>> high
>> number of television chefs (both PBS and Food Channel) using non-stick
>> pans
>> for
>> everything, even searing meat.
>
> You can't sear meat on a non-stick surface.
>
> No, they're not using non-stick. Really.
>
Yes they are and yes you can. Not your mother's non-stick pans.
Janet

In article
>,
mysti > wrote:

> Buy a good brand and it will last you 40 to 75
> > years. Buy a coated pot and toss in in a couple of years.
>
> True.

I've got Calphlon, Analon and Circulon non-sticks. The higher quality
ones do last. I am particularly pleased with the endurance of my
Circulon (now marketed as Circulon Classic) 12 inch saute. My wife has
been particular rough on it (over heated empty, used metal utensils,
etc.) and it is still holding its own after almost six years. A five
year old Calphalon 12 inch saute I got has also been similarly abused by
her and is still surviving in excellent shape.

Now a T-Fal or Revere, I would equate those to single-use 35-mm cameras,
especially in y wife's hands.

jt