Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The case for induction cooking

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 647 posts

Re: The case for induction cooking

#211

Post by carterschonwald »

angry_octet wrote: post #141
schroeding wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can absolutely recommend the upgrade, these stoves are far superior to PWM style "2000W or off" ones. I can even melt chocolate without a water bath on mine, they can keep temperatures as low as 55°C / 131°F steadily no problem. :D

I just have to be pedantic and say that what you are describing is the very opposite of PWM, which runs at high frequencies (e.g. 30kHz), varying the duty cycle over the tiny slice of time. The only problem with good PWM is audible harmonics, usually only children can hear them.

Those whines drive me crazy and I’m 34! Do any induction cooktops not have that terrible whine? At least with the duxtop portable induction I had to return it because the whine was so bad.

Which leads to the question : which ones do not have a whine? Does the breville? Or which? It’s not something any reviews I’ve seen talk about

Re: The case for induction cooking

#212

Post by Aaargh20318 »

elil17 wrote: post #187
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you’re trying to say. A wok is a very specific type of cookware for specific uses cases. The round bottom is the entire point of a wok. A flat bottom wok is like a square wheel.

Cannot imagine why op wrote “flat bottomed wok” instead of “A pan similar in shape to a wok, but with a flat bottom, so that it can be used on induction cooktops but still allows for the tossing motion that cooks use to mix ingredients in a wok”

Easy tossing for stir fry is just one feature of a wok. For example, the round bottom causes liquids to pool in the center.

I’m not saying that large flat bottom frying pans with high edges aren’t useful, I have one and it’s probably my most used pan, it’s just not a complete replacement for a wok.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#213

Post by lfowles »

quasarj wrote: post #161
nemo1618 wrote: post #46

Warning to anyone thinking about buying one of those portable induction cooktop ("just to see what all the fuss is about"): if it plugs into a standard 120V socket, it's probably not going to boil water any faster than your existing stove! In fact, mine boils even slower than my electric stove. Apparently, the portable ones only go up to around 1800W. If you want to experience the true boil-the-oceans power of induct…

You either got a shit induction cooktop or an amazing electric stove. Maybe both? I have an 1800W portable induction cooktop and while it's not perfect, it's definitely way faster than my electric stove. At least 5x faster at boiling water, I'd say.

Same experience, I grabbed an 1800W induction cook top in January to test the waters for an inevitable range replacement. It has bubbles forming at the bottom of the pot before the normal stove even gets an empty pan hot. Since then it has had a permanent spot in the kitchen, in fact I can't remember the last thing I used the regular stove for...

It also helped me find out that my kitchen counter outlets share the circuit with my fridge. The breaker quickly tripped when I was making toast, boiling water, and the fridge compressor cycled on!

Re: The case for induction cooking

#214

Post by Aaargh20318 »

noveltyaccount wrote: post #205
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, woks are made of thin sheet steel. This allows them to heat up and cool down instantly. If it has a flat outside and round inside then it must have a lot of mass and thus cannot cool down instantly when removed from heat. Again, an essential feature of a wok.

My flat bottom wok is still made from a thin sheet of carbon steel. It heats and cools instantly, performing the essential function of a wok. The bottom has a flat surface inside and out. You're tilting at windmills, mate. This is the wok: https://kenhomwoks.com/store/products/ken-hom-excellence-car...

> It heats and cools instantly, performing the essential function of a wok. The bottom has a flat surface inside and out.

It performs one essential function, it needs both a round shape and has to be made of thin sheet steel. You can only have one if you need to place it on a flat induction stove: either it’s thin and flat on the inside, or it’s round on the inside but thick.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#215

Post by Aaargh20318 »

m3kw9 wrote: post #202
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I got a flat bottom wok There is no such thing. A round bottom is a defining feature of a wok. If it doesn’t have a round bottom it isn’t a wok by definition . A round bottom is essential to how a wok is used.

The original wok has round bottom because the Chinese at the time was poor and it allowed them to use less oil to cook as it pools easily

Yes, and that’s a defining feature of a wok. You can use a flat bottom wok and add a shitload of oil but that kind of changes the dish, and not for the better.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#216

Post by npsimons »

leoedin wrote: post #10

I fitted an AEG induction hob in our kitchen about 3 years ago. It is absolutely amazing. It's so controllable - you can go from "barely hot enough to melt chocolate" to "so hot your pans start discolouring and everything burns" - and back again - in seconds (and everything in-between obviously). I always thought gas was the best for cooking. But I was wrong - induction is. Gas is great for medium-high power cooking,…

> you can't really use woks on induction.

I found a flat-bottomed induction compatible wok on Amazon when I got my induction cook top. I'm not a master stir fry cook, but it woks for me!

Re: The case for induction cooking

#217

Post by syshum »

trulyme wrote: post #66
jandrese wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't as popular in the US because they're considered commercial appliances and it's assumed you are on a business budget if you want to buy one. This means the store carries like 3 models and they cost literally ten times as much as a traditional glass cooktop. $250 vs. $2500.

Whoa. Is that an import/export opportunity here? In EU the prices of both are comparable.

it is not just the cost of the unit, there are alot of other costs that would go into converting to elec from gas, including running a new outlet, and if you have an older home could require upgrading your entire electrical service.

Re: The case for induction cooking

#218

Post by noveltyaccount »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #214
noveltyaccount wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My flat bottom wok is still made from a thin sheet of carbon steel. It heats and cools instantly, performing the essential function of a wok. The bottom has a flat surface inside and out. You're tilting at windmills, mate. This is the wok: https://kenhomwoks.com/store/products/ken-hom-excellence-car...

> It heats and cools instantly, performing the essential function of a wok. The bottom has a flat surface inside and out. It performs one essential function, it needs both a round shape and has to be made of thin sheet steel. You can only have one if you need to place it on a flat induction stove: either it’s thin and flat on the inside, or it’s round on the inside but thick.

Instead of arguing, why don't you educate? You're clearly passionate about this issue. We've covered the importance of thin carbon steel. Why is the round bottom so essential that without it we can't call it a wok?

Re: The case for induction cooking

#219

Post by yout2 »

I have one but find it frustrating to use.

The hob is big enough to fit a large pan but only heats a 10cm circle in the middle. (And I have tried it with many induction-safe pots and pans.)

Rather than physical buttons, it has touch sensors that react to moisture. So a few drops of water spilling out of the pot cause it to turn off or stop working.

Post reply on HN