Advantages and disadvantages please.

On Mon 11 Apr 2005 05:09:41a, Andy wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> Advantages and disadvantages please.

Stainless, Durable, Non-Reactive

Poor Heat Conductor (if used alone)

Most good SS cookware today is combined in layers (at least on the bottom)
with copper and/or aluminum or other alloys which provide good and even heat
conductivity.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974

On Mon 11 Apr 2005 05:27:32a, Wayne Boatwright wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Mon 11 Apr 2005 05:09:41a, Andy wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> Advantages and disadvantages please.
>
> Stainless, Durable, Non-Reactive
>
> Poor Heat Conductor (if used alone)
>
> Most good SS cookware today is combined in layers (at least on the
> bottom) with copper and/or aluminum or other alloys which provide good
> and even heat conductivity.

Oops, sorry, I misread cookwear for cooktop.

Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real disadvantages other
than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show easily.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974

"Andy" > wrote in message
u...
> Advantages and disadvantages please.

Can't think of any-- easy to clean with windex!
>
>

"Andy" > wrote in message
u...
> Advantages and disadvantages please.
>
>

The main one I know is that it scratches with many cleaners - (like the
swirls left in a stainless sink when you use the wrong pad or cleaner)
basically, compared to glazed tile, it is "soft".

On 11 Apr 2005 14:30:36 +0200, Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real disadvantages other
> than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show easily.

But it cleans up easily too... no grout to scrub.

sf




Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:30:07 -0500, -- wrote:

> The main one I know is that it scratches with many cleaners - (like the
> swirls left in a stainless sink when you use the wrong pad or cleaner)
> basically, compared to glazed tile, it is "soft".

Well, don't use the wrong pad or cleaner if you don't like the
"brushed" look. Personally, I don't care. It's not a bad thing to
have a patina on SS.



Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

Andy wrote:
> Advantages and disadvantages please.

It's essentially an esthetic decision... and since we can't see your
kitchen... and even if we could there's no accounting for taste. So
who chooses your clothing, your mommy.

Sheldon

"sf" > wrote in message
news
> On 11 Apr 2005 14:30:36 +0200, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
> > Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real disadvantages
other
> > than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show easily.
>
> But it cleans up easily too... no grout to scrub.

so put in brown, black, or dark grey grout, use sealed grout, and use a
supplemental sealer on the sealed grout -

>
> sf
>
>
>
>
> Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

"Andy" > wrote in message
u...
> Advantages and disadvantages please.
>

in addition to the extra care in cleaning stainless over cleaning tile, you
also need to put 5/8" sheetrock in nail-offset fire-proof construction to
get the same code rating as tile
- (and you will need to meet code in the cooking area to have your
insurance pay out if there is a fire)
(in the short answer, fire-resistant construction in the cooking area means
no metal from cooktop area- e.g., backsplash - may contact framing
material - thus fasteners must be "blind", e.g. by using two sheets of
fire-rated material with nails offset sheet-to-sheet so as to not provide a
path thru the two sheets, or the fasteners to the framing be isolated by a
top layer of tile)

>

A little birdie told me that Wayne Boatwright >
said:

>Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real disadvantages other
>than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show easily.

My parents had copper tiles behind the stove. It was very nice. I wonder
if I should do something like that, instead of wallpapering? Hmmm. Thanks
for the inspiration, Andy (OP - I didn't see the original).

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

Far as I can tell, someone wrote:
>Advantages and disadvantages please.

Keep in mind that the word is stain less, not stain proof.

I have a stainless steel fridge, and it shows every finger print and spatter.

Also, where a magnet was placed, there is rust. It canbe removed, but the appearence
of new stainless is far better than older stainless.

See if you can observe someone elses before investing in your own.

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Andy wrote:
>> Advantages and disadvantages please.
>
> It's essentially an esthetic decision... and since we can't see your
> kitchen... and even if we could there's no accounting for taste.

I prefer hot and spicy

So
> who chooses your clothing, your mommy.
>

Mainly

-- wrote:
> "Andy" > wrote in message
> u...
> > Advantages and disadvantages please.
> >
>
> in addition to the extra care in cleaning stainless over cleaning
tile, you
> also need to put 5/8" sheetrock in nail-offset fire-proof
construction to
> get the same code rating as tile
> - (and you will need to meet code in the cooking area to have your
> insurance pay out if there is a fire)

I can't believe they could enforce that; certainly other aspects of
the house don't have to meet code. For example, my insurance agent
said we could get a discount if we re-wired the house, but she didn't
mention that electrical fire claims would not be paid if we kept the
original wiring. I think it would be big news if that were the case.

My house is 50 years old; the wall behind the stove is old sheetrock
of some kind, probably with a plaster skim coat, and paint over that.
Certainly fire-resistant, but nothing special.

> (in the short answer, fire-resistant construction in the cooking
area means
> no metal from cooktop area- e.g., backsplash - may contact framing
> material - thus fasteners must be "blind", e.g. by using two sheets
of
> fire-rated material with nails offset sheet-to-sheet so as to not
provide a
> path thru the two sheets, or the fasteners to the framing be isolated
by a
> top layer of tile)
>


Cindy Hamilton

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 13:54:18 -0500, -- wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> news
> > On 11 Apr 2005 14:30:36 +0200, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> >
> > > Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real disadvantages
> other
> > > than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show easily.
> >
> > But it cleans up easily too... no grout to scrub.
>
> so put in brown, black, or dark grey grout, use sealed grout, and use a
> supplemental sealer on the sealed grout -
>
I hate tile too.



Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 14:53:41 -0500, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:

> A little birdie told me that Wayne Boatwright >
> said:
>
> >Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real disadvantages other
> >than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show easily.
>
> My parents had copper tiles behind the stove. It was very nice. I wonder
> if I should do something like that, instead of wallpapering? Hmmm. Thanks
> for the inspiration, Andy (OP - I didn't see the original).
>
Didn't Martha Stewart feature metal wallpapers a few years ago? It
was less expensive and seemed to have some of the same qualities as
the real thing (easy to wipe clean).




Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> A little birdie told me that Wayne Boatwright
>
> said:
>
> >Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real
disadvantages other
> >than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show
easily.
>
> My parents had copper tiles behind the stove. It was very nice. I
wonder
> if I should do something like that, instead of wallpapering? Hmmm.
Thanks
> for the inspiration, Andy (OP - I didn't see the original).

Sure... Home Depot has them, 4" sq. copper or stainless, shiny or
brushed finish, peel n' stick. But I think they look cheap/tacky, and
with all those seams are difficult to clean (and spraying with even
mild cleaner will eventually dissolve the adhesive). I have a
cloth-like wallpaper on that small space behind my stove... it mastches
the rest of the wallpaper trim in my kitchen and holds up well...
besides, I see no reason to ever get splatters on the wall behind the
stove, unless one is a slovenly filthy dirty kitchen slob.. and then
may as will duct-tape a sheet of heavy duty aluminaum foil to the wall,
and simply change it when it gets too disgusting. And there is no
reason for additional fire proofing materials adjacent to a residential
stove, not even for a commercial-style unit... only a true commercial
cooking appliance requires abiding by an elevated code, which can vary
greatly by municipality.


Sheldon

sf wrote:
> On 11 Apr 2005 14:30:36 +0200, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>
>> Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real disadvantages other
>> than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show easily.
>
>
> But it cleans up easily too... no grout to scrub.
>
> sf

We put vinyl flooring up for the backsplash. Actually, it runs all
around the kitchen from the bottom of the cabinets to the top of the
counter. Easy to clean and comes in lots of patterns.

--Charlene


--
A witty saying proves nothing. --Voltaire


email perronnelle at earthlink . net

"Charlene Charette" > wrote

> We put vinyl flooring up for the backsplash. Actually, it runs all around
> the kitchen from the bottom of the cabinets to the top of the counter.
> Easy to clean and comes in lots of patterns.

Interesting idea. I put vinyl tiles as shelf liners, they are
fabulous, but also out of sight.

nancy

A little birdie told me that sf > said:

>Didn't Martha Stewart feature metal wallpapers a few years ago? It
>was less expensive and seemed to have some of the same qualities as
>the real thing (easy to wipe clean).

I suppose I'll have to find a K-Mart to check that out. <G>

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

A little birdie told me that "Sheldon" > said:

>Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>
>> My parents had copper tiles behind the stove. It was very nice. I
>> wonder if I should do something like that, instead of wallpapering?
>
>Sure... Home Depot has them, 4" sq. copper or stainless, shiny or
>brushed finish, peel n' stick. But I think they look cheap/tacky, and
>with all those seams are difficult to clean (and spraying with even
>mild cleaner will eventually dissolve the adhesive).

Good points, all of them.

>I have a
>cloth-like wallpaper on that small space behind my stove... it mastches
>the rest of the wallpaper trim in my kitchen and holds up well...

I have paper that matches my dining area trim, as well. I've been planning
on using that, but am waiting for some re-wiring on that wall before I do
anything about ut,

>besides, I see no reason to ever get splatters on the wall behind the
>stove, unless one is a slovenly filthy dirty kitchen slob.. and then
>may as will duct-tape a sheet of heavy duty aluminaum foil to the wall,
>and simply change it when it gets too disgusting.

LOL! Never thought of that. On the other hand, I wouldn't do it, either.

>And there is no
>reason for additional fire proofing materials adjacent to a residential
>stove, not even for a commercial-style unit... only a true commercial
>cooking appliance requires abiding by an elevated code, which can vary
>greatly by municipality.

Good. I wasn't going to mess around with that, either. I'll likely just
use my wallpaper. I have enough that I can replace it from time to time,
if need be.

I need one of those tennis racquets that you put over the frying pan to
prevent spatters. Does such a thing exist for tomato-based sauces?

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> -- wrote:
> > "Andy" > wrote in message
> > u...
> > > Advantages and disadvantages please.
> > >
> >
> > in addition to the extra care in cleaning stainless over cleaning
> tile, you
> > also need to put 5/8" sheetrock in nail-offset fire-proof
> construction to
> > get the same code rating as tile
> > - (and you will need to meet code in the cooking area to have your
> > insurance pay out if there is a fire)
>
> I can't believe they could enforce that; certainly other aspects of
> the house don't have to meet code.

The key is that any CHANGES you make must meet the latest code, structure to
surface. Codes basically address access and egress, structure and integrity,
and (in this case) fire protection.

If it exists but does not meet the present code, in most residences it
almost always is "grandfathered in" (allowed to remain since it met the old
code until such time as you change something in it- BTW, public spaces
rarely grandfather).
So if it's not compliant today but met the old code when it was
installed, moot.

But if you remodel and fail to meet the new code, and damage arises because
of that non-compliance, your insurance is almost always null and void.

In this particular situation of a stove backsplash: if you replace a
backsplash and fail to meet the fire-spread- protection for the subsurface,
and a fire spreads because of the failure to comply, IMHE you would be found
negligent for not complying with the exisitng code during that remodel.

For example, my insurance agent
> said we could get a discount if we re-wired the house, but she didn't
> mention that electrical fire claims would not be paid if we kept the
> original wiring.

No, they could not fail to pay on the existing wiring left untouched because
that old wiring is code compliant with the code at the time it was built,
and they wrote the original policy knowing (legally) that wiring was in
place.

The new wiring allegedly has advantages over the old as far as safety goes
(rodent resitance, aluminum wiring not derated, etc.) and is less likely to
burn down your house, so there is less risk with new wiring, thus the rate
reduction is for less risk on their part.

>I think it would be big news if that were the case.
>
> My house is 50 years old; the wall behind the stove is old sheetrock
> of some kind, probably with a plaster skim coat, and paint over that.
> Certainly fire-resistant, but nothing special.
>

You make an assumption on a defined parameter- "fire resistant".
"Fire resistant" is not an opinion made by non-professionally licensed
persons, it is a term determined by government-limited specific persons
(usually PEs or government authorized code inspectors); a defined term with
criterion and standards (e.g., UL or IBC/IBFC).
E.g, some years back, it used to require 5/8" sheetrock to be fire
resistant - 1/2" sheetrock was not fire resistant even if blind fastened.

> > (in the short answer, fire-resistant construction in the cooking
> area means
> > no metal from cooktop area- e.g., backsplash - may contact framing
> > material - thus fasteners must be "blind", e.g. by using two sheets
> of
> > fire-rated material with nails offset sheet-to-sheet so as to not
> provide a
> > path thru the two sheets, or the fasteners to the framing be isolated
> by a
> > top layer of tile)
> >
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>

>And there is no
>reason for additional fire proofing materials adjacent to a
residential
>stove, not even for a commercial-style unit... only a true commercial
>cooking appliance requires abiding by an elevated code, which can vary

>greatly by municipality.


Good. I wasn't going to mess around with that, either. I'll likely
just
use my wallpaper. I have enough that I can replace it from time to
time,
if need be.

I need one of those tennis racquets that you put over the frying pan to

prevent spatters.


I simply lower the heat... I'm not running a race... I don't need
burned pans, because burned pans mean burned food. Some people cook
for showmanship, I cook for goodness. If grease is spattering all over
you're doing something wrong, like frying at the smoke point, and then
your food will taste like shit, burned shit, but shit nevertheless.


Does such a thing exist for tomato-based sauces?

Carol

Yes. It's called a pot lid. <g>

But lower the heat... the only time you want a boil is if it's plain
water, as in cooking pasta... you never ever boil tomato sauce, not
unless it's on top of a pizza in a hot oven... which is why pizza sauce
is always a raw sauce, it gets fully cooked in the oven. If your
tomato sauce is still spattering even after lowering the heat then you
need a deeper pot... I mean like if you fill a pot to within an inch of
the brim and crank up the heat till your stove, floor, and walls turn
red, then you're a kitchen slob.

Sheldon

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
oups.com...

over-enthusiatically and erroneously advising on fire codes and other
matters of safety

>And there is no
>reason for additional fire proofing materials adjacent to a residential
>stove, not even for a commercial-style unit

And since you are
1) well versed in such technical matters of fire protection requirements,
2) with the requisite five years experience as a practicing engineer in the
field for those providing licensed professional advice in such matters of
fire safety,
3) and since you are undoubtedly currently licensed by your state to be
dispensing advice as to code and safety requirements, then
4) you will provide us all with your professional engineers seal on a
document which so states?
And have the board decide if you can keep your license after giving such
utterly asinine advice about fire requirements.

As to the double-talking comment on commercial stoves - check the IBC on
cooking appliances (which includes ranges and cooktops)

And on a more informational note -
since it is obvious you are way out of your league - some advice from
someone who's earned his spurs and read his autopsies.
It's not about boiling water - its about things like towels and pads
hung nearby that ignite when the cook is distracted and they heat the
stovetop area to thousands of degrees in minutes; its about common grease
fires; and its about violently ejected flaming grease and the backsplash
sheet flame caused by the person who panics in a grease fire and throws
water on the fire, or uses a pressurized fire exinguisher and blows the
flaming grease onto the backsplash.

that is what backsplashes do - they are not a decorative holder for
wallpaper.

(Apologies for being overly sensitive... but the various posts advising to
use wallpaper, vinyl, and other toxic and combustibles juxtaposed on the
serious burn injury reports reading I need to do today, just set me on edge
on this topic.)

>
> Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> > A little birdie told me that Wayne Boatwright
> >
> > said:
> >
> > >Advantages listed still stand. Can't think of any real
> disadvantages other
> > >than maintaining appearance from spatters, etc. They will show
> easily.
> >
> > My parents had copper tiles behind the stove. It was very nice. I
> wonder
> > if I should do something like that, instead of wallpapering? Hmmm.
> Thanks
> > for the inspiration, Andy (OP - I didn't see the original).
>
> Sure... Home Depot has them, 4" sq. copper or stainless, shiny or
> brushed finish, peel n' stick. But I think they look cheap/tacky, and
> with all those seams are difficult to clean (and spraying with even
> mild cleaner will eventually dissolve the adhesive). I have a
> cloth-like wallpaper on that small space behind my stove... it mastches
> the rest of the wallpaper trim in my kitchen and holds up well...
> besides, I see no reason to ever get splatters on the wall behind the
> stove, unless one is a slovenly filthy dirty kitchen slob.. and then
> may as will duct-tape a sheet of heavy duty aluminaum foil to the wall,
> and simply change it when it gets too disgusting. And there is no
> reason for additional fire proofing materials adjacent to a residential
> stove, not even for a commercial-style unit... only a true commercial
> cooking appliance requires abiding by an elevated code, which can vary
> greatly by municipality.
>
>
> Sheldon
>

A little birdie told me that "Sheldon" > said:

In response to Carol's statement:
>I need one of those tennis racquets that you put over the frying pan to
>prevent spatters.
>
>I simply lower the heat... I'm not running a race... I don't need
>burned pans, because burned pans mean burned food. Some people cook
>for showmanship, I cook for goodness. If grease is spattering all over
>you're doing something wrong, like frying at the smoke point, and then
>your food will taste like shit, burned shit, but shit nevertheless.

It only happens when I'm frying hamburgers or steaks, and want a crispy
brown surface. If I keep the heat down, they literally boil in their own
juices (still haven't found the meat grinder since moving here).

>Does such a thing exist for tomato-based sauces?
>
>Carol
>
>Yes. It's called a pot lid. <g>

Smart-ass!

>But lower the heat... the only time you want a boil is if it's plain
>water, as in cooking pasta... you never ever boil tomato sauce, not
>unless it's on top of a pizza in a hot oven... which is why pizza sauce
>is always a raw sauce, it gets fully cooked in the oven. If your
>tomato sauce is still spattering even after lowering the heat then you
>need a deeper pot... I mean like if you fill a pot to within an inch of
>the brim and crank up the heat till your stove, floor, and walls turn
>red, then you're a kitchen slob.

I think that Kitchen Slob only applies if the tomato sauce actually reaches
the ceiling, but I could be wrong. I do fill the pot only one third full,
and keep the temp at 2 or 3, out of a possible 6. But my tomato sauces
seem to be trans-species, and were raised as popcorn. Keeping a spoon in
the pot does seem to help.

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:57:34 -0500, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:

> A little birdie told me that sf > said:
>
> >Didn't Martha Stewart feature metal wallpapers a few years ago? It
> >was less expensive and seemed to have some of the same qualities as
> >the real thing (easy to wipe clean).
>
> I suppose I'll have to find a K-Mart to check that out. <G>
>
I don't think they were advertised as being in her "line", it was a
designer feature.




Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:07:35 -0500, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:


>I need one of those tennis racquets that you put over the frying pan to
>prevent spatters. Does such a thing exist for tomato-based sauces?
>
>Carol

I found that a spatter guard (mostly used for frying) works well for
long simmering tomato sauces.

Pan Ohco

A little birdie told me that Pan Ohco > said:

>On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:07:35 -0500, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>
>>I need one of those tennis racquets that you put over the frying pan to
>>prevent spatters. Does such a thing exist for tomato-based sauces?
>
>I found that a spatter guard (mostly used for frying) works well for
>long simmering tomato sauces.

Thanks. Next time I make a tomato-based sauce, I'm going to try the larger
pan, lower heat method. If that doesn't work, it's time for a tennis
racquet.

Carol
--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> A little birdie told me that Pan Ohco > said:
>
> >On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:07:35 -0500, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> >
> >>I need one of those tennis racquets that you put over the frying
pan to
> >>prevent spatters. Does such a thing exist for tomato-based sauces?
> >
> >I found that a spatter guard (mostly used for frying) works well for
> >long simmering tomato sauces.
>
> Thanks. Next time I make a tomato-based sauce, I'm going to try the
larger
> pan, lower heat method. If that doesn't work, it's time for a tennis
> racquet.

Placing the pot lid slightly askew will almost always solve the spatter
problem. If your tomato sauce is on very low heat and in a deep pot
and the occasional bubbles are bursting with such velocity that
spattering occurs then your sauce is simply too thick... it's either
done cooking or needs thinning.

Sheldon