Anybody have experience with the Innova brand of enameled cast iron
sold by Target et al.? Seems to be about half the price of the
Traditional Name Brands.

tia,
bkr

I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean. But
the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a connection
here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with enamel? Very
curious about this.

"salgud" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean. But
> the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a connection
> here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with enamel? Very
> curious about this.
>

It's a "non-reactive" surface. You can cook acidic foods in enameled iron
without damaging the pot ("seasoning" in the case of cast iron"), or
discoloring the food. Also, judging the color of a roux or a caramel is
difficult against the black background. Finally, the enamelware is easier to
maintain . . . no rust, no initial seasoning . . . no fuss.

--Rich

salgud wrote:
> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean.

Anyone with half a brain knows you don't wash whites with bluejeans.

Jill

The cast iron will react with acidic items such as
tomatoes. If it is enameled, then there is no reaction.

Also, for certain foods, cooking in cast iron makes
then brownish/greyish...

HTH,
Irax.
http://rumimmi.blogspot.com [ my little AdSense Expt]


salgud wrote:
> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean. But
> the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a connection
> here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with enamel? Very
> curious about this.
>

"Rich" > wrote in message
...
>
> "salgud" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
>> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
>> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
>> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
>> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
>> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
>> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
>> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean. But
>> the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a connection
>> here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with enamel? Very
>> curious about this.
>>
>
> It's a "non-reactive" surface. You can cook acidic foods in enameled iron
> without damaging the pot ("seasoning" in the case of cast iron"), or
> discoloring the food. Also, judging the color of a roux or a caramel is
> difficult against the black background. Finally, the enamelware is easier
> to maintain . . . no rust, no initial seasoning . . . no fuss.
>
> --Rich
Take a look at my pots - they didn't serve me well.
http://freepages.family.rootsweb.com...reusetpots.htm

Dee

"Dee Randall" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Rich" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "salgud" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
>>> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
>>> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
>>> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
>>> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
>>> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
>>> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
>>> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean. But
>>> the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a connection
>>> here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with enamel? Very
>>> curious about this.
>>>
>>
>> It's a "non-reactive" surface. You can cook acidic foods in enameled iron
>> without damaging the pot ("seasoning" in the case of cast iron"), or
>> discoloring the food. Also, judging the color of a roux or a caramel is
>> difficult against the black background. Finally, the enamelware is easier
>> to maintain . . . no rust, no initial seasoning . . . no fuss.
>>
>> --Rich
> Take a look at my pots - they didn't serve me well.
> http://freepages.family.rootsweb.com...reusetpots.htm
>
> Dee
>

I have an 8-quart that is about twenty years old. The interior is
discolored, but still intact. I mostly just use it as ovenware, but I do
brown meat and make roux in it. I sorry that your have not done so well. I
like the enamel enough that I intend to try one of the pots from the new
Lodge line of enamelware.

--Rich

"Beaker" > wrote in message
...
>
> Anybody have experience with the Innova brand of enameled cast iron
> sold by Target et al.? Seems to be about half the price of the
> Traditional Name Brands.
>
> tia,
> bkr


It's pretty, and they claim a 25-year guarantee. I'd go for it.

--Rich

On Fri 06 May 2005 09:12:12a, Dee Randall wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "Rich" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "salgud" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
>>> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
>>> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
>>> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
>>> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
>>> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
>>> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
>>> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean.
>>> But the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a
>>> connection here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with
>>> enamel? Very curious about this.
>>>
>>
>> It's a "non-reactive" surface. You can cook acidic foods in enameled
>> iron without damaging the pot ("seasoning" in the case of cast iron"),
>> or discoloring the food. Also, judging the color of a roux or a caramel
>> is difficult against the black background. Finally, the enamelware is
>> easier to maintain . . . no rust, no initial seasoning . . . no fuss.
>>
>> --Rich
> Take a look at my pots - they didn't serve me well.
> http://freepages.family.rootsweb.com...lyPage/lecreus
> etpots.htm
>
> Dee

Dee, I remember when you first reported on the problem with your your pots,
and I'll still never figured out what may have caused it. I have a large
assortment of Le Creuset that I've been using since the early 1970s and
they all but one look like new. They are routinely put in the dishwasher,
and are used on both the cooktop and in the oven. One pat, a 2-qt oven,
has a slightly dull interior.

I remember looking at the pictures of your pots back then and couldn't
believe how they looked.

--
Wayne Boatwright
____________________________________________

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

So there's some problem with cooking those tomato dishes in my cast
iron skillet? How does it damage the seasoning?
I can understand about the roux, I don't do that in my cast iron.
I think that the "easier to maintain" is a matter of opinion. I do
almost zero "maintenance" on my cast iron, other than initial
seasoning, and cleaning it and drying it when I'm done using it, which
I have to do with any pot. I suspect the rust problem may have
something to do with local climate. I live in the very dry climate of
Denver, and as long as I dry the pan after I wash it, I don't get rust,
inside or out. Maybe back east or down south this is more of an issue.
It's probably just personal preference, but I've spent too many hours
cleaning enameled pots after I accidently burned something in them.
Will keep my cast iron until I can afford All Clad!

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote

> I remember looking at the pictures of your pots back then and couldn't
> believe how they looked.

I've never seen anything like that. They must be scraped with metal
spoons and scrubbed half to death with ... what ... steel wool? They
look to be horribly abused. Any insight, Dee?

nancy

Good to know you have half your brain functioning! Those of us with
fully functioning brains will make allowances for you!

"salgud" > wrote...
> Good to know you have half your brain functioning! Those of us with
> fully functioning brains will make allowances for you!

Whom are you addressing?

nancy

The cast iron will react with acidic items such as tomatoes.

And what symtoms does this cause? I've never noticed a problem. Maybe
because my cast iron is properly seasoned?

Also, for certain foods, cooking in cast iron makes
then brownish/greyish

What kinds of foods would this be? Have never noticed this problem
either.

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote
>
>> I remember looking at the pictures of your pots back then and couldn't
>> believe how they looked.
>
> I've never seen anything like that. They must be scraped with metal
> spoons and scrubbed half to death with ... what ... steel wool? They
> look to be horribly abused. Any insight, Dee?
>
> nancy
Believe it or not, Nancy, I never used steel wool on them or any other kind
of rough type cleaner. If I used bon-ami, it wasn't often, as I don't keep
these ajax-ype cleaners in my house. I didn't put the large one in the
dishwasher, the one that has these scars/marks on the bottom. I never
neglected these pans in any way. It is totally a mystery to me what the
heck these scars/marks are doing on the bottom. I did use the large one for
cooking chutneys -- tomatoes and other kinds. The only thing that I can
figure out is that the sugar/tomato/vingegar eventually dissolved the
coating. I always used wooden spoons on these pans. (Now that I have
caphalon, I used KitchenAid rubber-type spoons & spatulas, and before that
the Caphalon brand spoons and spatulas.)

When I watch the cooking shows using the enameled pans, I really want
them -- but I wouldn't recommend them to anyone; I just say, 'take a look at
mine.' Yes, I agree, they Do look horribly abused. But they weren't. Just
one of those questions that one asks if and when one gets to the 'pearly
gates' -- tee hee.

Thanks for responding, too, Wayne.

Dee

"salgud" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Good to know you have half your brain functioning! Those of us with
> fully functioning brains will make allowances for you!
>

Before you include yourself in the "fully functioning brain" category you
should learn to quote the message you are replying to so that your message
makes sense to people.


--
Peter Aitken
Visit my recipe and kitchen myths page at www.pgacon.com/cooking.htm

On Fri 06 May 2005 11:07:20a, Dee Randall wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote
>>
>>> I remember looking at the pictures of your pots back then and couldn't
>>> believe how they looked.
>>
>> I've never seen anything like that. They must be scraped with metal
>> spoons and scrubbed half to death with ... what ... steel wool? They
>> look to be horribly abused. Any insight, Dee?
>>
>> nancy
> Believe it or not, Nancy, I never used steel wool on them or any other
> kind of rough type cleaner. If I used bon-ami, it wasn't often, as I
> don't keep these ajax-ype cleaners in my house. I didn't put the large
> one in the dishwasher, the one that has these scars/marks on the bottom.
> I never neglected these pans in any way. It is totally a mystery to me
> what the heck these scars/marks are doing on the bottom. I did use the
> large one for cooking chutneys -- tomatoes and other kinds. The only
> thing that I can figure out is that the sugar/tomato/vingegar
> eventually dissolved the coating. I always used wooden spoons on these
> pans. (Now that I have caphalon, I used KitchenAid rubber-type spoons &
> spatulas, and before that the Caphalon brand spoons and spatulas.)
>
> When I watch the cooking shows using the enameled pans, I really want
> them -- but I wouldn't recommend them to anyone; I just say, 'take a
> look at mine.' Yes, I agree, they Do look horribly abused. But they
> weren't. Just one of those questions that one asks if and when one gets
> to the 'pearly gates' -- tee hee.
>
> Thanks for responding, too, Wayne.
>
> Dee

'Tis a puzzlement. Very strange. I know you didn't treat them abusively,
but it just makes no sense.

--
Wayne Boatwright
____________________________________________

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

On 2005-05-06, Nancy Young > wrote:

> Whom are you addressing?

The other side of his allegedly funcioning brain?

nb

"notbob" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-05-06, Nancy Young > wrote:
>
>> Whom are you addressing?
>
> The other side of his allegedly funcioning brain?

(laughing) nancy

On 2005-05-06, notbob > wrote:

> The other side of his allegedly funcioning brain?

LOL.... well, we've always known my brain doesn't funcion!

nb

"Dee Randall" > wrote...
>
> "Nancy Young" > wrote

>> I've never seen anything like that. They must be scraped with metal
>> spoons and scrubbed half to death with ... what ... steel wool? They
>> look to be horribly abused. Any insight, Dee?

> Believe it or not, Nancy, I never used steel wool on them or any other
> kind of rough type cleaner. If I used bon-ami, it wasn't often, as I
> don't keep these ajax-ype cleaners in my house. I didn't put the large
> one in the dishwasher, the one that has these scars/marks on the bottom.
> I never neglected these pans in any way. It is totally a mystery to me
> what the heck these scars/marks are doing on the bottom. I did use the
> large one for cooking chutneys -- tomatoes and other kinds. The only
> thing that I can figure out is that the sugar/tomato/vingegar eventually
> dissolved the coating. I always used wooden spoons on these pans. (Now
> that I have caphalon, I used KitchenAid rubber-type spoons & spatulas, and
> before that the Caphalon brand spoons and spatulas.)
>
> When I watch the cooking shows using the enameled pans, I really want
> them -- but I wouldn't recommend them to anyone; I just say, 'take a look
> at mine.' Yes, I agree, they Do look horribly abused. But they weren't.
> Just one of those questions that one asks if and when one gets to the
> 'pearly gates' -- tee hee.

Please don't be angry with me, I was just astonished. My Le Crueset is used
all the time, on the stove, in the oven. Whatever. Is it perfect? No.
Does
it look like yours? That would be a no. I'm sorry, I just don't know what
the
heck happened to your pots. Me? I'd buy mine all over again, I adore it.

Don't they have some kind of replacement guarantee?

nancy

Long-time lurker delurking...

Dee, I was surprised to read of your experience with Le Creuset.
My ten-year-old French oven recently lost some enamel from the bottom
(a few small pieces "popped" off while I was heating oil to brown some
meat). Le Creuset customer service gave me a return authorization
number and told me that if they determined it was a manufacturing
defect, they would send a new pot. If not, they would sell me a
replacement for half off the list price. I was somewhat skeptical but
sent the pot off. I was very pleasantly surprised to receive a (free)
new pot within a couple of weeks (much quicker than I expected).
It was inconvenient to lose the use of the pot for several weeks (it
was a real workhorse in my kitchen), but nobody's perfect and I was
very pleased with LeCreuset's response to my problem.
Maybe you should try again with their customer service?

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dee Randall" > wrote...
>>
>> "Nancy Young" > wrote
>
>>> I've never seen anything like that. They must be scraped with metal
>>> spoons and scrubbed half to death with ... what ... steel wool? They
>>> look to be horribly abused. Any insight, Dee?
>
>> Believe it or not, Nancy, I never used steel wool on them or any other
>> kind of rough type cleaner. If I used bon-ami, it wasn't often, as I
>> don't keep these ajax-ype cleaners in my house. I didn't put the large
>> one in the dishwasher, the one that has these scars/marks on the bottom.
>> I never neglected these pans in any way. It is totally a mystery to me
>> what the heck these scars/marks are doing on the bottom. I did use the
>> large one for cooking chutneys -- tomatoes and other kinds. The only
>> thing that I can figure out is that the sugar/tomato/vingegar eventually
>> dissolved the coating. I always used wooden spoons on these pans. (Now
>> that I have caphalon, I used KitchenAid rubber-type spoons & spatulas,
>> and before that the Caphalon brand spoons and spatulas.)
>>
>> When I watch the cooking shows using the enameled pans, I really want
>> them -- but I wouldn't recommend them to anyone; I just say, 'take a look
>> at mine.' Yes, I agree, they Do look horribly abused. But they weren't.
>> Just one of those questions that one asks if and when one gets to the
>> 'pearly gates' -- tee hee.
>
> Please don't be angry with me, I was just astonished. My Le Crueset is
> used
> all the time, on the stove, in the oven. Whatever. Is it perfect? No.
> Does
> it look like yours? That would be a no. I'm sorry, I just don't know
> what the
> heck happened to your pots. Me? I'd buy mine all over again, I adore it.
>
> Don't they have some kind of replacement guarantee?
>
> nancy
No, Nancy, I am not the least bit angry; I am/was astonished as you. Yes, I
loved the pans; even though they are too heavy for me to handle now. I did
go thru the replacement guarantee exercise at one point, but was not
successful.
I do use a le creuset 'white' enameled fish/gratin pan that I've had a good
30 + years -- no problems -- but, the white is not the same enamel as the
'sand-type' enamel that went bad on the three pans I was illustrating.
Perhaps I got a 'life-time' of use out of mine in a short time. I did use
them A LOT! Let's say I was enameled with them. Game over.
My best,
Dee

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Long-time lurker delurking...
>
> Dee, I was surprised to read of your experience with Le Creuset.
> My ten-year-old French oven recently lost some enamel from the bottom
> (a few small pieces "popped" off while I was heating oil to brown some
> meat). Le Creuset customer service gave me a return authorization
> number and told me that if they determined it was a manufacturing
> defect, they would send a new pot. If not, they would sell me a
> replacement for half off the list price. I was somewhat skeptical but
> sent the pot off. I was very pleasantly surprised to receive a (free)
> new pot within a couple of weeks (much quicker than I expected).
> It was inconvenient to lose the use of the pot for several weeks (it
> was a real workhorse in my kitchen), but nobody's perfect and I was
> very pleased with LeCreuset's response to my problem.
> Maybe you should try again with their customer service?
>
Well, they went to the dump -- after really trying to get satisfaction.
I've heard so many good things about this company giving satisfaction. I
guess I was just one of those that fell thru the cracks. Maybe I should not
bring this up again -- you know, too much crying over spilled milk. There
comes a time when one thinks well, I just won't think about this again; but,
you know, the people on food channel using these pots really get to me
:-) )
The cry baby, whining still,
Dee

Dee Randall wrote:

>>Well, they went to the dump

Oh, ouch!

>>There comes a time when one thinks well, I just won't think about
this
>>again; but, you know, the people on food channel using these pots
>>really get to me :-) )
>>The cry baby, whining still

I don't blame you; I'd be crying too!

:-)

Another half-brain? If you can't figure out whom I'm addressing, then
you obviously are using less than half of your brain. My condolences!
(Now comes the flamer about not following her rules of how to post...)

You're right. I'm sorry. I'll never do it again!

salgud wrote:
> So there's some problem with cooking those tomato dishes in my cast
> iron skillet? How does it damage the seasoning?

I ate chili once (with way too much tomato added, IMO) and to me the
entire pot of food tasted like "rust".

I have a large Le Crueset dutch oven that I just *love* using. It cheers
me up just to see it on my stove top, as it's so colorful and bright.
When the interior got a bit dingy, soaking in a bleach water solution
brightened it right up.

I have one plain cast iron skillet for frying some things in. I don't
use it much.
Goomba

"salgud" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Another half-brain? If you can't figure out whom I'm addressing, then
> you obviously are using less than half of your brain. My condolences!
> (Now comes the flamer about not following her rules of how to post...)

They aren't my rules. What the **** are you talking about. Is that better?

nancy

"Dee Randall" wrote in message
> Take a look at my pots - they didn't serve me well.
> http://freepages.family.rootsweb.com...reusetpots.htm
>
> Dee

Dee - honest question - I'm not being critical. Is it possible you have
started to heat those pans using high heat, rather than the slow warm-up
that LC recommends?

Dora

"limey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dee Randall" wrote in message
>> Take a look at my pots - they didn't serve me well.
>> http://freepages.family.rootsweb.com...reusetpots.htm
>>
>> Dee
>
> Dee - honest question - I'm not being critical. Is it possible you have
> started to heat those pans using high heat, rather than the slow warm-up
> that LC recommends?
>
> Dora
With pans this expensive and the personality I have, I'm sure that I
followed all the instructions about pre-heating. But that has been
some-time ago, so I can't state exactly what I did, but that I probably did
it the way they suggested in the literature.
Thanks, Dora.
Dee

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
>
> "salgud" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Another half-brain? If you can't figure out whom I'm addressing, then
>> you obviously are using less than half of your brain. My condolences!
>> (Now comes the flamer about not following her rules of how to post...)
>
> They aren't my rules. What the **** are you talking about. Is that
> better?
>
> nancy
>

Oh, he's just another pinhead who cannot figure out how to use his
newsreader and goes around calling other people stupid to make himself feel
smart. Sort of like Danny DeVito calling people short.


--
Peter Aitken
Visit my recipe and kitchen myths page at www.pgacon.com/cooking.htm

salgud wrote:
> The cast iron will react with acidic items such as tomatoes.
>
> And what symtoms does this cause? I've never noticed a problem. Maybe
> because my cast iron is properly seasoned?
>
> Also, for certain foods, cooking in cast iron makes
> then brownish/greyish
>
> What kinds of foods would this be? Have never noticed this problem
> either.

This happens mostly with milk-based sauces or custards. I've had it
happen with white sauce, but I don't use my cast iron very often, so it
doesn't matter to me.

N.

You're right! I'm sorry! I'll never do it again!

That makes sense. I can't remember ever using my cast iron with a
milk-based sauce, use my 2 qt pot, which is metal with non-stick.

"Peter Aitken" > wrote

> "Nancy Young" > wrote

>> They aren't my rules. What the **** are you talking about. Is that
>> better?

> Oh, he's just another pinhead who cannot figure out how to use his
> newsreader and goes around calling other people stupid to make himself
> feel smart. Sort of like Danny DeVito calling people short.

I apologize for my language.

nancy

salgud wrote:
>
> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean. But
> the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a connection
> here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with enamel? Very
> curious about this.

No rusting. No reaction with any foods. No seasoning. Can simmer foods.
Easy to clean.

Don't know why you think an enamelled surface as being fragile. We have
a couple of enamelled cast iron pans that are at least 30 years old and
used regularly. Dropping a hammer into such a pan would probably damage
it should one be so inclined; not much else has.

On 6 May 2005 08:09:49 -0700, salgud quoth:
> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black?

Well, iron reacts with things, I'm not interested in fussing over a
"seasoning". Maybe I'm a neat freak, but I like things that CLEAN
(as in sparkling) easy, so a ceramic/enamel surface appeals to me.
I also don't want something that will rust, since I live in soupy
tropical air. You should see the junk cars literally dissolving
in people's yards here. It's just a matter of personal preference.
YMMV

But the main thing I'm interested in is whether the Innova pots
are good quality and easy-cleaning compared to the Name Brands, and
therefore a good value. It doesn't have to last 50+ years, because
I won't either.

tia,
bkr

On Fri, 06 May 2005 21:38:28 -0500, Beaker quoth:
>
> But the main thing I'm interested in is whether the Innova pots
> are good quality and easy-cleaning compared to the Name Brands, and

Well, somebody pointed it out to me as "Innova", but now when I
look on Target's website it's called "Colorcast". Maybe it goes
by several names.

bkr

I looked at the pics - it sure looks like you went to "high" on the burners
with them -

The instructions with my set said to never use high - ever -even with the
skillets. And so I always keep them below "med-high" and they look like the
day I got them.

"Dee Randall" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Rich" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "salgud" > wrote in message
> > oups.com...
> >> I'm curious to hear the replies too. And even more curious as to why
> >> someone would take a durable, easy to maintain material like cast iron
> >> and coat it with a somewhat fragile, much harder to maintain material
> >> like enamel. What advantages could there possibly be, unless someone
> >> wants to cook on a white or colored surface instead of black? Maybe
> >> like people (ok, female people) who think that white things, like
> >> underwear, aren't clean unless they're pure white. If they're a little
> >> gray from being washed with blue jeans and such, they're not clean. But
> >> the blue jeans in the same washer with them are. Is there a connection
> >> here, or some other reason for coating cast iron with enamel? Very
> >> curious about this.
> >>
> >
> > It's a "non-reactive" surface. You can cook acidic foods in enameled
iron
> > without damaging the pot ("seasoning" in the case of cast iron"), or
> > discoloring the food. Also, judging the color of a roux or a caramel is
> > difficult against the black background. Finally, the enamelware is
easier
> > to maintain . . . no rust, no initial seasoning . . . no fuss.
> >
> > --Rich
> Take a look at my pots - they didn't serve me well.
>
http://freepages.family.rootsweb.com...reusetpots.htm
>
> Dee
>
>