IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Epicuria and Health Forum / Cast Iron is generally thick enough . .
Post #147,601
by Andrew Grygus
Picture of Andrew Grygus
3/22/04 8:43:16 PM
Reply
New Cast Iron is generally thick enough . .
. . to provide good enough heat transfer by itself, so there's no real need to face the manufacturing problems. Sheet metals can be hot rolled or pressed together in the forming die, aluminum would have to be cast over the cast iron, a tricky and expensive procedure.

Laminate is much more necessary when you are dealing with thinner material, as with stainless which is generally thin and isn't a good heat conductor.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
Post #147,762
by Arkadiy
Picture of Arkadiy
3/23/04 9:51:40 AM
Reply
New I was thinking "weight"
My mom is very fond of her cast iron pans (skillets?) but it's getting too heavy for her to handle.
--

Less Is More. In my book, About Face, I introduce over 50 powerful design axioms. This is one of them.

--Alan Cooper. The Inmates Are Running the Asylum
     Enameled Iron isn't forever - (Andrew Grygus) - (24) - March 21, 2004, 12:10:50 PM EST
         I've been happy with some stuff from Target. - (Another Scott) - (11) - March 21, 2004, 01:25:36 PM EST
             Aluminum conducts heat well . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (10) - March 21, 2004, 01:57:45 PM EST
                 We have a 3.5qt Calphalon anodized Windsor - (admin) - March 21, 2004, 02:38:20 PM EST
                 dupe, sorry -NT - (Arkadiy) - March 22, 2004, 06:39:53 PM EST
                 Why doesn't somebody put cast iron on top of aluminium? - (Arkadiy) - (2) - March 22, 2004, 06:39:32 PM EST
                     Cast Iron is generally thick enough . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (1) - March 22, 2004, 08:43:16 PM EST
                         I was thinking "weight" - (Arkadiy) - March 23, 2004, 09:51:40 AM EST
                 What's wrong with Pyrex? - (deSitter) - (4) - March 22, 2004, 08:57:48 PM EST
                     Re: What's wrong with Pyrex? - (Andrew Grygus) - (3) - March 22, 2004, 09:06:53 PM EST
                         I've got some Pyrex pots and skillets. - (Another Scott) - March 22, 2004, 09:20:21 PM EST
                         Re: What's wrong with Pyrex? - (deSitter) - (1) - March 22, 2004, 09:47:56 PM EST
                             The kitchen isn't a lab - it's a production facility. - (Andrew Grygus) - March 23, 2004, 01:13:55 AM EST
         Re: multi-ply stainless - (a6l6e6x) - (3) - March 21, 2004, 02:59:05 PM EST
             ATTN: Alex Re: "Seal-O-Matic" waterless cookware - (twosnugglebugs) - (2) - May 31, 2006, 11:35:53 PM EDT
                 welcome and post often -NT - (boxley) - June 1, 2006, 07:56:33 AM EDT
                 Do you know anything about that? - (a6l6e6x) - June 5, 2006, 12:10:20 AM EDT
         Nothing beats a well-seasoned carbon steel wok - (pwhysall) - (4) - March 21, 2004, 03:01:22 PM EST
             Hallelujah! Preach it, brother! -NT - (FuManChu) - March 21, 2004, 06:14:52 PM EST
             Woks are a religion . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2) - March 21, 2004, 06:49:01 PM EST
                 Sink? - (pwhysall) - March 22, 2004, 01:54:49 AM EST
                 Wok Update - (Andrew Grygus) - June 1, 2006, 02:35:46 AM EDT
         prefer cast iron cookware for even heat distribution - (boxley) - (2) - March 21, 2004, 04:08:58 PM EST
             Cast Iron is great for frying, no economical substitute . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (1) - March 21, 2004, 07:04:11 PM EST
                 Simmering goes into the preassure cooker, without the top on - (boxley) - March 21, 2004, 07:06:25 PM EST

Do you believe everything you read on the radio?
120 ms