Just looking at my notes again from last year: I had also tested 9.5" size stock pots.
My Cuisinart MultiClad Pro 9.5" stock pot vs. Cuisinart Professional Series (blue) disc bottom.
My trusty Cuisinart MultiClad Pro I’ve had since 2001
below: Professional Series (blue)
I had also tested a 9.5" stock pot from ‘Denmark: Tools for Cooks’ (disc base) stock pot that was lighter in weight, and thinner.
(MultiClad on left, Denmark pot on right)
MultiClad Pro - clad
9.5" W x 5" H
5.7 liter (6 quart)
1.6 kg (without lid)
Cuisinart Professional Series (blue) - disc base
9.5" W x 5" H
5.7 liter (6 quart)
1.5 kg (without lid)
Denmark: Tools for Cooks - disc base
9.5"W x 5-1/8"H
5.7 liter (6 quart)
1.1.kg (without lid)
Volume of water tested: 3 liters
Volume height: 2-5/8"
Burner 8" set at max temp. (dial number 9). 2400 Watts
Boil target: 200° F
3 rounds each pot, 2 hours cool down period in between each round. Results of 3 time trials averaged and rounded up. I allowed 15 seconds as a margin of error, accounting for electric coil start lag, differences in humidity and barometric pressure, and any differences in ambient room or water temperature (water was left overnight at room temp).
Cuisinart Professional Series (blue) 9.5" disc base stock pot at 200°F
Results:
MultiClad Pro: 9 min. 35 sec.
Professional Series (blue): 11 min. 12 sec.
Denmark: Tools for Cooks: 9 min. 15 sec.
Analysis:
The MultiClad Pro held its own against its disc base competition. The MultiClad and the Professional Series were exactly identical pots in every conceivable way, apart from the disc base. They were the exact same geometry and even produced by the same company. The Professional Series weighed 100 grams less and was induction compatible, whereas the MultiClad Pro are the original version and non-magnetic. Still, I doubt a more direct and fair A/B comparison could be possible between a clad and disc base design. The clad beat the disc base by just over two minutes. The opposite of Franz’s results.
However, the other disc base design (Denmark) pot slightly edged the clad design by 20 seconds. It weighed 500 grams less than the Multiclad and was thinner (though I did not have a micrometer and could not measure thickness).
Conclusion:
It’s difficult to draw general conclusions about design or materials, except that they do not appear to be a large differentiating factor between similar lines of cookware when it comes to boil speed. Cast iron would no doubt be slower, but by how much? In my tests, the clad design beat one brand of disc base, but not the other. So again, differentiation would need to be broken down into types of disc base, vs types of clad design. It seems all kinds of small variables are at work, including thickness of metal.
Franz’s results indicate that even solid clad copper vs disc base does not make any significant difference either in terms of boiling speed.