Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Wow, those are nice looking.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

They could be but the model 2519 are these: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Rever...

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

I looked at your photo. But I agree in that it's probably not the pie pan and likely something else. I'm betting on a frying pan second or something like that.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

I saw one of the sold on ebay. Since it looks like a Revere Ware frying pan without a handle, I would guess it's either a factory second or a pie/cake pan.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Oh, well thank you for the compliments. As for 10 pages for disserations, it would probably depends on the professor/school.

So yeah, while the pre1968 is considered the best in terms of the copper bottomed pans, they still aren't comparable to even 2.5mm of all aluminum. Judging by the types of cookware you own, the Revere Ware the comes closest to your standards would probably be the Proline and their "tri-ply" aluminum disc pans. But definitely nothing like Falk/Mauviel and Sitram.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Well when people refer to pre1968 Revere Ware as "heavy", I think they mean in comparision to post1968 and later the Asian made Revere Ware. A ten page 8x11 term paper is light but still heavier than a six page term paper with the same dimensions.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

I don't mind it. I really only bought it on ebay because it was cheap and small and I like small cookware. I think it would do well for one egg French omelettes that I put in my sandwiches.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Nice. Also adding that I bought Revere Ware's 6.25" frying pan. I'm using it for eggs. Cooking with it isn't easy as I have to adjust how I cook eggs. Totally different from my fair thickness nonstick one egg pan and my 7.5" All-Clad stainless steel pan. I don't know what the BTU of the stove at home is but putting it on medium low got the pan hot enough for oil to smoke. Also one large jumbo egg for a mini French omelette cooled off the pan significantly.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

I would think so too. Are those brass handles on it by the way?

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

So the pictures are working again and I appreciate the postings. The pot looks like it has rivets that attach the handles. I've never seen Revere Ware with rivets before.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Hey Jospeh,
Have you ever tried that seasoning method on your Revere Ware omelette pans? I tried that method on my All-Clad 7.5 inch frying pan and it works well for omelettes.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

With the picture comparision, it sure looked like they cut both. http://i.imgur.com/OaauJ.jpg

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Definitely there's zero chance of it containing 2mm of copper. They'd be much heavier, perform better and be much more costly. I think the 2mm thickness is only at the base of the cookware. Meaning 1mm of stainless steel body with 1 mm of copper on the bottom.

I think the only Revere Ware pans that can meet your minimum standards of cookware would be their Pro Line and their bottom clad tri ply line. The amount of aluminum they use seem to be at least 3mm thick or so.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Nice. But for some reason the website isn't allowing me to enlarge the photos.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Any chance of seeing your pictures of you cooking food in them?

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

I've found a few blogs where people posted pictures of them cooking with the older Revere Ware pans. They seem like workable pieces of cookware. The fish and the steak cooked in it seem surprisingly even.

http://happyfoodhappyfamily.blogspot....

http://memoriesfoodlove.wordpress.com...

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

I doubt lawyers care that much.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Thanks Jospeh. I figured that the original had to be at least 2mm thick.
Also thanks for your input on the omelette pans.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Unless I read wrong, cast iron actually has a higher carbon content than carbon steel does.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Thanks Kaleokahu.

As for the even heating I found it surprisingly even compared to the flour burn tests I've seen people do with regular cast iron. The cast iron pans end up getting a single burn spot over the center with almost nothing on the edges.

Wait, I'm confused, how would it essentially make it steel instead of cast iron?

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

My guess is that the Magic Fry Pan is more durable than the thin cast iron woks. The woks are fragile and are unlikely to ever be used in a restaurant kitchen. The Magic Fry Pan seems to be more durable as seen in this video where they hammer it flat during production. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mXCg...

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Were you able to feel a difference in weight or see any differences in heat conductivity/eveness?

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Ha! Maybe we should ask the Japanese. Speaking of them, have you seen their other thinner cast iron frying pan called "Magic Fry Pan"? It's different from this one but I wonder how it works compared with the one you have?

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

It's an interesting design. But what's the rest of the pan's height compared to the higher lip? If the higher lip is the same as regular frying pans with it's "regular" sides lower, then I don't see much of a difference using that and a pan with even sides.

Angelus2013 commented 7 years ago

Is it just me, or is the front of the pan higher than the back of the pan where the handle is? Or is it an illusion created by the handle? It sure looks like a nice pan though.