HOME > Chowhound > Cookware >

Discussion

Revere Ware? Different?

  • 8

Based on a comment I found here, I bought a second hand Revere Ware 9 inch for doing omelettes. It's great I'm after a second one to be able to keep up with the table :).

I like the copper and the heat and stuff. Its not quite flat but it fits the electric burner I'm using well. With a pad of butter its just very nice to cook omelettes with.

I have heard complaints about new Revere Ware. Are they that different? Any comments?

Bo

 
  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. The old stuff has more copper on the bottom, you can actually see and feel the transition into the copper. The older stuff has a two piece molded plastic handle that is screwed together to make the handle. The midrange Revere Ware has a one piece molded handle with a metal insert that attaches to the pan. The newest is different yet. The old two piece handled Revere Ware has the thickest coper layer and should have the best thermal conductivity.

    1. The oldest Revere Ware has according to the patents has about 0.5 mms of copper. This was cut in half in the mid 60s. The new stuff is just flashed with copper. The screws in the handle are pretty good indicators that you have the oldest pans.

       
      1 Reply
      1. re: wekick

        Those are the ones I have (my mother's, probably from the 50's) and I love them - will never give them up!

      2. The copper on the bottom of even the old revere ware may not do much but the stuff is bulletproof, USA made and lasts lifetimes. The new stuff is MIC and of questionable quality - for cheap thrift store cookware it's serviceable stuff and has a neat vintage look - if buying new I would look elsewhere.

        1 Reply
        1. re: JTPhilly

          In theory 0.5 mm is not supposed to be all that great but I have a sauce pan that bubbles sugar all the way across evenly even though the ring burner flame touches about a half inch from the outside of the pan. I don't get any hot or burnt spots in the sugar. It might not be as even for a skillet that is oversized for the burner though.

        2. I bought a 9inch first version thats not flat but still light and heats quickly. Its cheap and nice enough that I'll get a second.
          Seems a nice niche pan for single servings & eggs.

          1. Is it possible that the copper exposed on the bottom is the most efficient? Also the whole pan is thin so the heat penetrates.

            1 Reply
            1. re: Sigurd

              Exposed copper would have some advantage initally over ply copper like the All Clad copper core, but I can't imagine that would hold true for very long on a hob. A simplystic way to look at this is that in a ply pan, the copper recieves it's heat from the outer ply and then distributes it evenly to the liner. In a copper pan with a SS liner the copper is heated by the hob and then distributes the heat to the liner more evenly than the hob would. You eliminate a step, but because the copper on a Revere pan is so thin this advantage isn't going to dominate the thermodynamics that are taking place as you cook.

              The whole pan is thin, that's for sure, but this is a double edeged blade so to speak, it's easy to heat, but should also be easy to hot spot because there is no thermal mass to even things out.

              Copper is great because of it's thermodynamics, it has good thermal conductivity compared to other metals used in cookware and better thermal mass, note how heavy a good copper pot really is. In the old Revere Ware, the copper is still much thinner than the SS part of the pan, so although it may hlep some, you aren't going to get much of the advantage of copper.