I spy a KitchenAid pan! Anyone tried that one out?

Has anybody tried the Regal Ware stainless everyday pan? I'm always tempted to try one, but have never seen one in a store and wonder if they are decently heavy pans or kind of flimsy. I'd appreciate any help.
Thanks

njkatz wrote:Has anybody tried the Regal Ware stainless everyday pan? I'm always tempted to try one, but have never seen one in a store and wonder if they are decently heavy pans or kind of flimsy. I'd appreciate any help.
Thanks

I don't have that, but I do have the twelve-quart stock pot, and it is very well made. Since the every day pan seems to be tri-ply, while mine only has an encapsulated aluminum disc on the bottom, I would expect it to be better.

I would be very surprised if it isn't a great pan. And it's got a twenty-five year warranty.

craigthom wrote:I don't have that, but I do have the twelve-quart stock pot, and it is very well made. Since the every day pan seems to be tri-ply, while mine only has an encapsulated aluminum disc on the bottom, I would expect it to be better.

I would be very surprised if it isn't a great pan. And it's got a twenty-five year warranty.

Thank you for the help. I may weaken this time and go ahead and order it.

Here is a great infomercial for pans.

Not an accomplished cook but bought the now sold-out saute pan in the hopes of getting an exterior texture on chicken, etc. which I just can't get with a nonstick pan. Been looking for a while and this one seems well-built.

Question for the more advanced cooks: why would someone prefer not to have a nonstick stockpot?

Even though I'm a fan of Cast Iron, as well as Lodge, I'm passing on this dutch oven. Don't do much campfire cooking.

But, if it had a "!" on it, I might reconsider. (Even an "i" would work.)

steve

njkatz wrote:Has anybody tried the Regal Ware stainless everyday pan? I'm always tempted to try one, but have never seen one in a store and wonder if they are decently heavy pans or kind of flimsy. I'd appreciate any help.
Thanks

I purchased this back in October for $5 more. I love this pan. I use it as a sauté pan and as a covered casserole. This is a good quality tri-ply, not flimsy at all. I am glad I invested in it.

smartheart wrote:Not an accomplished cook but bought the now sold-out saute pan in the hopes of getting an exterior texture on chicken, etc. which I just can't get with a nonstick pan. Been looking for a while and this one seems well-built.

Question for the more advanced cooks: why would someone prefer not to have a nonstick stockpot?

I don't claim to be an advanced cook. I think the reason to use a stainless steel stock pot is so that you can sear your meats and sauté the aromatics before adding the liquids and other ingredients.

I purchased the tri-ply stock pot in a previous woot. I am impressed with the quality and love using it.

One reason I prefer to avoid nonstick is because I'm not always great at remembering that you can't make them too hot without risking the nonstick finish. I'd rather have a metal I might discolor at most than a weird teflon/whatever thing that'll flake or separate or off-gas into my food.

What I'm saying is that I'm too lazy even for nonstick.

smartheart wrote:Question for the more advanced cooks: why would someone prefer not to have a nonstick stockpot?

For one thing there aren't that many large, heavy non-stick stock pots out there. For another, it's hard to see what's going on sometimes when the surface is dark. For a third, I don't like to be limited in what utensils I can use. Finally, I don't see the benefit. I'd rather my money be spent on the thickness of the metal. I want a stock pot I will keep forever, not just as long as the surface remains bonded.

The aforementioned browning is a good reason not to a non-stick surface, too.

I'm not opposed to using a non-stick pan when it is needed. I've got one that I use for eggs, crepes, omelets, etc.) that are prone to sticking. I'd just rather not use it when it isn't called for. I am not afraid of overheating it and releasing gasses or ingesting (inert) flakes. I would just rather cook on metal.

smartheart wrote:
Question for the more advanced cooks: why would someone prefer not to have a nonstick stockpot?

As a couple people have mentioned already, nonstick in a stockpot is not necessary for several reasons.

One, you are usually cooking for a long time at a temperature that is not recommended for nonstick since the coating is usually made of a host of chemicals that will release into fumes. Admittedly, Teflon says that's about 400*F, but if you're opting for cheaper pans or there's a flaw in the surface then that temp could be lower.

Most good quality stock pots (I picked up mine for about $70 on sale, worth every penny) will 'release' any gunk from cooking after a good soap&water soak overnight. Discoloration can be avoided by using a cookware cleaner a few times a year. I bought some for $4 at a kitchen supplies store, but it still has the wrapping on it.

Finally, nonstick coatings are not permanent -- the bonding to the metal of the pot will eventually give out and the coating will begin to flake off. Not exactly what you want ending up in your food, especially that pot of chili you've been simmering for hours. So, you're paying for something (a coating) that will guaranteed break down and make the pot unusable in the future.

Is the Caldero suitable for frying chicken? Cut in small pieces.
I had a scary no injury incident with hot oil, but I dont want a electric fryer(That would set a unacceptable food president).
If their is another pan type better suited under $30 please do tell.

Thanx,
Zoe

I love, love, love my Fagor stainless steel pressure cooker! 'Best black beans, lentils, or rice I ever had were made quickly & energy-efficiently in this thing. Best steamed artichokes, too. Fast food can be healthy after all. I can walk away from cooking corn on the cob it in and know it's done when there's a sudden corn aroma being released into the air. Fast to clean and safe too. I use it 3 times a week. It's a terrific gift for a vegetarian, 'tho it handles meat well too.

zofer11 wrote:...unacceptable food president...

I'll say! I didn't vote for him!

Thank you all for the excellent input on nonstick v non-nonstick stock pots. You all really covered the waterfront!! Three cheers for the Woot community!!

I haven't used Regal Ware so I cannot speak to the brand, but I do use Calphalon non stick cookware and I have been most pleased by it.

In particular, I use non-stick Calphalon Contemporary pans that can also be used in the oven up to 450 degrees. It is quite versatile. The only drawbacks are cost and the cookware must be hand washed.

Is the RegalWare Tri Ply Induction compatible? I'm looking at the 2Qt saucepan and the 8Q stockpot.

Bought the RegalWare 12" non stick Fry pan, from Woot not long ago! LOVE IT!!! Best pan I own! My husband says I need to start upgrading to RegalWare!

mikegallin wrote:Is the RegalWare Tri Ply Induction compatible? I'm looking at the 2Qt saucepan and the 8Q stockpot.

I think that's what they meant by 'Safe for use on all range tops'. Here is the amazon product page that confirms induction compatibility
http://www.amazon.com/American-Kitchen-Tri-Ply-2-Quart-Saucepan/dp/B003Z0BSGW/ref=pd_sim_sbs_k_2

mikegallin wrote:Is the RegalWare Tri Ply Induction compatible? I'm looking at the 2Qt saucepan and the 8Q stockpot.

Yes the tri-ply is induction compatible. I have purchased all the tri-ply pieces that Woot has offered so far. I love them. The quality is high and they have a 25 year warranty. We are especially enjoying the tri-ply frying pans.

animama wrote:I purchased this back in October for $5 more. I love this pan. I use it as a sauté pan and as a covered casserole. This is a good quality tri-ply, not flimsy at all. I am glad I invested in it.

Thank you for the help. I'm giving it a try.

animama wrote:Yes the tri-ply is induction compatible. I have purchased all the tri-ply pieces that Woot has offered so far. I love them. The quality is high and they have a 25 year warranty. We are especially enjoying the tri-ply frying pans.

Thanks for the feedback. I ordered the 8Q stock pot and am trying to figure out which of the fry pans are triply - it doesnt say in the descriptions... ??? Id like to order the set of two if they are triply. Thanks again!

mikegallin wrote:Thanks for the feedback. I ordered the 8Q stock pot and am trying to figure out which of the fry pans are triply - it doesnt say in the descriptions... ??? Id like to order the set of two if they are triply. Thanks again!

They are I got them a few weeks back.

dave_bug wrote:They are I got them a few weeks back.

Actually, the 2 fry pan set in this Woot is NOT tri-ply. They are non-stick. The only tri-ply fry pan in this Woot is the Regal Ware AK710-GB 10-inch Stainless Steel Open Fry Pan.

EDIT: It was my understanding from previous Woots that if the description didn't specifically say tri-ply, then it wasn't. I apologize if I gave incorrect info.

mikegallin wrote:Thanks for the feedback. I ordered the 8Q stock pot and am trying to figure out which of the fry pans are triply - it doesnt say in the descriptions... ??? Id like to order the set of two if they are triply. Thanks again!

The 2 fry pan set is not tri-ply. None of the non-stick pans are tri-ply. The following items are the tri-ply items in this Woot. I own all of them and love, love, love them.

Regal Ware AK702-SP 2 Quart Covered Sauce Pan
Regal Ware AK710-GB 10-inch Stainless Steel Open Fry Pan
Regal Ware AK708-DO 8 Quart Covered Stock Pot
Regal Ware AK710-EP 3 Quart Covered Everyday Pan
(Sold Out) Regal Ware AK712-FP 12" Covered Saute Pan

animama wrote:The 2 fry pan set is not tri-ply. None of the non-stick pans are tri-ply. The following items are the tri-ply items in this Woot. I own all of them and love, love, love them.

You've said that twice, but what means of divination did you use to determine it? I see no indication that non-stick and tri-ply are mutually exclusive, and in fact have found descriptions of some of these specific "Nonstick Fry" pans and the two-pan set on other sites explicitly describing them as tri-ply. The "Open Fry Pans" do say "impact-bonded aluminum core base" so those particular ones aren't tri-ply though.

Not trying to be argumentative, I'd just like to better understand the source. In other words "[citation needed]."

Perhaps there is some confusion on other sites about multi-ply vs tri-ply?

Edit: Here's one such statement from another page selling AK-802NS:
"American Kitchen by Regal Ware limited edition Tri-Ply stainless steel 10-inch and 12-inch skillet set..." "...Available in two cooking surfaces: 18/10 Stainless Steel and Eco-Satin Non-PFOA nonstick."
Link (sears.com)

Yes! I just got a new frying pan with lid! Time to fry up those eggs and bacon now!

kmartind wrote:
Perhaps there is some confusion on other sites about multi-ply vs tri-ply?

Oh, and I'm not even 100% sure what the difference is myself (assuming there is one). But when I look closely at the top edge of the 12 inch Nonstick Fry Pan & Lid ("Perfect Egg Pan") it sure seems like I can make out three distinct layers of metal. It's also heavy (which can be both good and bad) and well constructed.

My only real complaint is that I'd probably call it an 11.5 inch pan rather than 12. It's noticeably smaller than my other-brand 12 inch skillet in both diameter and depth. My other-brand pan looks terrible on the outside though, because it's Aluminum and the protective paint/finish has worn off. "Someone" also put it in the dish washer so the now-unprotected exterior aluminum has become black and pitted as well.
I'm willing to give up a little pan capacity to have a stainless exterior, and the price is right, but I'd still prefer a "true" 12 inch pan.

Any chance of getting the steamer insert and double boiler insert back on woot!

The see-through lid is a pivotal development for old fashioned popcorn!

Now I'm wondering why someone from WOOT or the manufacturer (RegalWare) hasnt bothered to clarify which of the RegalWare items is triply????

Come on Woot, there was wrong info posted last time for the Regal Ware and I ordered a bunch of items incorrectly labeled as TRIPLY and had to send them all back - what a hassle. Now instead of figuring it out and providing clear info you are ignoring the questions and posting vague product descriptions???

kmartind wrote:You've said that twice, but what means of divination did you use to determine it? I see no indication that non-stick and tri-ply are mutually exclusive, and in fact have found descriptions of some of these specific "Nonstick Fry" pans and the two-pan set on other sites explicitly describing them as tri-ply. The "Open Fry Pans" do say "impact-bonded aluminum core base" so those particular ones aren't tri-ply though.

Not trying to be argumentative, I'd just like to better understand the source. In other words "[citation needed]."

Perhaps there is some confusion on other sites about multi-ply vs tri-ply?

Edit: Here's one such statement from another page selling AK-802NS:
"American Kitchen by Regal Ware limited edition Tri-Ply stainless steel 10-inch and 12-inch skillet set..." "...Available in two cooking surfaces: 18/10 Stainless Steel and Eco-Satin Non-PFOA nonstick."
Link (sears.com)

I know what you are saying... I tried to figure out which of the items is triply by referencing the items on other sites but still am not sure because different descriptions seem to be used for the same products and I'm not sure how to locate the right info.. so why the heck hasn't WOOT dialed into any of this and taken the bull by the horns???

mikegallin wrote:Now I'm wondering why someone from WOOT or the manufacturer (RegalWare) hasnt bothered to clarify which of the RegalWare items is triply????

Come on Woot, there was wrong info posted last time for the Regal Ware and I ordered a bunch of items incorrectly labeled as TRIPLY and had to send them all back - what a hassle. Now instead of figuring it out and providing clear info you are ignoring the questions and posting vague product descriptions???

We're not ignoring at all! We're looking into this.

Update: Turns out we typically call out if an item is tri-ply in the features. Like this right here: http://sellout.woot.com/offers/regal-ware-8qt-covered-stock-pot

Of course if there's ever any item where this isn't the case and you need to know, just holla for a community person to go asking, we're really more than happy to help.

My wife told me she wanted a saucier pan, but I think if I got her one, I might get struck by a flying saucier. badumching

I went ahead and ordered the 2-pan nonstick set anyway, and it actually showed up today.
I can confirm it has a huge graphic on the American Kitchen packaging that says "Tri-Ply Stainless Steel," and looking at the top outer edge I can make out three layers of metal (I could also see that on the 12 inch covered nonstick "perfect egg" pan, even though that one didn't seem to be labeled one way or the other).
So looks like potentially good news for anyone who was hoping for tri-ply on the 10"/12" nonstick set.

I'd still call it more of an 11 1/2 or 11 3/4 inch pan than 12 inch though. Actually I guess it's 30cm, but that's still less than 12 inches by enough to make it annoying. I tried setting the lid of one my "true" 12 inch pans on it and it just sits on top and doesn't fit since the Regal Ware/American Kitchen pans are smaller.

I do have one additional question though, if anyone happens to get information from Regal Ware/American Kitchen: The rivets appear to be Aluminum and the handles cast-aluminum. Is that correct? A magnet won't stick to the rivets or the handle and the metal seems softer than steel.

While the pans claim to be dishwasher safe, putting an aluminum handled/riveted pan in the dishwasher would eventually result in a mess.
Today's stupid phosphate-free dishwasher detergent ruins aluminum in no time, especially if you have a dishwasher with a stainless interior. I'd have thought any cookware manufacturer would know that, and avoid aluminum rivets/handles. Or maybe that plus the not-quite-12-inch size is part of why these ended up on Woot! ?

mikegallin wrote:Is the RegalWare Tri Ply Induction compatible? I'm looking at the 2Qt saucepan and the 8Q stockpot.

I'd watch out! A month ago, I purchased the 8" non-stick stainless RegalWare skillet and the 10" Stainless skillet. The 8" non-stick works great, but the 10" stainless (no non-stick) does NOT work on my induction cooktop. Heck, a magnet sticks briefly before sliding down the bottom of the pan! Must be too much aluminum and not enough steel in that 3-ply core!

inkycatz wrote:We're not ignoring at all! We're looking into this.

Update: Turns out we typically call out if an item is tri-ply in the features. Like this right here: http://sellout.woot.com/offers/regal-ware-8qt-covered-stock-pot

Of course if there's ever any item where this isn't the case and you need to know, just holla for a community person to go asking, we're really more than happy to help.

OK Great, thanks for your offer to help clarify whichones are tripply and which are not... please let us know... I ordered the set of two nonstick fry pans and one other nonstick fry pan because I thought they were triply and did not get any answer from WOOT to my quesions before I ordered. I'll either need to send those back or get some clarification they are triply ??? Thanks

compudata wrote:I'd watch out! A month ago, I purchased the 8" non-stick stainless RegalWare skillet and the 10" Stainless skillet. The 8" non-stick works great, but the 10" stainless (no non-stick) does NOT work on my induction cooktop. Heck, a magnet sticks briefly before sliding down the bottom of the pan! Must be too much aluminum and not enough steel in that 3-ply core!

Too bad there isn't more care put into quality control and labeling accuracy of our American made cookware... as I'd love to feel more confidence in purchasing American made products. I suppose you get what you pay for, and I'd love to see All Clad on Woot...