Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47

Thread: Revere wear care questions

  1. #1
    Karen Guest

    Default Revere wear care questions

    I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.

    Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    never shined the bottom.

    My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    does it matter in other ways?

    Karen

  2. #2
    Steve Pope Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Karen <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    >Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.


    >Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    >never shined the bottom.


    >My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    >it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity?


    I would think if anything, the reverse: that polishing it would
    wear off the copper, making it thinner.

    However, the copper is so thin to begin with it probably doesn't
    do anything either way.

    Steve

  3. #3
    Tamzen Cannoy Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    In article
    <[email protected]>,
    Karen <[email protected]> wrote:

    > I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    > Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.
    >
    > Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    > never shined the bottom.
    >
    > My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    > it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    > can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    > if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    > does it matter in other ways?
    >
    > Karen


    Polishing only matters for looks.

  4. #4
    Edwin Pawlowski Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions


    "Karen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    > Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.
    >
    > Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    > never shined the bottom.
    >
    > My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    > it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    > can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    > if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    > does it matter in other ways?
    >
    > Karen


    Won't make any difference. The copper is so thin it is not doing anything
    for heat transfer anyway. If you like the shine, keep at it. but if you
    want to save labor, forget it. You may find it easier to wipe them with
    vinegar and salt to brighten them rather than use a commercial polish.



  5. #5
    Steve Pope Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Arri London <[email protected]> wrote:

    > The conductivity will be controlled by the *least* conductive
    > material making up the pan.


    I would say that is backwards. Heat conduction in the horizontal
    direction (which is the purpose of any copper, to spread heat
    more evenly) is controlled by the more conductive of the two
    horizontal layers.

    Steve

  6. #6
    Arri London Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions



    Karen wrote:
    >
    > I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    > Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.
    >
    > Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    > never shined the bottom.
    >
    > My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    > it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    > can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    > if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    > does it matter in other ways?
    >
    > Karen


    There's likely to be enough copper on the bottom of such pans to affect
    conductivity, so polishing it or not is moot. The conductivity will be
    controlled by the *least* conductive material making up the pan. Anyway,
    IIRC (and could be wrong of course), silver is a better thermal
    conductor and there probably isn't a lot of cookware around that is
    plated in silver

  7. #7
    Jean B. Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
    > "Karen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >> I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    >> Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.
    >>
    >> Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    >> never shined the bottom.
    >>
    >> My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    >> it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    >> can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    >> if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    >> does it matter in other ways?
    >>
    >> Karen

    >
    > Won't make any difference. The copper is so thin it is not doing anything
    > for heat transfer anyway. If you like the shine, keep at it. but if you
    > want to save labor, forget it. You may find it easier to wipe them with
    > vinegar and salt to brighten them rather than use a commercial polish.
    >
    >

    Does the comment about thinness pertain to all vintages, even
    though the older Revereware has a noticeably thicker copper layer?

    --
    Jean B.

  8. #8
    Nancy2 Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    On Jun 29, 8:59*pm, "Jean B." <jb...@rcn.com> wrote:
    > Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
    > > "Karen" <ksoa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > >news:[email protected]....
    > >> I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    > >> Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.

    >
    > >> Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    > >> never shined the bottom.

    >
    > >> My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    > >> it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    > >> can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    > >> if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    > >> does it matter in other ways?

    >
    > >> Karen

    >
    > > Won't make any difference. *The copper is so thin it is not doing anything
    > > for heat transfer anyway. *If you like the shine, keep at it. but if you
    > > want to save labor, forget it. *You may find it easier to wipe them with
    > > vinegar and salt to brighten them rather than use a commercial polish.

    >
    > Does the comment about thinness pertain to all vintages, even
    > though the older Revereware has a noticeably thicker copper layer?
    >
    > --
    > Jean B.- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    My one Revere copper-clad pan dates to 1962, and it burns everything.
    They are lousy pans unless you're just boiling water, IMO.

    N.

  9. #9
    Jean B. Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Nancy2 wrote:
    > On Jun 29, 8:59 pm, "Jean B." <jb...@rcn.com> wrote:
    >> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
    >>> "Karen" <ksoa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:[email protected]...
    >>>> I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    >>>> Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.
    >>>> Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    >>>> never shined the bottom.
    >>>> My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    >>>> it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    >>>> can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    >>>> if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    >>>> does it matter in other ways?
    >>>> Karen
    >>> Won't make any difference. The copper is so thin it is not doing anything
    >>> for heat transfer anyway. If you like the shine, keep at it. but if you
    >>> want to save labor, forget it. You may find it easier to wipe them with
    >>> vinegar and salt to brighten them rather than use a commercial polish.

    >> Does the comment about thinness pertain to all vintages, even
    >> though the older Revereware has a noticeably thicker copper layer?
    >>
    >> --
    >> Jean B.- Hide quoted text -
    >>
    >> - Show quoted text -

    >
    > My one Revere copper-clad pan dates to 1962, and it burns everything.
    > They are lousy pans unless you're just boiling water, IMO.
    >
    > N.


    Those were already lighter. That of my grandmother's era was
    lovely and heavy, with deeply etched writing on the bottom. That
    from my mother's day were noticeably lighter, and the pots and
    pans I got in the 60s were still lighter. Of course, after that
    it became pretty junky.

    --
    Jean B.

  10. #10
    Karen Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    On Jun 30, 9:49*am, "Jean B." <jb...@rcn.com> wrote:
    > Those were already lighter. That of my grandmother's era was
    > lovely and heavy, with deeply etched writing on the bottom. *That
    > from my mother's day were noticeably lighter, and the pots and
    > pans I got in the 60s were still lighter. *Of course, after that
    > it became pretty junky.


    Mine's an antique. I love it.

    I have a few favorite pans I wouldn't trade for the fanciest ones now
    available. I have a roasting pan from Australia that is as old as the
    hills, and I roast a chicken in every week almost and it makes the
    carmelization just perfect.

    Karen

  11. #11
    cybercat Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions


    "Nancy2" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    On Jun 29, 8:59 pm, "Jean B." <jb...@rcn.com> wrote:
    > Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
    > > "Karen" <ksoa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > >news:6536ff9[email protected]..
    > >> I have a copper bottom Revere ware pot that I love. I use "Copper
    > >> Clean" on the bottom after evertime I use it and keep it shiny.

    >
    > >> Last night, I had dinner at a friend's who had the same pan, but has
    > >> never shined the bottom.

    >
    > >> My question is: does it matter to the efficiency of the cookware if
    > >> it's never polished? Does not polishing it lessen the conductivity? I
    > >> can't think of the right way to phrase the question but I am wondering
    > >> if polishing the copper is only important to the look of the pan, or
    > >> does it matter in other ways?

    >
    > >> Karen

    >
    > > Won't make any difference. The copper is so thin it is not doing
    > > anything
    > > for heat transfer anyway. If you like the shine, keep at it. but if you
    > > want to save labor, forget it. You may find it easier to wipe them with
    > > vinegar and salt to brighten them rather than use a commercial polish.

    >
    > Does the comment about thinness pertain to all vintages, even
    > though the older Revereware has a noticeably thicker copper layer?
    >
    > --
    > Jean B.- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    >My one Revere copper-clad pan dates to 1962, and it >burns everything. They
    >are lousy pans unless you're just >boiling water, IMO.


    I agree, I hate these things. I do have a RW tea kettle though! It does a
    fine job on water.


    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  12. #12
    sf Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:51:46 -0400, "cybercat" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Nancy2" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    >>My one Revere copper-clad pan dates to 1962, and it >burns everything. They
    >>are lousy pans unless you're just >boiling water, IMO.

    >
    >I agree, I hate these things. I do have a RW tea kettle though! It does a
    >fine job on water.
    >

    My Mom's Revere ware is the main reason I've never bought SS pots and
    pans. The new type looks great, but I keep remembering the sheer
    horror of cooking with that d*mn RW. It was a great day when a cast
    iron fry pan appeared somehow and it was even better when anodized
    Calphalon came into existence (although I've never had the nerve to
    buy a Calphalon fry - saute pan). I bought mine mumble mumble years
    ago. They look terrible now, but still cook great. I wonder if
    Calphalon trades in old pieces that are losing their coating?
    Actually, I'd just like them recoated.


    --
    I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

    Mae West

  13. #13
    Steve Pope Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    sf <[email protected] > wrote:

    >My Mom's Revere ware is the main reason I've never bought SS pots and
    >pans. The new type looks great, but I keep remembering the sheer
    >horror of cooking with that d*mn RW.


    Yeah, it's difficult to do anything more serious than boiling
    pasta in a Revereware. Even cooking beans is problematical
    (they can stick to the hot spots). The main advantages are
    they are cheap and light and you don't have to worry about
    damaging them. I'd pick 'em over aluminum pans, or yet-cheaper
    SS pans.

    But Caphalon or other serious stainless steel pieces are
    a whole 'nother animal.

    Steve

  14. #14
    cybercat Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions


    "sf" <.> wrote
    > My Mom's Revere ware is the main reason I've never bought SS pots and
    > pans. The new type looks great, but I keep remembering the sheer
    > horror of cooking with that d*mn RW. It was a great day when a cast
    > iron fry pan appeared somehow and it was even better when anodized
    > Calphalon came into existence (although I've never had the nerve to
    > buy a Calphalon fry - saute pan). I bought mine mumble mumble years
    > ago. They look terrible now, but still cook great. I wonder if
    > Calphalon trades in old pieces that are losing their coating?
    > Actually, I'd just like them recoated.
    >


    I'm confused. You have never bought a Calphalon fry pan, but you have a
    Calphalon fry pan?

    And what coating? Nonstick?? I have the regular Calphalon, and you can
    take scouring powder to them. In fact, it is recommended.




  15. #15
    Janet Wilder Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Steve Pope wrote:
    > sf <[email protected] > wrote:
    >
    >> My Mom's Revere ware is the main reason I've never bought SS pots and
    >> pans. The new type looks great, but I keep remembering the sheer
    >> horror of cooking with that d*mn RW.

    >
    > Yeah, it's difficult to do anything more serious than boiling
    > pasta in a Revereware. Even cooking beans is problematical
    > (they can stick to the hot spots). The main advantages are
    > they are cheap and light and you don't have to worry about
    > damaging them. I'd pick 'em over aluminum pans, or yet-cheaper
    > SS pans.
    >
    > But Caphalon or other serious stainless steel pieces are
    > a whole 'nother animal.
    >


    My mom had Revere Ware. I hated it. Everything stuck to it. For that
    reason, I shied away from SS form many years. When I started
    housekeeping I went with a set of Wagnerware Magnalite. Now those were
    pots! Can't even get them any more. They were cast aluminum and heavy.
    Awesome heat distribution. Cleaned up well, too.

    When I went to replace them (lost them in a wreck with our fifth wheel
    trailer)I did a bunch of reasarch and bought a set of Calphalon
    stainless steel. The fry pans are coated, but the other pots are not. I
    was a little afraid of SS, but these supposedly had some aluminum in
    them to distribute heat better.

    They are very heavy, but I love them.


    --
    Janet Wilder
    Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
    Good Friends. Good Life

  16. #16
    hahabogus Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Janet Wilder <[email protected]> wrote in news:48696284$0$30335
    $[email protected]:

    > The fry pans are coated, but the other pots are not. I
    > was a little afraid of SS, but these supposedly had some aluminum in
    > them to distribute heat better.
    >
    > They are very heavy, but I love them.
    >
    >
    >


    If you want good heat distribution get an induction range.

    --

    The house of the burning beet-Alan




  17. #17
    Steve Pope Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    hahabogus <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Janet Wilder <[email protected]> wrote in news:48696284$0$30335


    >> The fry pans are coated, but the other pots are not. I
    >> was a little afraid of SS, but these supposedly had some aluminum in
    >> them to distribute heat better.


    >> They are very heavy, but I love them.


    >If you want good heat distribution get an induction range.


    Not exactly a low-cost quick fix!

    I find the stainless steel uncoated Caphalon, which I think have a
    bonded alumimum implant, very satisfactory distribution-wise. I
    have two such pieces.

    Steve

  18. #18
    Jean B. Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Karen wrote:
    > On Jun 30, 9:49 am, "Jean B." <jb...@rcn.com> wrote:
    >> Those were already lighter. That of my grandmother's era was
    >> lovely and heavy, with deeply etched writing on the bottom. That
    >> from my mother's day were noticeably lighter, and the pots and
    >> pans I got in the 60s were still lighter. Of course, after that
    >> it became pretty junky.

    >
    > Mine's an antique. I love it.
    >
    > I have a few favorite pans I wouldn't trade for the fanciest ones now
    > available. I have a roasting pan from Australia that is as old as the
    > hills, and I roast a chicken in every week almost and it makes the
    > carmelization just perfect.
    >
    > Karen


    Neat! One thing I really like about the Revereware is the lids.
    You know how they catch the steam? Also you can pick the lids and
    the pots up without a potholder--and you don't break your wrist
    doing so.

    --
    Jean B.

  19. #19
    Jean B. Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    hahabogus wrote:
    > Janet Wilder <[email protected]> wrote in news:48696284$0$30335
    > $[email protected]:
    >
    >> The fry pans are coated, but the other pots are not. I
    >> was a little afraid of SS, but these supposedly had some aluminum in
    >> them to distribute heat better.
    >>
    >> They are very heavy, but I love them.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > If you want good heat distribution get an induction range.
    >

    Heh. I guess that's true. I have some trouble at the edges of
    the pan, but I only have two relatively small induction burners.
    Oddly enough, the burners are SQUARE!

    --
    Jean B.

  20. #20
    Steve Pope Guest

    Default Re: Revere wear care questions

    Jean B. <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Neat! One thing I really like about the Revereware is the lids.
    >You know how they catch the steam? Also you can pick the lids and
    >the pots up without a potholder--and you don't break your wrist
    >doing so.


    That's true about the lids -- probably the only pot where you can
    thicken a sauce while having it covered.

    (I guess the same is true of Farberware.)

    S.

Page 1 of 3 123 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