Thread Number: 68228
/ Tag: Small Appliances
Slow Cookers |
[Down to Last] |
Post# 909581   12/4/2016 at 11:01 (2,670 days old) by Liberatordeluxe (UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Never owned a slow cooker but wanted to know if they ever get to boiling point? Has anyone ever steamed a Christmas pudding in one as WELL? |
|
Post# 909587 , Reply# 2   12/4/2016 at 12:30 (2,670 days old) by Michaelman2 (Lauderdale by the Sea, FL)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Lux, this is a fantastic idea! So glad I read you ur reply to the post. |
Post# 909593 , Reply# 3   12/4/2016 at 13:19 (2,670 days old) by cuffs054 (MONTICELLO, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
great idea. I want to try making a pudding this year. |
Post# 909597 , Reply# 4   12/4/2016 at 13:47 (2,670 days old) by panthera (Rocky Mountains)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 909606 , Reply# 5   12/4/2016 at 15:25 (2,670 days old) by luxflairguy (Wilmington NC)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
All I have are old round manual pots. One has a pot roast in it as we write! |
Post# 909609 , Reply# 6   12/4/2016 at 15:32 (2,670 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Came out of using the heating power pretty much equal to a light blub , so am gobsmacked some actually "boiled".
Have read various online warnings about preparing certain foods in slow cookers. Apparently there are/were concerns because temperatures never reach high enough levels to kill certain bacteria. |
Post# 909624 , Reply# 8   12/4/2016 at 16:32 (2,670 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
>Came out of using the heating power pretty much equal to a light blub , so am gobsmacked some actually "boiled".
>Have read various online warnings about preparing certain foods in slow cookers. Apparently there are/were concerns because temperatures never reach high enough levels to kill certain bacteria. I've read warnings about older slow cookers potentially not running hot enough. I've even seen a recommendation that people test their old slow cooker. I can't remember the test suggested, but the one I saw basically involved heating water. After a certain length of time, the water should be at least a certain temperature. Supposedly modern slow cookers run hotter than many vintage designs, and so there is the inevitable suggestion that one should just "upgrade" to something. This upgrade, of course, will also bring some other upgrades, such as environmental impact to make a new slow cooker, increase in the trade deficit since we no longer have the sophisticated technology required to make a Crock Pot, and possibly issues with bad wiring and poisonous glaze (probably more of an issue with the cheapest, no name slow cookers). I can say from experience with vintage slow cookers that they seemed to have varied in heating power. I've got a couple of old ones from the 70s when the technology was, er, hot, and everyone was making a slow cooker. One definitely seems run hotter and heat faster. |
Post# 909625 , Reply# 9   12/4/2016 at 16:38 (2,670 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Interesting point, but I think one could actually see the change of power of slow cookers in thrift shops, just by comparing the wattage of a vintage slow cooker to a modern slow cooker of the same brand/size. It's easiest to compare with Crock Pots, since the brand has always been there, and so many were made. Goodwill might easily have 1970s Crock Pot sitting right beside a 5 year old Crock Pot.
|
Post# 909632 , Reply# 11   12/4/2016 at 18:27 (2,670 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
>Apparently the ones with removable liners did not have the same radiant heat exposure on the outside of the crock as the ones with non-removable liners and the originals with non-removable liners tended to brown things better, or so I was told by customers, not that anybody liked washing the damn things.
I had one Crock Pot that I dumped partly because washing it promised to be a pain to wash. That wasn't the only factor--it also needed a lid, and I frankly got tired of trying to find a lid would fit, and so in a moment of "let's get rid of some clutter!" that Crock Pot went bye bye to Goodwill. Maybe someone at Goodwill lucked out, finding a match for the lid left over from a Crock Pot that went to the big Kitchen Counter in the Sky. Right now, I have no dishwasher, so it's all hand wash. But thinking long term, I want stuff that can go into a dishwasher. If it can't go into a dishwasher, I want some compelling value in the product to justify the pain of hand washing. Past that, even with hand washing in mind, removable inserts may be easier to deal with. |
Post# 909637 , Reply# 13   12/4/2016 at 18:46 (2,670 days old) by luxflairguy (Wilmington NC)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Power ratings! I've just trolled Ebay and found that even older models were anywhere between 150 watts and 200! Some larger ones were 150 on low and 200 on high. The one I'm using today is 180 watts on high. I've been learning a lot about SC and Miele today! |
Post# 909649 , Reply# 14   12/4/2016 at 19:49 (2,670 days old) by rp2813 (Sannazay)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
|
Post# 909658 , Reply# 15   12/4/2016 at 20:14 (2,670 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Comes from recipes and or persons that leave things in slow cookers for hours upon hours such as overnight or while away all day. Theory seems to be that temperature will never rise enough to keep the nasty things from growing and or kill them off. That and the low temperature/moist environment might just encourage things to grow.
Our mother never was sized by the whole "slow cooker craze" so never saw such things growing up outside of advertisements. In fact none of one's female relatives did either. By the time one moved out into one's own digs didn't see the purpose. Interestingly some microwaves of the 1980's or so had "simi-cook" feature. That is the microwave would "simmer cook" a meal which was supposed to be same as slow cooking. This usually involved inserting a thermometer probe into the food being cooked, then pushing a few buttons. The oven took care of things from there. All these things and features started popping up in the 1970's and 1980's as more and more women began entering the workforce. Women's magazines, appliance adverts, etc.. were all full of ideas, recipes, gadgets, appliances and so forth that were supposed to allow a working wife and mother to still get a hot meal on table. This was probably particularly true of men like "Mr. Red Foreman" that didn't want their wives working (I wear the pants in this house was the line one heard being shouted about often enough), but gave in long as things didn't slip on the home front. This post was last edited 12/04/2016 at 20:47 |
Post# 909661 , Reply# 16   12/4/2016 at 20:31 (2,670 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
My mother never really got into slow cookers, either. She had one--a West Bend Lazy Day (one of those with a brownish enamel steel pot). She used it for making vegetable soup, and I cannot remember her doing anything else with it. She didn't even make the soup stock used in the vegetable soup in the slow cooker, preferring to use the stove. Simmering time for the soup was only a few hours as I recall--not all day. The soup did turn out nicely (again, as I recall). I recall my mother making soup at least once in my grandmother's kitchen, using the stove, and it wasn't as good as what she could do in our kitchen with the slow cooker.
|
Post# 909663 , Reply# 17   12/4/2016 at 20:41 (2,670 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I've wondered if energy costs didn't help fuel slow cooker sales in the 70s. (Imagined sales pitch: "this slow cooker cooks dinner, using only as much power as a light bulb!") I also recall having heard that there was a sort of return to basics mentality, at least in some circles, and a technology that did long, slow simmering might have been appealing.
I know I've seen Sunbeam electric skillets that had a removable ceramic insert. I've wondered if those weren't influenced by the slow cooker craze. In a way, that skillet idea seems like it would appeal to many buyers in that one base appliance can be used for a wide range of cooking activiities from frying to gently simmering soup. The thermostatic control is also nice in that it guarantees a more reliable temperature than a slow cooker that has a weak heater that heats constantly when powered. |
Post# 909664 , Reply# 18   12/4/2016 at 20:41 (2,670 days old) by norgeway (mocksville n c )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
We had one too, but Mother and Grandmother used the Mirro Matic Pressure cooker much more often. |
Post# 909666 , Reply# 19   12/4/2016 at 20:52 (2,670 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Stagflation, the "Earth" movement, the economy, and high energy prices.
As a child then one had little direct worry about such things. I mean one heard about them on the news, but since one didn't actually have to work/pay bills.... Yes, there was a "return to nature/basics" movement in the 1970's; but our Dad wasn't having any of that "Hippy-Dippy" nonsense in his house either. Closest we got was that horrible Quaker "natural" cereal an aunt either purchased for us or got our mother to buy. It was like eating cardboard with milk..... We kids did try to mount a protest, but that was something else that didn't fly in Big Daddy's house. *LOL* Now a pressure cooker our Mother did have; it was from Presto IIRC and got used often. |
Post# 909673 , Reply# 21   12/4/2016 at 21:46 (2,670 days old) by Xraytech (Rural southwest Pennsylvania )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Growing up my mother had 2 slow cookers, a 3.5 qt Rival and a 4 qt rectangular West Bend
She used them fairly often for spaghetti sauce, chili, barbecued ham, roast beef, pork and sauerkraut Both were wedding gifts in 1984 |
Post# 909677 , Reply# 22   12/4/2016 at 22:52 (2,670 days old) by rp2813 (Sannazay)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I limited myself to removable inserts until I saw this thing and had to have it. Since I didn't have a SC smaller than 6-quarts, that justified the purchase.
View Full Size
|
Post# 909741 , Reply# 25   12/5/2016 at 12:59 (2,669 days old) by rp2813 (Sannazay)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I picked up a similar Sunbeam item a while back, but I don't think it was ever intended to be used for deep frying. It has a single handle and of course lacks a removable insert. Since the liner is aluminum, there may be issues with acidic ingredients. I bought it for jobs that a 6-quart Nesco is too big for, but I've yet to find a reason to use it for anything, so it may get re-homed at some point. |
Post# 909784 , Reply# 26   12/5/2016 at 18:21 (2,669 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I have heard some argue that any metal pan will react to some degree. Someone here said he could detect a slight different between stainless steel and ceramic or enameled iron. IIRC. Thus the non-reactive slow cookers might be appealing, at least for some, particularly for something that has long simmering time.
|
Post# 909793 , Reply# 27   12/5/2016 at 19:28 (2,669 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Actually do have a slow cooker, well at least in theory.
Mother Dear gave me a Dazey combination deep fryer/slow cooker as a Christmas gift one of the first years after moving out. Didn't come with the ceramic liner, and one hasn't used the deep fryer in ages so totally forgot about the thing. Apparently they are now highly collectible and sought after. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dazey-Chefs-Pot-... |
Post# 909844 , Reply# 28   12/6/2016 at 05:30 (2,668 days old) by askolover (South of Nash Vegas, TN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I just learned a few days ago that one should not prepare kidney beans in a crock pot without boiling them on the stovetop for a few minutes first....apparently they have a toxin that's deactivated by the boiling water!
I have 3 crock pots myself...my mother's old 1970's red round Rival crockpot with non-removable liner, a newer round one with removable liner and one large oval one with removable liner (I roast a ham in it sometimes...so tender). I've seen recipes for cakes "baked" in the crock pot. |
Post# 909847 , Reply# 29   12/6/2016 at 05:46 (2,668 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I currently have 3 slow cookers. Next to my coffee maker, they are the most used small appliance in my kitchen.
I have made cakes in the slow cooker, but they are the 'Lava' variety. Spooned into a bowl with a scoop of ice cream and eaten hot. Hardest part is smelling it while waiting for it. Malcolm |
Post# 909868 , Reply# 30   12/6/2016 at 09:13 (2,668 days old) by Xraytech (Rural southwest Pennsylvania )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 909872 , Reply# 31   12/6/2016 at 09:28 (2,668 days old) by sudsmaster (SF Bay Area, California)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Some years ago a friend raved about buying a small slow cooker on sale and that it was perfect for single serve meals.
So I went to the local kmart/walmart/target and got a 1.5 liter model. It sat in hte original box for years. But last Sunday I decided to give it a try, at last. Instructions said to break it in by adding a couple cups of water and setting it on high for 15 minutes. Well, it was more like an hour and by that time the thing was boiling briskly. Tag on unit says it consumes 120 watts, no doubt on high. Which is probably a lot for such a small pot.
Anyway, I added some chopped onion, cubed potatoes, carrots, cubed chuck steak, soup stock, and herbs. Set on low, went off to a car meet and came back three hours later. It smelled great. But the instructions said to cook for 8-10 hours. Well by that time the aroma had dissipated and while the results were edible they had lost a lot of flavor. The next day I cut up the rest of the chuck steak and tried again, leaving it on for "only" five hours. Contents simmering by then. Results better. But I think it tends to run hot, even on low, so I will try shorter cook times to see what works best. Possible using larger chunks of meat would help, as well.
I'm giving it a break for a bit, but might try some pork instead of beef next time.
I figure slow cooker manufacturers make these things run hotter than necessary because of the very concerns about food poisoning mentioned earlier. A programmable unit might help with timing. Your mileage may vary. |
Post# 909877 , Reply# 33   12/6/2016 at 10:37 (2,668 days old) by panthera (Rocky Mountains)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I've noticed that lots of recipes are written by idiots. At 120 watts for 1.5 liter, there's no way it needs 8 hours. Sheesh. One thing which has often been mentioned - lifting the lid takes away an awful lot of heat and it does add to the final cooking time. I participated in an online review of pressure pans a few years back. Very professional, very exacting - cooked several 'high-altitude' variations on recipes. Unfortunately, the ultimate article - and this is still online and it's a major player in the review business, print and online - was edited at the last minute to make these two changes: 1) It takes 1.5 hours at 15 PSI at sealevel to cook a fresh chicken. Or make a simple soup. Or stew. When I and everybody else complained, we were informed that this was drawn from the FDA guidelines. Which is total nonsense. Stupid times are still up. 2) Because oil under pressure goes way up to a very high temp very fast, all manufacturers council against using normal pressure cookers for pressure frying. So, idiot editor dumbed down every recipe which used more than two tablespoons (aggregate!) of fat or oil. She insisted upon our repeated complaints that this was a safety rule of the manufacturers.
In short, they spent a lot of money, invested a lot of time, got some great recipes and testers and devices...and then absolutely destroyed the finished online review by letting editors who wouldn't know a pressure pan from a slow cooker 'correct' our work.
I've had kidney beans turn out (and yes, they had boiled) in five hours at our altitude in our 1957 bean pot. Without presoaking. Follow your nose and throw away the stupid instructions. Cook with a thermometer. |
Post# 909902 , Reply# 35   12/6/2016 at 12:57 (2,668 days old) by panthera (Rocky Mountains)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
You sure got that one right. Our protests - all 18 of us testers - that 1.5 hours for a soup was absurd fell on deaf ears. The idiot editor had never used a pressure cooker, hadn't a clue and wasn't going to let reality stand in the way of her certainties. So - useless review, hurt the reputation of the organization and resulted in all 18 of us refusing to ever work with them again. And then people wonder why Trump was able to create his own reality. After that project, I know exactly why. |
Post# 921937 , Reply# 37   2/17/2017 at 04:47 (2,595 days old) by sudsmaster (SF Bay Area, California)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Interesting account of the birth of the slow cooker small appliance. Never heard of Naxon before. The idea that leaving a crock in the bakery oven which is not re-fueled on the Sabbath is interesting: a way to honor the laws against lighting a fire on the Sabbath and having a hot meal at the end of the day. I do remember slow cookers becoming something of a rage in the '70's, although it took me a long time to "get with it" and acquire my own in the late 90's. That one I still have; it's an oval Rival with a green crock. I had this idea that the size would accommodate a whole chicken. But I was never all that impressed with the result. More like boiled chicken. OK for a sort of chicken stew, I guess.
One thing about slow cookers is a bit of a concern. And that is the amount of time that the raw food sits in the cooker before the temp goes from room temp to a safer 120F and above. I suppose that would be called the danger zone. I suppose some modern cookers allow one to program them for high for the first few hours and then switch to low. The Hamilton Beach I have now has a temp probe, which is very nice, as it will switch automatically to "Warm" when the target probe temp is reached, but it doesn't to the programmed high-low switch, at least not in temp probe mode. |
Post# 921961 , Reply# 39   2/17/2017 at 08:13 (2,595 days old) by joeekaitis (Rialto, California, USA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Heavenly. Spray the crock of a large oblong slow cooker with nonstick cooking spray, shape the loaf to fit with at least a half-inch on all sides, low setting for 8 to 10 hours.
For a little char, use a small oblong cooker and pack the mixture firmly. You'll get a flatter loaf but with that exterior crispness which some folks crave and others foolishly leave on the plate for the dog or the Waste King. |
Post# 922145 , Reply# 41   2/18/2017 at 09:08 (2,594 days old) by polkanut (Wausau, WI )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I found this last fall at a neighborhood estate sale. I think I paid around $5.00 for it. Almost all of the original paperwork came with it as well. CLICK HERE TO GO TO polkanut's LINK |
Post# 922147 , Reply# 42   2/18/2017 at 09:47 (2,594 days old) by joeekaitis (Rialto, California, USA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Works best in a large programmable ("smart pot") slow cooker.
Hunt up a Corning Ware Pyroceram covered casserole that will fit inside your slow cooker using the inverted casserole lid as a riser under the casserole. This, of course, rules out your rare first-generation "shark's fin" lid. The crock's lid shouldn't touch the raised casserole. A 1.5 liter casserole will make two servings.
Put 2 cups of water in the bottom of the crock. Put in the inverted lid into the crock. Combine oats and water in the casserole using the proportions on the package. Set the casserole on the inverted lid. Cover the crock.
If you have the luxury of time and planned ahead, set the cooker for 8 hours on low; otherwise 4 hours on high. Results should be about the same.
Advantages: You only need to wash the casserole (soak in cold water until wash-up time) and wipe the crock dry. The gentle steam prevents a hard crust from forming on the oats. Predictable results.
Disadvantages: Not for the impatient with limited time-management skills. Can't make a crowd-feeding batch.
And, yes, this was inspired by the bowl-in-the-pressure-cooker method |
Post# 979982 , Reply# 44   1/26/2018 at 09:50 (2,252 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Well,here is the hardest & most-challenging thing that I'd made in my slow cooker:
But unfortunately when I wanted to add more meat (turkey) to pot, it got left on Warm, and not turned to Low while I was at work, so after this delicious portion was all that I got to enjoy, the whole rest of it burned beyond any recognition (& enjoyment) because I couldn't count on anyone left here to turn the cooking setting down to the warming one, when it was done: -- Dave |
Post# 979996 , Reply# 45   1/26/2018 at 11:47 (2,252 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|