283168 Mon Feb 13 09:29:09 -0800 2006 10 31 Home Cooking 0 1510935 Hi all, A recipe I have for a pudding calls for potato starch instead of cornstarch. Wondering if anyone has used potato starch before and if there would be a problem using cornstarch instead...what difference in the end result would there be, etc. Thanks! Mon Feb 13 09:29:09 -0800 2006 0 wyf4lyf 1 1510940 I would not substitute. Thickeners behave differently at different temperatures, and have different effects (and are used in different quantities for a given volume of liquid). Unless the recipe was Passover-related (where potato starch is used because it is Kosher for Passover, as it is not from a grain), I would assume there is a reason the recipe specifies potato starch rather than cornstarch relating to the above, or because it does not leave a starchy flavor like flour or cornstarch. Mon Feb 13 09:52:01 -0800 2006 1510935 0 Karl S 2 1510976 I agree. Anyone can correct be if I'm wrong, but I believe that potato starch thickens at cold temperatures, where (and this I know) cornstarch doesn't achieve full thickening power until boiled. I don't know what the recipe is like, but if it's a no-cook pudding, that would explain it. Mon Feb 13 13:33:50 -0800 2006 1510940 0 Aaron 3 1511010 Don't think its a hot vs. cold issue because yesterday I made the chocolate pudding part of a chocolate/raspberry parfait from food network show, Sugar Rush. It called for both flour and potato starch and was cooked until slow boil. Mon Feb 13 15:10:32 -0800 2006 1510976 0 Karen 4 1511022 I've always though that you can't boil potato starch - maybe since is was a very slow boil.... Mon Feb 13 15:54:37 -0800 2006 1511010 0 rudeboy 5 1511031 Recipe calls for a boil just until you see large bubbles coming to the surface, not a rolling one. Never used potato starch before, so don't know its properties. However, this chocolate parfait called for both potato starch *and* flour and the result, much to my surprise, is a very, very dense pudding. Hope it wasn't a typo in the recipe because I spent a significant sum of money on Scharfenberger cocoa powder. Link: http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/recipes/recipe/0,1977,FOOD_9936_32155,00.html Mon Feb 13 16:13:38 -0800 2006 1511022 0 Karen 6 1511050 Hmm, so why do many homemade marshmallwo recipes call for PS not CS? Less of a taste you think? The starch doesnt get heating (it is dusted at the end along with or instead of powdered sugar) Mon Feb 13 17:21:56 -0800 2006 1511031 0 D-NY 7 1511099 To my taste buds, corn starch has a dull, baking soda-like quality to it, esp. raw and it takes a little more cooking time to get rid of its chemical flavor. Potato starch tastes milder and sweeter, a little more natural. I've also found potato starch thickens a tiny bit faster than corn starch. They look different when cooked/thickened with just water: potato starch turns into a clear gel and corn starch into a transparent white goop. No problems with boiling potato starch. The Swan brand has a recipe on the box for a white sauce that calls for boiling and it works fine. Mon Feb 13 21:12:31 -0800 2006 1511050 0 petradish 4 1511063 That's the same recipe I was recommending to someone on this board who requested a chocolate dessert for Valentine's day, and the question came up about the potato starch. Glad to hear it turned out well. Mon Feb 13 17:57:26 -0800 2006 1511010 0 wyf4lyf 1 1511020 Here's an overview, with pictures Link: http://www.foodsubs.com/ThickenStarch.html Mon Feb 13 15:52:39 -0800 2006 1510935 0 rudeboy 2 1511051 That says don't boil potato starch, but I do so often without a problem. I don't boil it for very long, but when I want to thicken up a sauce right before serving I add potato starch and bring it to a boil for just a few seconds to get the full thickening effect. Works great. Jim Mon Feb 13 17:22:57 -0800 2006 1511020 0 Jim Washburn