"Sky" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>. . . . . . that most 4-burner stoves/ranges have the large burners**
> up front and close, or rather, why is it the small burner is typically
> located in the back row of burners? Isn't it more hazardous to reach
> over and behind a tall hot pan/pot to tend the little simmering pan at
> the back? SF's post about her really nice new 6-burner cook-top had me
> thinking about this conundrum. My GE natural-gas range has large and
> middle burners in the front, then middle & small burners at the back.
> Seems to me the 'natural order of things' should be little, shorter pans
> cook up front with the taller pots to the back when one cooks several
> things at the same time. Although, I can see how the large burner can
> be handy in the front row when cooking something like a big batch of
> stir-fry or fried chicken and such.
> ** "Large", "middle" & "small" refer to the BTU output for stove burners
I've seen one of each front and back also. I like the big ones up front
because that is where most of the frying is done. Front burners probably
get 80% of the total use in our house.
Our Bertazzoni is a little different though. All four burners differ from
each other. The left front is both the most and least powerful. It is a
dual burner with outer shape for high Btu and the center of the burner can
be turned down to 600 Btu for slow cooking. The left rear has a flame
pattern that is perfect for my tea kettle and gets it boiling very fast.
The left rear is good for most boiling and simmering, the right front is
good for frying where you don't need the absolute highest power.
Best would be the ability to change to the pattern you like best. Those
large pots of sauce that simmer for hours are probably best on the back, out
of the way, but the pasta you want to boil rapidly is probably best up front
for easy handling. YMMV, of course.