Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 97

Thread: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

  1. #1
    David Dyer-Bennet Guest

    Default Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    I'm shopping for a new stove. We've got gas plumbing in place and no
    240V in place, so we're looking for an all-gas range with dual ovens
    and a decently high-power burner.

    I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    burners on $1k stoves.

    Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating? Many
    online articles suggest the rating is about 2x the actual. I can't look
    up the rating on my old stove, it's a Magic Chef from perhaps the 1950s,
    or even older. (I measured the heating on my old stove as about 3950
    BTU/hr, which is compatible with the articles suggesting a rating of 2x
    the practical measure, since 8,000 BTU/hr is at the low end of modern
    "ordinary" burners.)

    Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    selling locally right at $1000.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, [email protected]; http://dd-b.net/
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

  2. #2
    Ed Pawlowski Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    wrote:



    >
    >I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >burners on $1k stoves.


    Pretty much the max from what I've seen.

    >
    >Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    >their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?


    Not easily done at home. Most of us have nothing near what is
    required to measure that kind of heat.



    >
    >Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    >relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    >still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    >learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    >perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    >selling locally right at $1000.


    Sounds like a bargain at the price. I have no idea how LG appliances
    are, but I like my LG TV and LG computer monitor. I don't cook on
    either one though.

  3. #3
    Sqwertz Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 18:54:03 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

    > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >>interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >>BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >>lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >>propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >>burners on $1k stoves.

    >
    > Pretty much the max from what I've seen.


    My Kitchenaide has a 18K burner (cost was about $1,400) but I don't
    like how wide it is. For wok cooking you want to the flame to be
    fairly concentrated/narrow at the bottom and the heat from there to
    wrap up around the sides. With the way this burner is designed it's
    as if it expecting an 18" stock pot rather than a wok.

    This is what I think you really have to watch out for - the width of
    the burner as well as the BTU's.

    -sw

  4. #4
    sf Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    > Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    > relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    > still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    > learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    > perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    > selling locally right at $1000.


    What model is that? I see the LDG3016ST MAP - but it's closer to
    $2000 than $1000. I was going to recommend looking at Kitchenaid
    ranges but they cost even more. My KA cooktop has 20,000 btu burners,
    but you're looking for and all in one so that won't do. Good luck
    finding anything worthwhile for $1000 but if you do, let us know how
    it's going in 5 years because it's something I'd recommend to others
    if it doesn't need any service calls in that time.

    --
    Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

  5. #5
    isw Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:

    > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.n[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >
    > >I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    > >interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    > >BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    > >lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    > >propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    > >burners on $1k stoves.

    >
    > Pretty much the max from what I've seen.
    >
    > >
    > >Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    > >their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?

    >
    > Not easily done at home. Most of us have nothing near what is
    > required to measure that kind of heat.


    Actually, it's very easy. All it takes is a big pot of water, a
    thermometer, and a clock.

    First, note that cookstove burners are rated in BTU *per hour*, not just
    BTU.

    It takes 8.34 BTU to increase one gallon of water one degree F. (note
    that it doesn't matter how long it takes). If your stove accomplished
    that in one hour, you'd have a 8.34 BTU/hr burner. If it could do it in
    one minute, you'd have a (8.34*60 = 500.4) BTU burner. One gallon, ten
    degrees in one minute, 5,004 BTU/hr. And so on.

    So here's how:

    Put a big pot of water on the burner (Use a thin-walled pot so its mass
    doesn't affect things too much). Measure the amount of water (an exact
    number of gallons will make the calculations easier). Measure the
    temperature. Turn on the heat. Wait a while -- a few minutes -- using a
    clock so you'll know how long. Measure the temperature again. You'll get
    better accuracy if you use more water and a smaller temperature rise.

    As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...

    Isaac

  6. #6
    spamtrap1888 Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Feb 20, 11:54*pm, isw <i...@witzend.com> wrote:
    > In article <l2n5k7pddammaoljmp00nu4a03gv9f0...@4ax.com>,
    > *Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <d...@dd-b.net>
    > > wrote:

    >
    > > >I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    > > >interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    > > >BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    > > >lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    > > >propane tank, but I don't have room for that). *I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    > > >burners on $1k stoves.

    >
    > > Pretty much the max from what I've seen.

    >
    > > >Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    > > >their stove? *How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?

    >
    > > Not easily done at home. *Most of us have nothing near what is
    > > required to measure that kind of heat.

    >
    > Actually, it's very easy. All it takes is a big pot of water, a
    > thermometer, and a clock.
    >
    > First, note that cookstove burners are rated in BTU *per hour*, not just
    > BTU.
    >
    > It takes 8.34 BTU to increase one gallon of water one degree F. (note
    > that it doesn't matter how long it takes). If your stove accomplished
    > that in one hour, you'd have a 8.34 BTU/hr burner. If it could do it in
    > one minute, you'd have a (8.34*60 = 500.4) BTU burner. One gallon, ten
    > degrees in one minute, 5,004 BTU/hr. And so on.
    >
    > So here's how:
    >
    > Put a big pot of water on the burner (Use a thin-walled pot so its mass
    > doesn't affect things too much). Measure the amount of water (an exact
    > number of gallons will make the calculations easier). Measure the
    > temperature. Turn on the heat. Wait a while -- a few minutes -- using a
    > clock so you'll know how long. Measure the temperature again. You'll get
    > better accuracy if you use more water and a smaller temperature rise.
    >
    > As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    > cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    > don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...
    >


    Alternatively, I would fill a pot of water 2/3 of the way up, mark the
    level, then add a quart of water. Then time how long it takes to boil
    that quart of water away. The advantage is that you will humidify your
    dry winter air at the same time.


  7. #7
    Lou Decruss Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:11:54 -0800 (PST), spamtrap1888
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Feb 20, 11:54*pm, isw <i...@witzend.com> wrote:
    >> In article <l2n5k7pddammaoljmp00nu4a03gv9f0...@4ax.com>,
    >> *Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <d...@dd-b.net>
    >> > wrote:

    >>
    >> > >I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >> > >interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >> > >BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >> > >lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >> > >propane tank, but I don't have room for that). *I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >> > >burners on $1k stoves.

    >>
    >> > Pretty much the max from what I've seen.

    >>
    >> > >Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    >> > >their stove? *How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?

    >>
    >> > Not easily done at home. *Most of us have nothing near what is
    >> > required to measure that kind of heat.

    >>
    >> Actually, it's very easy. All it takes is a big pot of water, a
    >> thermometer, and a clock.
    >>
    >> First, note that cookstove burners are rated in BTU *per hour*, not just
    >> BTU.
    >>
    >> It takes 8.34 BTU to increase one gallon of water one degree F. (note
    >> that it doesn't matter how long it takes). If your stove accomplished
    >> that in one hour, you'd have a 8.34 BTU/hr burner. If it could do it in
    >> one minute, you'd have a (8.34*60 = 500.4) BTU burner. One gallon, ten
    >> degrees in one minute, 5,004 BTU/hr. And so on.
    >>
    >> So here's how:
    >>
    >> Put a big pot of water on the burner (Use a thin-walled pot so its mass
    >> doesn't affect things too much). Measure the amount of water (an exact
    >> number of gallons will make the calculations easier). Measure the
    >> temperature. Turn on the heat. Wait a while -- a few minutes -- using a
    >> clock so you'll know how long. Measure the temperature again. You'll get
    >> better accuracy if you use more water and a smaller temperature rise.
    >>
    >> As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    >> cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    >> don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...
    >>

    >
    >Alternatively, I would fill a pot of water 2/3 of the way up, mark the
    >level, then add a quart of water. Then time how long it takes to boil
    >that quart of water away. The advantage is that you will humidify your
    >dry winter air at the same time.


    Call me stupid but what will that show?

    Lou










  8. #8
    Lou Decruss Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 23:54:09 -0800, isw <[email protected]> wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    > Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> >
    >> >I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >> >interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >> >BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >> >lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >> >propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >> >burners on $1k stoves.

    >>
    >> Pretty much the max from what I've seen.
    >>
    >> >
    >> >Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    >> >their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?

    >>
    >> Not easily done at home. Most of us have nothing near what is
    >> required to measure that kind of heat.

    >
    >Actually, it's very easy. All it takes is a big pot of water, a
    >thermometer, and a clock.
    >
    >First, note that cookstove burners are rated in BTU *per hour*, not just
    >BTU.
    >
    >It takes 8.34 BTU to increase one gallon of water one degree F. (note
    >that it doesn't matter how long it takes). If your stove accomplished
    >that in one hour, you'd have a 8.34 BTU/hr burner. If it could do it in
    >one minute, you'd have a (8.34*60 = 500.4) BTU burner. One gallon, ten
    >degrees in one minute, 5,004 BTU/hr. And so on.
    >
    >So here's how:
    >
    >Put a big pot of water on the burner (Use a thin-walled pot so its mass
    >doesn't affect things too much). Measure the amount of water (an exact
    >number of gallons will make the calculations easier). Measure the
    >temperature. Turn on the heat. Wait a while -- a few minutes -- using a
    >clock so you'll know how long. Measure the temperature again. You'll get
    >better accuracy if you use more water and a smaller temperature rise.
    >
    >As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    >cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    >don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...


    I've read that method before but why would you need to do it in a real
    life situation?

    I was on a job that needed a new boiler. It was originally coal and
    then oil and finally converted to gas. It was installed in 1927 and
    there was no way of telling how many btu it was with testing it. They
    turned off anything in the building that was gas and took a meter
    reading. Then jumped the stat to run continuously for 30 minutes and
    took another meter reading. They came up with 1.4 million btu and
    estimated 60% efficiency and came up with the proper sized modern
    boiler to replace it.

    Lou

  9. #9
    sf Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 23:54:09 -0800, isw <[email protected]> wrote:

    > As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    > cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    > don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...



    --
    Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

  10. #10
    sf Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 23:54:09 -0800, isw <[email protected]> wrote:

    > As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    > cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    > don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...


    Electric is more efficient with less heat loss than gas, so it doesn't
    need to be as strong. I think gas is used in professional kitchens
    for the instant on and off.

    --
    Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

  11. #11
    Brooklyn1 Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:31:37 -0800, sf <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 23:54:09 -0800, isw <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    >> cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    >> don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...

    >
    >Electric is more efficient with less heat loss than gas, so it doesn't
    >need to be as strong.


    Wrong. Electric is more efficient when used as immersible heating
    elements but not as a standard cooktop. Electric element cooktops
    rely on 100% contact for best efficiency but in RL that never happens,
    50% contact is hardly achievable Gas cooktops are more than twice as
    efficient as electric, that's one reason why restaurants use gas, but
    more importantly is that gas cooking is far more sensitive.... think
    of cooking with gas as playing a Stradivarius and cooking with
    electric as playing a kazoo.

  12. #12
    David Dyer-Bennet Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> writes:

    > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >>
    >>I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >>interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >>BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >>lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >>propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >>burners on $1k stoves.

    >
    > Pretty much the max from what I've seen.
    >
    >>
    >>Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    >>their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?

    >
    > Not easily done at home. Most of us have nothing near what is
    > required to measure that kind of heat.


    Oh, no, it's very easy. You measure three things: volume of water,
    temperature of water, and time. All are easy to measure. A normal
    instant-read kitchen thermometer that I'd expect us all to have goes
    from about freezing (solidly below room temp, anyway) up to about 220F
    (they cost about $8 new).

    What I did was measure out two quarts of water, read the temperature,
    heat it on high for 5 minutes, and measured the temperature again. A
    pint of water weighs 1.02xxx or some such -- "1" is close enough, so two
    quarts is 4 pounds. One BTU is the energy to raise one pound of water
    one degree F.

    So, the BTU/hr actually transferred into the water is:

    (finaltemp - originaltemp) * 60 / 5 * 4

    I had final temp 130F, original temp 67F, and I heated for 4 minutes
    rather than 5, so (130 - 67) * 60 / 4 * 4 = 3780.

    (Which is not quite the number I got, so some random value in the
    example here isn't what I actually did at home.)

    (Not all the heat goes into the pot and the water, some escapes all sort
    sof different directions, and the pot isn't perfectly insulated, and for
    that matter combustion isn't 100% efficient either, so the actual
    measured heating will be less than the rating for the burner; online
    discussions elsewhere suggested the rating will be roughly twice what
    you measure with this procedure. I'm wondering if anybody else who
    knows the rating on their burners has done this, to verify the 2x
    factor?)

    >>Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    >>relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    >>still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    >>learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    >>perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    >>selling locally right at $1000.

    >
    > Sounds like a bargain at the price. I have no idea how LG appliances
    > are, but I like my LG TV and LG computer monitor. I don't cook on
    > either one though.


    We've got a washer of theirs that works -- slightly closer to a stove
    than a TV, maybe. It's been good so far.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, [email protected]; http://dd-b.net/
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

  13. #13
    David Dyer-Bennet Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    sf <[email protected]> writes:

    > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    >> relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    >> still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    >> learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    >> perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    >> selling locally right at $1000.

    >
    > What model is that? I see the LDG3016ST MAP - but it's closer to
    > $2000 than $1000. I was going to recommend looking at Kitchenaid
    > ranges but they cost even more. My KA cooktop has 20,000 btu burners,
    > but you're looking for and all in one so that won't do. Good luck
    > finding anything worthwhile for $1000 but if you do, let us know how
    > it's going in 5 years because it's something I'd recommend to others
    > if it doesn't need any service calls in that time.


    I saw a Kithenaid with 20k burners, but it was an open-box item on
    super-special discount for $4000, AND had only a single oven. So we
    didn't buy it. But 20k burners do have a certain charm!

    I've seen this LG in two places now. It's 4 burners (no fifth burner or
    griddle area in the middle), two ovens with the larger one on the bottom
    (convection in the bottom oven), all-gas (not electric oven). I think
    it's a last-year's model being moved out at $1000, not MSRP of $1000.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, [email protected]; http://dd-b.net/
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

  14. #14
    dsi1 Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On 2/21/2012 8:30 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
    > Ed Pawlowski<[email protected]> writes:
    >
    >> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet<[email protected]>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>> I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >>> interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >>> BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >>> lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >>> propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >>> burners on $1k stoves.

    >>
    >> Pretty much the max from what I've seen.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    >>> their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?

    >>
    >> Not easily done at home. Most of us have nothing near what is
    >> required to measure that kind of heat.

    >
    > Oh, no, it's very easy. You measure three things: volume of water,
    > temperature of water, and time. All are easy to measure. A normal
    > instant-read kitchen thermometer that I'd expect us all to have goes
    > from about freezing (solidly below room temp, anyway) up to about 220F
    > (they cost about $8 new).
    >
    > What I did was measure out two quarts of water, read the temperature,
    > heat it on high for 5 minutes, and measured the temperature again. A
    > pint of water weighs 1.02xxx or some such -- "1" is close enough, so two
    > quarts is 4 pounds. One BTU is the energy to raise one pound of water
    > one degree F.
    >
    > So, the BTU/hr actually transferred into the water is:
    >
    > (finaltemp - originaltemp) * 60 / 5 * 4
    >
    > I had final temp 130F, original temp 67F, and I heated for 4 minutes
    > rather than 5, so (130 - 67) * 60 / 4 * 4 = 3780.
    >
    > (Which is not quite the number I got, so some random value in the
    > example here isn't what I actually did at home.)
    >
    > (Not all the heat goes into the pot and the water, some escapes all sort
    > sof different directions, and the pot isn't perfectly insulated, and for
    > that matter combustion isn't 100% efficient either, so the actual
    > measured heating will be less than the rating for the burner; online
    > discussions elsewhere suggested the rating will be roughly twice what
    > you measure with this procedure. I'm wondering if anybody else who
    > knows the rating on their burners has done this, to verify the 2x
    > factor?)


    My suggestion would be to keep a lid on the pot and make sure you do
    your measurements well before the boiling point of the water.

    >
    >>> Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    >>> relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    >>> still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    >>> learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    >>> perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    >>> selling locally right at $1000.

    >>
    >> Sounds like a bargain at the price. I have no idea how LG appliances
    >> are, but I like my LG TV and LG computer monitor. I don't cook on
    >> either one though.

    >
    > We've got a washer of theirs that works -- slightly closer to a stove
    > than a TV, maybe. It's been good so far.


    We have a LG washer and dryer. The controls are not like any W/D that
    we've had before although it's easy enough to operate once you learn
    how. There's a big dial for the wash settings, an on/off switch, a bunch
    of buttons that I don't mess with, and a run/pause button that's sort of
    like something you'd find on a DVD player. There a pretty icon panel
    that I don't know how to interpret with a big numeric display that shows
    the estimated number of minutes remaining for the wash. I was somewhat
    shocked that the normal wash takes about 50 minutes.

    As it goes, we're pretty much an all Korean family. Even our car and my
    mother-in-law are Korean. So far, these K-products have preformed quite
    competently, although my mother-in-law looks like hell.



  15. #15
    sf Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:34:21 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    > I've seen this LG in two places now. It's 4 burners (no fifth burner or
    > griddle area in the middle), two ovens with the larger one on the bottom
    > (convection in the bottom oven), all-gas (not electric oven). I think
    > it's a last-year's model being moved out at $1000, not MSRP of $1000.


    I thought it had to be a sale price. Well, get it if it's that good
    of a deal! It may not be there for you if you horse around too long
    trying to decide. Surely you've looked at enough models to know if
    it's a deal or not. Since it's last year's model, what do the reviews
    say? I see the LG LDG3015ST 30 is $300 more, but it has a 5th burner.

    My only question is: Does it self-clean or continuous clean? I hate
    cleaning ovens and it would be a deal breaker for me if it didn't have
    at least one that self-cleaned.

    The other thing you need to look at is the placement of the oven
    light. Mine are at the back in the right-hand corner and they are a
    bear to replace. With a lot of effort (because the screws were
    frozen), I was able to replace the light in my upper oven - but I had
    to call the repairman anyway because I couldn't get it back together
    properly (and he had a hard time too). The light in my lower oven is
    out now but I'm not expending the effort to replace it. I'll just
    have the repairman do it for me the next time I need to call one for
    some other reason.

    --
    Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

  16. #16
    Gary Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    Lou Decruss wrote:
    >
    > On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:11:54 -0800 (PST), spamtrap1888
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >Alternatively, I would fill a pot of water 2/3 of the way up, mark the
    > >level, then add a quart of water. Then time how long it takes to boil
    > >that quart of water away. The advantage is that you will humidify your
    > >dry winter air at the same time.

    >
    > Call me stupid but what will that show?


    OK....Hi stupid. It will show condensation on your kitchen window.

    Gary

  17. #17
    David Dyer-Bennet Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    dsi1 <[email protected]> writes:

    > On 2/21/2012 8:30 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
    >> Ed Pawlowski<[email protected]> writes:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet<[email protected]>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >>>> interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >>>> BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >>>> lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >>>> propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >>>> burners on $1k stoves.
    >>>
    >>> Pretty much the max from what I've seen.
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    >>>> their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?
    >>>
    >>> Not easily done at home. Most of us have nothing near what is
    >>> required to measure that kind of heat.

    >>
    >> Oh, no, it's very easy. You measure three things: volume of water,
    >> temperature of water, and time. All are easy to measure. A normal
    >> instant-read kitchen thermometer that I'd expect us all to have goes
    >> from about freezing (solidly below room temp, anyway) up to about 220F
    >> (they cost about $8 new).
    >>
    >> What I did was measure out two quarts of water, read the temperature,
    >> heat it on high for 5 minutes, and measured the temperature again. A
    >> pint of water weighs 1.02xxx or some such -- "1" is close enough, so two
    >> quarts is 4 pounds. One BTU is the energy to raise one pound of water
    >> one degree F.
    >>
    >> So, the BTU/hr actually transferred into the water is:
    >>
    >> (finaltemp - originaltemp) * 60 / 5 * 4
    >>
    >> I had final temp 130F, original temp 67F, and I heated for 4 minutes
    >> rather than 5, so (130 - 67) * 60 / 4 * 4 = 3780.
    >>
    >> (Which is not quite the number I got, so some random value in the
    >> example here isn't what I actually did at home.)
    >>
    >> (Not all the heat goes into the pot and the water, some escapes all sort
    >> sof different directions, and the pot isn't perfectly insulated, and for
    >> that matter combustion isn't 100% efficient either, so the actual
    >> measured heating will be less than the rating for the burner; online
    >> discussions elsewhere suggested the rating will be roughly twice what
    >> you measure with this procedure. I'm wondering if anybody else who
    >> knows the rating on their burners has done this, to verify the 2x
    >> factor?)

    >
    > My suggestion would be to keep a lid on the pot and make sure you do
    > your measurements well before the boiling point of the water.


    Yes to both (and I didn't use a lid; should have).

    >>>> Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    >>>> relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    >>>> still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    >>>> learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    >>>> perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    >>>> selling locally right at $1000.
    >>>
    >>> Sounds like a bargain at the price. I have no idea how LG appliances
    >>> are, but I like my LG TV and LG computer monitor. I don't cook on
    >>> either one though.

    >>
    >> We've got a washer of theirs that works -- slightly closer to a stove
    >> than a TV, maybe. It's been good so far.

    >
    > We have a LG washer and dryer. The controls are not like any W/D that
    > we've had before although it's easy enough to operate once you learn
    > how. There's a big dial for the wash settings, an on/off switch, a
    > bunch of buttons that I don't mess with, and a run/pause button that's
    > sort of like something you'd find on a DVD player. There a pretty icon
    > panel that I don't know how to interpret with a big numeric display
    > that shows the estimated number of minutes remaining for the wash. I
    > was somewhat shocked that the normal wash takes about 50 minutes.
    >
    > As it goes, we're pretty much an all Korean family. Even our car and
    > my mother-in-law are Korean. So far, these K-products have preformed
    > quite competently, although my mother-in-law looks like hell.


    So, practical, but not necessarily pretty? :-)
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, [email protected]; http://dd-b.net/
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

  18. #18
    David Dyer-Bennet Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    Lou Decruss <[email protected]> writes:

    > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 23:54:09 -0800, isw <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>In article <[email protected]>,
    >> Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:32:05 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <[email protected]>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> >
    >>> >I stir-fry a lot, so a real high-power burner would be nice, but I'm not
    >>> >interested in $4k stoves -- and I can't find any with above 20,000
    >>> >BTU/hr burners anyway (I can find commercial stoves taking bigger gas
    >>> >lines, and I can find dedicated Wok burners to connect to a gas line or
    >>> >propane tank, but I don't have room for that). I can find 17,000 BTU/hr
    >>> >burners on $1k stoves.
    >>>
    >>> Pretty much the max from what I've seen.
    >>>
    >>> >
    >>> >Has anybody ever tested the actual heat transferred to a pot of water on
    >>> >their stove? How did the measured BTU/hr compare to the rating?
    >>>
    >>> Not easily done at home. Most of us have nothing near what is
    >>> required to measure that kind of heat.

    >>
    >>Actually, it's very easy. All it takes is a big pot of water, a
    >>thermometer, and a clock.
    >>
    >>First, note that cookstove burners are rated in BTU *per hour*, not just
    >>BTU.
    >>
    >>It takes 8.34 BTU to increase one gallon of water one degree F. (note
    >>that it doesn't matter how long it takes). If your stove accomplished
    >>that in one hour, you'd have a 8.34 BTU/hr burner. If it could do it in
    >>one minute, you'd have a (8.34*60 = 500.4) BTU burner. One gallon, ten
    >>degrees in one minute, 5,004 BTU/hr. And so on.
    >>
    >>So here's how:
    >>
    >>Put a big pot of water on the burner (Use a thin-walled pot so its mass
    >>doesn't affect things too much). Measure the amount of water (an exact
    >>number of gallons will make the calculations easier). Measure the
    >>temperature. Turn on the heat. Wait a while -- a few minutes -- using a
    >>clock so you'll know how long. Measure the temperature again. You'll get
    >>better accuracy if you use more water and a smaller temperature rise.
    >>
    >>As a side note, the largest heating element you can get on an electric
    >>cooktop is probably about 7-8,000 BTU/hr. Which is probably why you
    >>don't see electric stoves in very many professional kitchens ...

    >
    > I've read that method before but why would you need to do it in a real
    > life situation?


    If you follow back to the message where I started this thread, you would
    know.

    Briefly, because my old stove is old enough I can't find a rating for
    the heat output of the burners, and it occurred to me to wonder whether
    a "high output" burner on a modern stove would be significantly more
    powerful. So I went through the process (maybe 15 minutes including
    research) of measuring it myself.

    > I was on a job that needed a new boiler. It was originally coal and
    > then oil and finally converted to gas. It was installed in 1927 and
    > there was no way of telling how many btu it was with testing it. They
    > turned off anything in the building that was gas and took a meter
    > reading. Then jumped the stat to run continuously for 30 minutes and
    > took another meter reading. They came up with 1.4 million btu and
    > estimated 60% efficiency and came up with the proper sized modern
    > boiler to replace it.


    I don't see any obvious signs of ours having gone through an oil stage,
    but one of our furnaces was originally coal, now converted to gas. I
    think it's the original from when the house was built in 1916. I'm
    thinking we can probably keep it going long enough to have a 100th
    birthday party for it :-).

    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, [email protected]; http://dd-b.net/
    Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
    Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
    Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

  19. #19
    Lou Decruss Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:00:28 -1000, dsi1
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On 2/21/2012 8:30 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:


    >>>> Does anybody have experience with the LG line of stoves? They're
    >>>> relatively new, and might be at the point in the curve where they're
    >>>> still offering aggressive pricing to build reputation, but have already
    >>>> learned to make a decent produce. Maybe. There's a model that's about
    >>>> perfect for my requirements, high-power burner plus dual ovens, that's
    >>>> selling locally right at $1000.
    >>>
    >>> Sounds like a bargain at the price. I have no idea how LG appliances
    >>> are, but I like my LG TV and LG computer monitor. I don't cook on
    >>> either one though.

    >>
    >> We've got a washer of theirs that works -- slightly closer to a stove
    >> than a TV, maybe. It's been good so far.

    >
    >We have a LG washer and dryer. The controls are not like any W/D that
    >we've had before although it's easy enough to operate once you learn
    >how. There's a big dial for the wash settings, an on/off switch, a bunch
    >of buttons that I don't mess with, and a run/pause button that's sort of
    >like something you'd find on a DVD player. There a pretty icon panel
    >that I don't know how to interpret with a big numeric display that shows
    >the estimated number of minutes remaining for the wash. I was somewhat
    >shocked that the normal wash takes about 50 minutes.


    When it breaks down are you going to repair it with those generic
    parts you spoke of?

    Lou

  20. #20
    dsi1 Guest

    Default Re: Gas stove "hot" burner capacity

    On 2/21/2012 9:31 AM, sf wrote:
    > On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:34:21 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet<[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I've seen this LG in two places now. It's 4 burners (no fifth burner or
    >> griddle area in the middle), two ovens with the larger one on the bottom
    >> (convection in the bottom oven), all-gas (not electric oven). I think
    >> it's a last-year's model being moved out at $1000, not MSRP of $1000.

    >
    > I thought it had to be a sale price. Well, get it if it's that good
    > of a deal! It may not be there for you if you horse around too long
    > trying to decide. Surely you've looked at enough models to know if
    > it's a deal or not. Since it's last year's model, what do the reviews
    > say? I see the LG LDG3015ST 30 is $300 more, but it has a 5th burner.
    >
    > My only question is: Does it self-clean or continuous clean? I hate
    > cleaning ovens and it would be a deal breaker for me if it didn't have
    > at least one that self-cleaned.


    >
    > The other thing you need to look at is the placement of the oven
    > light. Mine are at the back in the right-hand corner and they are a
    > bear to replace. With a lot of effort (because the screws were
    > frozen), I was able to replace the light in my upper oven - but I had
    > to call the repairman anyway because I couldn't get it back together
    > properly (and he had a hard time too). The light in my lower oven is
    > out now but I'm not expending the effort to replace it. I'll just
    > have the repairman do it for me the next time I need to call one for
    > some other reason.
    >


    The imaginary stove that I claim to have has a very nice light. It's so
    bright and white and clear! I have to admit that it never occurred to me
    to see what kind of light it is or where it's located but I'll have to
    check because it is the best light that I've ever had in an oven.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32