![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
When Dani was in Toronto a few weeks ago, his sister was showing off a pan she'd just gotten. It was a non-stick pan that really was non-stick (and no coating); he watched her heat it up, pour in pancake batter, and make pancakes effortlessly. The magic word, apparently, is "titanium".
We have some pans that are getting old and dinged up and, well, less non-stick than they used to be, so we looked into this. We found two brands that are available in the US, ScanPan ("Scan" stands for "Scandinavian", apparently; I had visions of flatbed scanners when I heard the name) and Anolon. (My sister-in-law's pan was called "Magic Pan", which we couldn't find.) After looking the two choices (and their spec sheets) over, we bought one representative of each line to experiment with.
I tried the pancake experiment in the ScanPan and it didn't work, but maybe I didn't have the heat level set right? (I almost never make pancakes.) All further experiments with both pans involved at least trace amounts of fat in the pan, but that's ok -- from what I tasted of the failed pancakes, pancakes without any butter are kind of bland. I probably wouldn't add fat if cooking meat, but I designated both pans as dairy 'cause that's where I had the greater need. Eventually maybe I'll have a report on cooking meat in one of these.
Both pans heated pretty evenly; I benchmarked with grilled cheese sandwiches, fried eggs, and pancakes. The Anolon did a slightly better job of heating all the way to the edges. But both of them did much better than most of my current skillets, which I sometimes have to move around on the burners to cause even heating.
Both pans clean up reasonably easily, at least now when they're new. The Anolon seems to be slightly better in this regard.
Both pans have comfortable, heat-resistant handles. Both claim to be oven-safe, but I haven't tried that experiment.
The Anolon pan is rather heavy -- not cast-iron weight to be sure, but my 10" saute pan weighs over six pounds. This doesn't bother me much, though if I were doing a lot of cooking that involves lifting and shaking the pan I might care more.
Anolon is less expensive than ScanPan by about two-thirds, on average.
For reasons I can't quite identify, I find the Anolon pan to be a little more pleasant to cook in. It has also picked up no scuff marks so far; the ScanPan, on the other hand, has a couple of scratches even though I've only used plastic utensils and safe sponges in it. ScanPan's FAQ says that scratches don't impede performance, but...
So all things considered, it seems clear that Anolon is the winner for us.
By the way, both pans came with the warning to not use non-stick sprays lest we degrade the pan's performance. The implication was that this is a long-term effect, not just that that particular food won't cook as well. I wonder what the issue there is.
We have some pans that are getting old and dinged up and, well, less non-stick than they used to be, so we looked into this. We found two brands that are available in the US, ScanPan ("Scan" stands for "Scandinavian", apparently; I had visions of flatbed scanners when I heard the name) and Anolon. (My sister-in-law's pan was called "Magic Pan", which we couldn't find.) After looking the two choices (and their spec sheets) over, we bought one representative of each line to experiment with.
I tried the pancake experiment in the ScanPan and it didn't work, but maybe I didn't have the heat level set right? (I almost never make pancakes.) All further experiments with both pans involved at least trace amounts of fat in the pan, but that's ok -- from what I tasted of the failed pancakes, pancakes without any butter are kind of bland. I probably wouldn't add fat if cooking meat, but I designated both pans as dairy 'cause that's where I had the greater need. Eventually maybe I'll have a report on cooking meat in one of these.
Both pans heated pretty evenly; I benchmarked with grilled cheese sandwiches, fried eggs, and pancakes. The Anolon did a slightly better job of heating all the way to the edges. But both of them did much better than most of my current skillets, which I sometimes have to move around on the burners to cause even heating.
Both pans clean up reasonably easily, at least now when they're new. The Anolon seems to be slightly better in this regard.
Both pans have comfortable, heat-resistant handles. Both claim to be oven-safe, but I haven't tried that experiment.
The Anolon pan is rather heavy -- not cast-iron weight to be sure, but my 10" saute pan weighs over six pounds. This doesn't bother me much, though if I were doing a lot of cooking that involves lifting and shaking the pan I might care more.
Anolon is less expensive than ScanPan by about two-thirds, on average.
For reasons I can't quite identify, I find the Anolon pan to be a little more pleasant to cook in. It has also picked up no scuff marks so far; the ScanPan, on the other hand, has a couple of scratches even though I've only used plastic utensils and safe sponges in it. ScanPan's FAQ says that scratches don't impede performance, but...
So all things considered, it seems clear that Anolon is the winner for us.
By the way, both pans came with the warning to not use non-stick sprays lest we degrade the pan's performance. The implication was that this is a long-term effect, not just that that particular food won't cook as well. I wonder what the issue there is.