I think we can all agree that thick copper pans are noticeably heavier than the typical pans used in most homes, enough so that for a significant number of folk that they would not want them. Sure, most could probably manage to use them, but they simply do not want to deal with the difference in weight. My small saucepan weighs three pounds twelve ounces. Filled with soup it obviously weighs more, probably over five.
1 Like
Yes, of course. That was my point. It may be that some cohort actually finds your example of a full saucepan that weighs 5 pounds to be uncomfortably heavy. They might also find a full pan that weighs 3 pounds to be “noticeably heavier” than the gossamer-thin aluminum pan they’re accustomed to. A few might even honestly admit they prefer the lightest possible pan they can find.
I think it’s the noticeable aspect that causes the most complaints on weight, not discomfort. And you and I know that few are the people who’ve cooked in thick copper (as opposed to simply once lifting a piece).
There may be a parallel with shooting. Shooters who pick up a gun that is “noticeably heavier” than what they’re used to may say they prefer something lighter, not understanding (without shooting it) that they can manage just fine and even find benefits like lower recoil than they feel with their lighter gun.
Frankly it’s a sad commentary on American health and fitness if able-bodied cooks are pained to lift 5 pounds.
It is true. Someone has to be below average. 
3 Likes
Wow! way to carry this out to a grandiose conclusion 
Nice. Must be rare to get 5 mm thick hammered aluminum pots.
Matfer made them. Only the larger pieces were that thick. My humble little saucepan looks about 3.5mm.
1 Like
Gaillard, too.
1 Like
1 Like
Well, to be a little bit picky, sterling is silver alloyed with 7.5%… copper. So the conductivity is not the ne plus ultra.
Also, hyperconductive constructions can push conductivities past those of the native materials (including silver) by 5-10X.
Just say “I can’t afford it.”
Why would you want me to lie, Charlie?
I’ll lend you one…
Aw, how nice and sincere!
Shazam, you have a silver lined copper pan?! I have never tried one, but they sound like a Lambo, a heady experience but not a workable daily driver. It is interesting that after collecting copper pans since the late 1960s, I find myself using steel, aluminum, and ceramic more and more.
I think he meant a solid silver pan. At least that’s what he meant all the other times he’s gone there.
1 Like
Yes (a gift). It gets hot like any other pan. I still cook with my eyes and my nose. I can get the same result from vintage Farberware (easier on my arthritis). What you need to buy, you see, are a pair of eyes and a nose… 
which are far more expensive than a solid-silver pan.
I have yet to find cookware that doesn’t get hot when placed over a fire. Isn’t physics amazing?
Learning to use a pan’s eccentricities is part of becoming a better cook.
I am just a cook.
1 Like
Woof. My fingers hurt from thinking about that hot handle!
1 Like
You might as well have a benchmark, no?
Benchmarks change. Why not pure, unalloyed silver rather than sterling? Or synthetic diamond? Or either element in a hyperconductive layup?
Was a time when aluminum was considered the ne plus ultra.
I think restaurant supply store clad SS and a bunch of morels or some gorgeous veal chops would be a good benchmark. I gotta go with Charlie that the benchmark is inside the pan, and I am confident that Kaleo would agree with that one. Nonetheless, using, collecting, studying, and fantasizing about cookware is a ton of fun and a very interesting hobby that has the added virtue of being useful every day. Happy Easter! Time to go make folded eggs in my ancient and now quite ugly, no name brand, carbon steel crepe pan.
1 Like
