HOME > Chowhound > Cookware >

Most indestructible cookware? Cast iron and ___?

c
Cinnamon Apr 13, 2009 09:19 PM

What is the most durable (and safe) nonstick out there aside from cast iron that's well-seasoned?

Also, in general, what pans (not just nonstick) do you like for their ability to heat nicely and basically survive anything and clean up well - for instance being exposed to fire and being dropped from high heights, possibly at the same time?

I welcome your recommendations of non-pansy-*** pans.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. m
    mpalmer6c RE: Cinnamon Apr 13, 2009 10:31 PM

    Not sure about the questions. Most modern metal cookware
    Is quite durable and will not shatter or crack if if dropped
    on the kitchen floor. It’s not a good idea to leave any empty pan on high heat for a long time. Most non-stick pan interiors are made of
    chemically similar materials. The Green Pan is apparently different, I but haven’t seen any verdict on its longevity.

    If these matterss are a concern, cast iron probably is the best bet. But in 30 years or so of cooking, I have only had one pan break. That was an ancient, inherited Le Creuset on which the handle weld snapped.

    1. n
      Nyleve RE: Cinnamon Apr 14, 2009 06:47 AM

      Stainless steel. Not non-stick - just with a heavy bottom. I've accidentally let my pans boil dry, left on a burner over high heat, dropped them, banged them, scrubbed them with an SOS pad - the works. I can't say they look like new, exactly, but they don't look bad and they still cook the way they did on day one. Heat is relatively evenly distributed on the bottom. No fancy frills - just good, utilitarian cookware.

      1. f
        fauchon RE: Cinnamon Apr 14, 2009 07:05 AM

        My 40 year old Paderno ... indestructible, elegant, heats up much faster than cast iron, takes heat evenly, no scorching or hot spots, no wobbling handles/uneven bottoms after all this time & constant use ... I bought various sizes & styles from Fred Bridge way back when...one of my best-ever cookware purchases.. In fact, I wish I'd bought more...

        1. Joe Blowe RE: Cinnamon Apr 14, 2009 09:59 AM

          The problem with your premise is that you assume most pans are pansy-ass, but that's not the case. Look at what they use in commercial settings (i.e. restaurants, catering, etc.) -- they use aluminum, stainless steel, carbon steel, and so on. All of these pans suffer a tremendous amount of abuse, but they keep on performing.

          Since you're looking for a pan that "heats nicely, survives anything, and cleans up well," I'd suggest a fully clad stainless steel pan. You can look at All-Clad, Demeyere, and all of the other big names, or you can take a look at some low-priced workhorses that will perform just as well at a fraction of the big-name prices:

          http://www.vollrathco.com/catalog_browse.jsp?id=193 (my choice for fully clad)

          http://www.bridgekitchenware.com/brow... (my choice for s.s. disc bottom)

          As far as non-stick is concerned, I like to buy whatever Teflon-coated (no fear here) aluminum pans are on sale and replace them when they start showing wear. This is much cheaper in the long run vs. buying high-end non-stick pans (Swiss Diamond, ScanPan, etc.). And, all municipal recyclers accept Teflon-coated aluminum pans, so there are no worries about adding to landfills (this is a typical point of contention from some people, so I'm just adding it as a safety ;-).

          5 Replies
          1. re: Joe Blowe
            c
            Cinnamon RE: Joe Blowe Apr 14, 2009 09:12 PM

            I didn't actually assume most pans were a problem, I'm just asking which ones fit the bill the best. Which of the commercial-type pans do you think clean up best/easily - the aluminum, the stainless or the carbon steel?

            I like the look of the fully clad at your first link.

            1. re: Cinnamon
              n
              Nyleve RE: Cinnamon Apr 15, 2009 05:50 AM

              Plain stainless is much better than aluminum. I have one Kitchen Aid set, which is great - but my favourite pan by far is a professional one that I bought used. It has no fancy name (Browne-Halco), but is excellent quality and seriously indestructible.

              I have no experience with fully clad pans so can't comment on durability factor. I personally don't want to have to treat my cookware particularly carefully. If it gets nicked or dinged it's just a sign of experience and good meals. It shouldn't become yet another thing that I have to look after.

              1. re: Nyleve
                c
                Cinnamon RE: Nyleve Apr 15, 2009 10:01 AM

                Thanks - this is exactly my point.

                1. re: Nyleve
                  Joe Blowe RE: Nyleve Apr 15, 2009 10:59 AM

                  "Plain" stainless steel pans (meaning not clad, no disc bottom) are actually inferior to aluminum. See the following from Understanding Stovetop Cookware by Samuel Lloyd Kinsey:

                  http://preview.tinyurl.com/dm4rwj

                  "[Plain] Stainless steel holds the honor of having the worst overall thermal characteristics of all the metals used for cookware. It has the highest specific heat per cubic centimeter and the lowest thermal conductivity -- not a good combination. Needless to say, evenness of heat is out of the question and stainless steel cookware must be thin or it will never become hot. Hot spots are inevitable."

                  Fully clad s.s. pans offer the *superior* heat distribution of aluminum, and the *same* durability of "plain" s.s. pans (the layers are fused together). There's absolutely no reason not to buy one such as the Vollrath Tribute.

                  1. re: Joe Blowe
                    c
                    Cinnamon RE: Joe Blowe Apr 15, 2009 08:17 PM

                    Thanks

            2. Politeness RE: Cinnamon Apr 14, 2009 05:55 PM

              Kuhn-Rikon Duromatic. They can be used with conventional lids just as well as they can be used with the pressure-cooker lids, and probably they could survive a nuclear blast.

              Show Hidden Posts