Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > Cookware >
Jul 17, 2011 02:24 PM

Revol Revolution - Ceramic for Induction?

Curious if anyone has any experience or opinions on Revols new (as far as I can tell, released a month ago?) Revolution ceramic cookware that they say is induction cooktop compatible?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. Hi, Girly_Qs:

    Thanks for letting me know about this. I have not cooked on Revol Revolution, but have the following reactions.

    I think if one *must* have cookware that can work with all heat sources AND go into the MW, this might be worthwhile. As in a traveling pot for vacation, to take to cook in someone else's kitchen, or move between one's own multiple kitchens. The principle that allows it to be so versatile is an advance in cookware.

    But... it will need to conduct heat energy to the food (except in the MW), and glass and ceramics are terrible at that. For comparison, if copper's thermal conductivity is 401 W/(m.K), and cast iron is 55, a ceramic is probably going to limp in at around 2 or less.

    My preliminary view of this is that it will prove no better than the old Corning Visions glass line. The Revol pans seem to have a special magnetic coating that allows them to function on induction--which practically speaking would be the same as cooking in Visions on a converter disk. Who would want to do that?


    10 Replies
    1. re: kaleokahu

      Looks like they will work with all heat sources AND MW.

      Compared to enameled cast iron, ceramic is much lighter in weight. There is no chipping and scratching to worry about either. Not to mention they're dishwasher safe.

      I always feel unsafe to use a converter disk. I'll have two hot objects to deal with instead of one. Otherwise I'd have gotten myself a Emile Henry pot already.

      1. re: cutipie721

        Hi, cutiepie:

        Good points about the light weight and DWability. They won't chip like the enamel off CI, but you think that ceramics are more durable overall?

        Have you used a converter disk? Do they not stay put?


        1. re: kaleokahu

          Nope, not at all. I'm actually afraid of using earthenware myself because I've seen all the mess my grandma had to deal with when she used it. But I'm willing to give it a try now because 1. my stove is a dream to clean and 2. they're made in France and come with warranty. Obviously there's no comparison in terms of durability between metal and clay, but if you think about how archeologists always manage to pull out relatively intact pots from underneath... and to some people, durability comes after ease-of-handling.

          I have not used a converter disk and do not plan to get one myself anytime soon, possibly never, when they keep coming up with these earthenware / copper cookware with built in disc. Some time ago when I had a choice between going all enameled cast iron or ceramic + disc, I picked the former, the one piece design.

          1. re: cutipie721

            Hi, cutipie:

            If you ever buy a piece of the Prima Matera line from deBuyer, I would be very interested in your feedback. Frankly, it would take something like that to get me to ante in for induction. That and a disk for the thick copper I already have.


            1. re: kaleokahu

              Thanks y'all!

              I guess I should have prefaced the question with a bit of info about myself too: I'm a home cook who knows just enough to be slightly dangerous. LOL

              We're building a new house, and I got brave and opted to go with induction. I'm familiar with the premise, but I've never actually cooked on it before (gasp!). I've had both smooth-top electric (loved the cleaning, hated the cooking) and reasonably powerful gas (love the cooking, absolutely, positively, utterly, and completely detest the cleaning). I also live in "Hot-lanta" so the idea of less 'escaped' heat appeals a good bit. So . . . that's where I'm coming from.

              I'll likely never own any of that deBuyer Prima Matera, beautiful as it may be (and, oh, it IS). My Costco copper core has served me reasonably well thus far (and yes, I made sure they're induction compatible). I do have several (7?) pieces of Le Creuset enameled cast iron, though too. I also still have a piece of Visions Corningware, lol, though it is relegated to microwave reheating.

              I'm not terribly interested in a converter disk either (sort of defeats the purpose, doesn't it? But, I also don't have fabulous but incompatible cookware either), so all these new induction compatible options are intriguing to me.

              I greatly appreciate all the feedback, and can't wait to hear more!

              1. re: Girly_Qs

                H, Girly_Qs;

                "a converter disk... (sort of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?)"

                This is a question that has fascinated me for some time. And as far as I know, no one here has ever tested a converter disk in a systematic way.

                You are absolutely right, of course, that sitting your LC, Prima Matera or CCC atop such a disk would defeat the purpose of generating heat inside the pan, and would be less efficient to boot. It might even spill a little more heat in your Hotlanta kitchen.

                But *something* gets hot either way, be it the disk on the stove, the disk bonded to the pan, the monolithic CI, or the outer clad pan's wall itself.

                Nonferrous pans = You have an (one) separate disk
                CI pans = each pan *is* the disk
                SS clad = each pan's outer layer is the disk
                Prima Matera & Revols = you have a disk stuck on the bottom of each pan

                If you take conduction differences into account, I'm not sure anyone can say for sure yet that the converter disks under Cu or Al pans are less efficient or purpose-defeating. That's one reason why my ears perked up when you were asking about the Revols. My prediction is that a highly-conductive pan atop the right converter disk would be more efficient than the Revols are without. And nevermind the one-dimensional-vs-3-dimensional cooking aspects.

                If you get the Revols, please post a review.


              2. re: kaleokahu

                We have the deGuyer in our showroom (from Miele). The pots are weighty and well balanced, and perform incredibly I on induction cook surfaces. Mile runs a special whereby you can get 4 or 5 pots with their cooktop for $500 more. Don't have the details at hand but its a substantial savings.

                I will say we don't treat these the best in our busy showroom! Food sits in them for hours after cooking and they get washed in the mile dishwasher (im told this is a no no), but they still look and perform well!

                1. re: ruby765

                  Hi, ruby765:

                  I'm sorry, I missed your point. Are the deBuyer pans you're talking about the same as the Revols?

                  I'm sure Miele is eager to sell its induction appliances, and given the profit margin and vertical integration, they'd be fools not to make such an offer. The question is, are the pots worth $500, or is the appliance in need of a sales boost?

                  Yes, stainless steel is a good material for storing food and cleaning up in the DW.


                  1. re: kaleokahu

                    It could be Demeyere. I know they always have this promo.

                    1. re: cutipie721

                      Hi, cutiepie721:

                      Maybe so, you would know better than I. I was just keying off the "little d" and thinking around the obvious typo.


      2. I bought one!! The stored ordered 18cm orange for me and it arrived this morning. It's very pretty. If it works well, you may see my Staub and Le Creuset on eBay some day. :-)

        The sales person at the store told me that this is the most break resistant material available on market today. Patent pending in France. We shall see about that.

        I tried to figure out which part of the pot is magnetic. NONE! None of my magnets on the fridge would stick to anywhere on the pot! I thought oh no... so I tested it on the stove, and it worked, water boiled. I kinda remember reading from somewhere that the induction compatibility comes from the bottom glaze of the pot and you should not scrub it too hard... We shall see how durable this glaze is.

        I'm very happy that I am no longer stuck to the super-heavy pots anymore. Thank you Girly_Q for bringing this up!

        5 Replies
        1. re: cutipie721

          Hi, cutiepie721:

          Thanks for this look. Interesting that, again, the magnet test isn't a determinant of induction capability.

          I also am interested in the texture on the bottom. It looks like two protruding rings, but what are the dots? Divots or bumps? Either way, it looks like a sizable % of the pan's bottom will not be in contact with the cooktop. When the pot starts to boil water, do bubbles form in any particular place on the bottom?

          Please post again after you've cooked in this some more. I'm particularly interested in what heat settings you use relative to the settings with your LC.

          Thanks Again,

          1. re: kaleokahu

            The bottom, where you see the dots, is totally smooth. There's almost no textural difference between the special glaze and the rest of the pot. You have to really really pay attention when you run fingers across the surface to notice the dots. And you're right, only those two ridges are touching the stove.

            Honestly I have no idea what in/on the pot is activating the magnetic circuit. It must be that silver-ish layer at the bottom. I plan to lay the pot side-way tonight and see if it heats up.

            What's the point of comparing it to LC if you already know CI is superior to ceramic?

            1. re: cutipie721

              Hi, cutiepie721:

              Thanks for the info.

              So do you think the dots *are* the special glaze? And is the "silverish layer" inside the pot, or outside on the bottom?

              "What's the point of comparing it to LC if you already know CI is superior to ceramic?" Well, first off, I'm not sure CI would be superior on your appliance, even though CI has better conductivity (other physical principles also being at work).

              Second, even if the ceramic is less-efficient, it would be nice for folks to have a real-world quantification of that. For example, if to maintain a medium simmer in the pot requires a setting of 5 with the ceramic and 3 with CI, then the marginal "2" is arguably an energy premium you pay for the other features of the ceramic pot. But maybe it will be the same. Or better.

              Re: only the ridges touching the stovetop, this is another proof that the induction field *effectively* extends off the deck at least a few millimeters. I know that strength drops off very rapidly (with the square of the distance), but I am still waiting for anyone to explain *how* high the effective height of the field really is.

              I'm also very interested in those rings... Some smoothtop manufacturers warn against using pans with similar "flame-rings" (like on some older CI, the molds for which were made back when woodstoves were still in wide use), for the ostensible reason that the heat differentials make cracking the glass more likely. Perhaps Revol has worked out this issue with the glaze and where they put it. My own experience with Descoware ECI with a flame-ring on a smoothtop has been crackless, BTW

              I really *am* interested in this stuff, and not as a way to disparage induction.

              Thanks Again,

              1. re: kaleokahu

                The only interesting place to look at is on the exterior bottom shown in the photo. There's nothing on the interior of the pot. The dots are actually areas without the coating. The rest of the bottom is silvery / pearl colored - that's the coating. I tried to put the pan on its side and the stove couldn't recognize it.

                I took a video of the Revol and LC boiling water. I tried to keep the height of liquid to be about the same. Turned on boost for both of them to make sure I didn't fall asleep while taking the videos. I turned off the stove when water reached boiling. Revol definitely took longer to heat up and to cool down.


                2:48 - turned off the stove for Revol.
                3:25 - final bubbles.

                3:40 - turned on the stove again for LC.
                4:52 - turned off the stove
                5:10 - water stopped moving.

                It's pretty common that induction stoves make a buzzing sound when it's on. I noticed that the buzz was louder when I used the LC, and it was almost non-existant with Revol. Not sure what that means.

                I was not aware of cookware with ridges at the bottom could pose a problem on smoothtops. I was under the impression that as long as the pan sits on the stove flat and steady, then it should be fine. I did hear someone, possibly on this board, talking about putting a hot, wet lid on the glass which created a suction and broke the glass... something like that... I have made Aebleskiver with the pan below a few times this past winter, and knock on wood the glass is still not broken.


                I don't usually make grains in my LC because 20cm is still too wide for us. This 18cm Revol is perfect. The lid has little spikes all over, like Staub. The black ceramic handle did not get hot at all after 30mins of simmering. It's now sitting the DW waiting to be washed tomorrow morning.

                It is an expensive pot, no doubt. I know I paid premium for novelty. I could have bought a little Staub for ~$50 when they had it on sale a few months ago and I'm glad I didn't. I probably won't replace my current ECI pots until there're more competitions, and/or when there are sales.

          2. re: cutipie721

            Oooh! Excited to hear your experiences! And, I love your choice of orange too!