Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > Cookware >
Apr 21, 2008 10:46 AM

Fagor Induction Burner

Does anyone have experience with this item? It was highlighted in the kitchen issue of House Beautiful and then I saw it on Sur La Table. I was thinking it would make a nifty addition to the kitchen as a supplement to the Viking range we have. We have the 6 burner, griddle and grill model, and since we rarely use the 5th and 6th burner except during big parties & the holidays, and almost never use the grill, we have these covered by wooden boards that this induction burner could fit on. The idea of boiling water in 90 seconds is kind of irresistible -- but only if this actually works and isn't just a toy.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. How much water are we talking? .

    7 Replies
    1. re: jtpeters

      I really don't know how fast it boild how much water, and I may have been exaggerating slightly. The item is at

      1. re: roxlet

        No, I saw a TV commercial advertising induction cooktops and relating the 90 second boiling time, but it bothered me that they didn't say how much water. My understanding is that induction provides the fast heat transfer of electric coil with the precision of gas flame - only for ferrous materials. My anodized aluminum pans would not work. Only stainless or cast iron surfaces work with it.
        The 90% efficiency thing is awesome, but it only draws 1300 Watts. I may be wrong but I thought my large electric coil burner pulled 4000 Watts. Now I'm going to test my burner.

        1. re: jtpeters

          UPDATE: It's the Electrolux induction cooktop that claims it can boil water in 90 seconds.

          1. re: jtpeters

            Noticed that it didn't say how much water boils in 90 seconds....maybe it's just 8 ounces..."let the buyer beware"..or just make sure to ask questions!

            1. re: ChowFun_derek

              Well, you could think about it. 3500 watt burner, 80% efficient, 90 seconds. That gives us a touch more than 250,000 joules. It takes just a bit more than a 1/3 of a kilojoule to raise a gram of water from 20 C (68 F) to 100 C (212F). We've got 250 kJ, so we can do that for about 750 grams of water, which is 750 ml, or about 3 cups. Of course, we'd also have to heat the pan, so we'd do less. But they're probably starting with warmer water. So I'd guess they mean you can boil about half a litre (a pint) of hot tap water in that time, which is pretty good.

              Assuming typical gas stove efficiency of 40% (which is what the gas industry claims, actual results tend lower), it would take 24,000 btu/hr burner to match that. Not many home stoves do that....

              1. re: dscheidt

                Just read your reply sorry! How long would it take to boil a pot of water for pasta...any thoughts???

          2. re: jtpeters

            if it draws 1300 Watts and is 90% efficient then you get 1170 Watts transferred to your water. That means that a large electric coil has to be at least 30% efficient at drawing 4000 Watts to best the induction.

      2. the MSRP is $199.99. The surfce does not get hot, you must use cookware that is ferromagnetic. It heats from 190-430 F. It has a 180 min. time qnd it will shut itself off if left on accidentally. It will not heat and will shut itself if no cookware is detected and does have a safety lock. It masures 14"X18" and weighs 8 lbs. It is UL approved and uses reguar 110 V. household wattage.

        If all you are going to do is boil water I would suggest an electric kettle which is very fast and is more economical.

        2 Replies
        1. re: Candy

          I was being facetious about the water boiling, but it seems to be an interesting adjunct to a gas stove. I'm curious if anyone has had first-hand experience with this particular item...

          1. re: roxlet

            Why wouldn't you just use the 5th and 6th burner?

        2. I've done a pressure cooker demo on this. I was impressed with how quickly it came to pressure.

          It didn't throw any heat either, which living in Arizona I liked. Anything that keeps the kitchen from heating up is OK in my book.

          That said, the controls drove me crazy. It has a touch screen thing that didnt' seem to respond to well to touch. Also it's pretty lightweight and almost cheap feeling, don't know how long it would hold up to be honest. I'd be tempted to look at some of the more expensive models on the market to see if they seemed better built.

          1 Reply
          1. re: ziggylu

            I wonder if Viking makes a drop in induction burner for its gas stoves. That would be interesting. I've seen the Viking induction burners as individual units for sale, and they definitely look bigger and blockier than this unit...

          2. Speaking from personal experience, though not with this brand, no 110 volt induction burner will meet your expectations. Perhaps a 110 volt unit that requires, say, a dedicated 30 amp circuit will work, but definitely not one that uses "normal" North American house current.It will likely boil water much more slowly than a burner on your regular range. Don't waste your money

            A commercial model would undoubtedly be better. Alternatively, get an "instant hot water" faucet - set to its max, your Viking should boil its output almost instantly. I still think you'd be wasting money to save a few minutes a week.

            You'll get the fastest boiling speed with a cheap 1700 watt electric kettle. This is the highest wattage available in Canada - I don't know what's sold in the US, where electric kettles are not something found in most households.

            1 Reply
            1. re: embee

              Interesting. Thanks for the POV, embee.

            2. -1 watt is one joule per second.
              -To raise the temp of one milliliter of water by one degree C it takes a bit over 4 joules.
              -To raise the temp of 1 liter of water by one degree C it takes 4000 joules.
              -Assuming room temp water at 20 deg. C, you need to raise it by 80 degrees C to get to boiling.
              -Thus, to bring a liter of room temp water to a boil you need 80 x 4000 = 320,000 joules.
              - 320,000 joules divided by 1300 watts = 246 seconds, or about four minutes.

              So, if your induction burner is 100% efficient (it won't be), didn't have to heat the pan (it does), it'd bring a quart of water to a boil in about 4 minutes.

              How do those numbers meet your expectations?

              Advice? Get an 1800 watt induction burner (which is the highest wattage I know of for 115v operation). Or, better yet, get an electric kettle and do what I do: Put some water in a pot on the stove, and some in the kettle to boil. Add the boiling water from the kettle to the pot on the stove and it'll speed things up.

              4 Replies
              1. re: ThreeGigs

                My 1300w Tatung induction cooktop takes 5 minutes to bring a quart of tap water to a rolling boil.

                1. re: ThreeGigs

                  The energy required to raise the temperature 80 degrees is only a fraction of the total energy needed to boil water. Don't forget the latent heat needed for the phase change from liquid to vapor. Surprisingly this will be over 7 times the heat to raise the temperature of water by 80 C. Since we aren't trying to boil away the entire liter of water, this isn't a major factor in cooking, but it does actually add time to the process to get it to a good rolling boil.

                  1. re: savorra_rocks

                    Ok I just checked using my cooktop I can boil 2 cups of water in 90 seconds. It is 220V 40 amps and I used one of the larger burners with a smallish saucepan!

                  2. re: ThreeGigs

                    Here's one test:

                    1800 watt induction burner (110 volt)
                    stainless teakettle.
                    16 oz water -- room temperature.
                    2 minutes, 15 seconds to boil.

                    That is MUCH faster than a conventional burner but slower than a 220 volt water heating appliance I suspect.