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
*******************************************

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 23:32:26 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>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.

I thought the same thing when I read the OP. Eggs and infrequently
crepes.
--

modom

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

> 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.

from qquito > contains these words:

> 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.

You left out a very important third type, which is enamel,
particularly enameled cast-iron.

Tangentially, we were surprised recently when the enamel coating
on one of our Le Cruesets failed. It was not overheated or
physically abused, but a largish chunk or enamel separated (probably
0.5 by 0.7 cm). We feel like we should write to them to complain
but probably won't get around to it.

Other than this one event we're completely happy with the product.

Steve

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:24:15 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:


>Tangentially, we were surprised recently when the enamel coating
>on one of our Le Cruesets failed. It was not overheated or
>physically abused, but a largish chunk or enamel separated (probably
>0.5 by 0.7 cm). We feel like we should write to them to complain
>but probably won't get around to it.

You should complain. Le Crueset has a wonderful reputation on
replacing pots. I have read of many folks that have had gotten a
totally new pot from Le Crueset, if something happened such as this.
Even if the pot was incredibly old, or something.

Christine

Christine Dabney > wrote:

>On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:24:15 +0000 (UTC),

>>Tangentially, we were surprised recently when the enamel coating
>>on one of our Le Cruesets failed. It was not overheated or
>>physically abused, but a largish chunk or enamel separated (probably
>>0.5 by 0.7 cm). We feel like we should write to them to complain
>>but probably won't get around to it.

>You should complain. Le Crueset has a wonderful reputation on
>replacing pots. I have read of many folks that have had gotten a
>totally new pot from Le Crueset, if something happened such as this.
>Even if the pot was incredibly old, or something.

Thanks for the tip. We'll probably do that -- it's a small #18
pot, but to replace it would still cost $70 (clearance price from
Macy's, including a $10 coupon).

Steve

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:38:59 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:


>
>Thanks for the tip. We'll probably do that -- it's a small #18
>pot, but to replace it would still cost $70 (clearance price from
>Macy's, including a $10 coupon).
>
>Steve

My understanding is that they will replace it totally free. I don't
remember if you have to send the old pot back.

Christine

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

modom (palindrome guy) wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 23:32:26 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>
>>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.
>
>
> I thought the same thing when I read the OP. Eggs and infrequently
> crepes.

Same here.

Most of my cooking (pasta, hamburger, skillet casseroles, anything
boiled or steamed, etc.) is done in stainless pans or skillets, but a
few things are reserved for well seasoned cast iron. Like pork chops and
steaks. I've got one non-stick pan, and one non-stick pot. The pan is
used only for potstickers, omlets, and crepes, and the non-stick pot is
never used; but the lid fits my stainless pans, sometimes used to steam
things.

I've got a couple large stainless steel pots used for steaming lobsters,
making beef broth, and boiling homemade beer wort.

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