BS: Slow cooker... which and why?

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 03 May 13 - 03:43 PM

I went on a shopping/buying process at eBay a couple of months back in order to get a new crock for my favorite 1 qt Rival Crockette from about 1976. I use it to make oatmeal over night. I start with boiling water and set it up with salt, oats (old fashioned rolled or the Irish steel-cut oats), raisins, for perfect oatmeal in the morning. That particular type, and I waited for the ones with the removable crocks, are good. The modern little crock pots are too hot and turn the cereal to rubber by morning.

If you can get one in the $20 to $25 range (including shipping) that's a pretty good price. Lower is even better, but not found often.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: pdq
Date: 03 May 13 - 01:29 PM

refresh

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 03 May 13 - 09:22 AM

Have one of these , so don't need a slow cooker, as it will do most of the same things as a slow cooker.
Slow cookers are great though. I was rather taken by the Cuisinart one, with the oval brown crock, inside a stainless steel box.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: gnu
Date: 03 May 13 - 08:43 AM

Charmion... I am keeping it. It's the smallest Hamilton Beach has and it cooks roast beef great and I have only used "high" so far. Alas, ya just can't get enough veggies in it. Soooo, I bought a 7 qt Bravetti at Crappy Tire for $35 and I am a happy clam!

I am gonna celebrate by starting a new thread... recipes.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Sanjay Sircar
Date: 18 Jan 13 - 09:18 PM

Trad. Neck rosettes. Slosh around in: salt, pepper (or perppercorns), tablespoons of brown sugar or molasses, ditto black vinegar, ditto odiferous mustard oil (do not be frightened, and yes, it is available), chopped onion, teaspoons of chopped or blended mint, dill, parsley, ginger powder, turmeric powder [cumin powder, coriander powder, if adventurous]. Mushrooms cut large or whole good in this. Turn slow cooker onto low. Done when soft, with a dryish gravy...

Tell me how it turned out. If to your taste, will let you know variations.

Sanjay Sircar

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: BrendanB
Date: 18 Jan 13 - 05:36 PM

We have a slow cooker which was given to us as a wedding present 42 years ago. We use it regularly and it is great for stews made using shin of beef or beef rib trim etc. Basically any fatty cheap cut of meat. I caramelise onions and then add garlic and finely sliced ginger. Bung that in the slow cooker set to low.   Brown the meat in olive oil and put that in. Deglaze the pan with some red wine (I sometimes use port) and pour that in on top of the meat. Pour in half a pint of good beef stock and season with salt, pepper and smoked paprika or pimenton.
You can add thinly sliced carrots and raw mushrooms. Root vegetables generally don't cook in a slow cooker but you can boil potatoes and then put them in, they absorb the juices but they are best if cut fairly small.
Cook for at least 4 hours and up to 8 hours. Before serving I ladle out some of the liquid and thicken it with cornflour (just like making gravy) and pour it back into the stew.
Flavour enhancers like Worcestershire sauce and dark soy sauce can be added.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 18 Jan 13 - 03:01 PM

Hello, gnu. I like to cook, but I don't enjoy cleaning up. I decided that after saying money by doing home cooking for 45 years, I deserved to spend a little money on myself.

One way I do that is by using Reynolds' Slow Cooker liners. You can probably find them in the area of your supermarket where they keep the foil, the waxed paper and the oven bags. I consider them worth their weight in gold because they keep the slow cooker from developing a baked-on crust.

Just be aware that once in a great while, the bag might split if you are lifting it out of the cooker. (Officially, you are not supposed to do that.) However, sometimes I cook food ahead and want to refrigerate it. I take a steel bowl and carefully slip it under the bag of cooked food, scooping it out with support from below, rather than lifting it out in the usual way.

I did have a bag break on me once. Thank goodness, the hot food didn't land on my feet, or I would have been in terrible trouble.

I have been cooking with slow cookers for many years, and I consider them essential to a good life.

===============
DELICIOUS BEEF ARM ROAST - a leeneia original

Arm roast is a meaty but rather dense, dry cut. It's probably better for you than a steak, but it needs help. When arm roast goes on sale, select one that is nicely marbled.

1. Put a liner in your slow cooker.

1a. I like to put meat in the microwave and heat it on Defrost for a little bit. I figure it kills germs. I also like it that the slow cooker doesn't have to heat the meat up from the 37F typical of a refrigerator.

2. Make cuts in the arm roast on a grid with lines about 1.5 inches apart. Cut 3/4 of the way through the meat, not all the way.

3. Put the arm roast in the slow cooker, pressing the meat against the sides and bottom. You want the meat to make contact with the ceramic pot.

4. Put some cranberries (maybe 1/2 cup) in a little bowl. Mix in 1/4 tsp cinnamon and 1 tsp molasses. (You can buy bagged cranberries in the fall and keep them frozen indefinitely.)

5. Strew the cranberry mixture on top of the meat.

6. Cover and cook on low all day.

When it's done, you can slice it and serve with noodles. The meat also makes nice sandwiches.

Option - refrigerate overnight and remove fat (there won't be much) when it solidifies.
============
Now what do you do with the rest of the molasses?

gingerbread
gingersnaps
barbecue sauce

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Charmion
Date: 18 Jan 13 - 08:20 AM

Keep the slow cooker, gnu, and give your cheaper relatives a dose of the old razoo instead.

Arthuritis had some good advice up-thread about small-batch cooking in a large slow-cooker by putting your food in a Pyrex dish that you place in the crock-pot filled with about an inch or so of hot water. This technique works a treat. I suggest covering the insert dish with foil.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: gnu
Date: 18 Jan 13 - 08:14 AM

I decided against getting one but I am about to brave -30WC because I found the right one for me at Sobeys grocery store. $19.99 - $3.69 5# stew veggies pack - $1.29 12 pack picnic rolls - $5.00 stew beef = $11.61. Sounds like the perfect one for a cheap b****** like me. ANd, I'll keep the packaging and give it my cheaper relatives next Kissmeass. I might even wrap it in a plastic bag... no shit, that's what they did 4 years ago... "got it at the last minute and didn't have time to wrap it". Ahhhh, yeah!

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 03:42 PM

We have at least two "crock pot" slow cookers, but they're seldom used.

My preference is an older version of the Presto Multi Cooker, since you can yank the control plug out and toss the whole thing in the sink or dishwasher.

The control setting dial indicates degrees F, and is apparently quite accurate at least near 200F, since you can "nudge" the setting either side of where a visible simmer appears. And it's close enough to deep fry small batches without using a separate thermometer. (We don't keep enough oil on hand to fry big batches.)

Note that ours is an older version, without the "temperature indicator" that appears to be shown at the link.

The current add shows a price at about $40 (US) but I saw a couple marked down to $24 a couple of days ago that I think were the same model.

I don't particularly care for the "non-stick lining" but it's becoming almost impossible to get anything without that #@$!% crap on it. My current one has lasted about 14 years without losing too much of it in the food.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Becca72
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 01:22 PM

Yes, Doug :-)

I figure if I'm home I have a better chance to do something about it or at least get the cats out!

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Penny S.
Date: 25 Aug 10 - 12:17 PM

I've looked up those Reynolds liners and we don't seem to have them over here yet. Drat.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: DougR
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 04:21 PM

So, Becca, if you burn up, we know it will be at night, right?
(Just kidding!)
DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: leeneia2
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 10:39 AM

Be aware that a slow cooker and a crock pot are two different things. A crock pot is merely any cooker that has a ceramic cooking vessel. It may or may not be capable of slow cooking.

My slow cookers are labelled thus:

      Rival
    CROCK POT
Ceramic Slow Cooker

They were not expensive and they work fine. Have done for years.

However, the small one has a plastic lid which didn't last. I use a glass cover that came with a glass bowl on it now.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Penny S.
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 10:30 AM

I have one which has a metal body which sits on a hotplate (Morphy Richards), which I can use for browning before hand on the stove. And I have one with a crock (not the teeny one), which I can't. I also have one which fits inside a Tefal steamer, which does seem to give a fresher taste, but which has one snag. The pot, plastic, has split. It needs a liner. Where do I get them from? What are they like?

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: bubblyrat
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 09:27 AM

I had one some years ago,and found it very useful. However,after having a solid-fuel stove installed, I started "slow cooking" on it ,using the recipes from the book that accompanied the slow cooker,but done in a "Le Creuset " French cast-iron casserole pot.I would do the preparation in the evening, and then place the "pot" on a trivet on top of the stove & leave it all night long ; lovely aromas in the morning !
               This is still my preferred method today,although the heat source is the minimum setting on my least-powerful electric hob,and for less time (4 - 5 hours). I always "brown" the vegetable ingredients in a little oil first,then put the meat component on top, pour over the "stock", and put the lid on, making sure that I DO NOT lift the lid,however strong the temptation ! This is important !

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Becca72
Date: 24 Aug 10 - 08:41 AM

I agree, Gnu, but I know many people who leave it for the day while they are out. Not something I am comfortable doing.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: IvanB
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 11:00 PM

My large cooker is a Hamilton Beach, but without the bells and whistles DougR described. I've been very satisfied with it. Probably the only slow cooker I ever was displeased with was a 6 qt. Rival. Never could manage to cook anything properly, then it partially died while cooking a batch of soup - raised it to just an ideal temp to accelerate bacteria growth and sour it. My small cooker is a Tayama and it's been very serviceable as well.

In SC where we winter I have a Cuisinart 4 qt. programmable which I really like. The only thing really programmable about it is the time, but it has a feature of starting out at high temp even when set to low, until the food temp reaches 150. This more quickly gets the food above the temps ideal for bacteria growth.

Although I have round pots for the smaller cookers I use both in MI and SC, the larger pots have oval crockery and I agree with the other comments here about oval being better. Comments I've also noticed about cookers with digital controls is that the controls seem to go bad far too frequently. No good having a heating unit that works if the controls don't. Mechanical controls seem to have a far better life expectancy.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: DougR
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 09:10 PM

gnu: I had a West Bend before I bought the Hamilton Beach and like it much better. All Clad makes a very well rated one, but it sells for about $200. I have used mine using all three methods of cooking and really like it.

I failed to mention that I always use a Slow Cooker liner made by Reynolds to ease the clean-up. All one has to do is rinse out the insert as the liner completely protects it.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Penny S.
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 06:32 PM

I used to find my first one very useful when unwell - I could cook a whole meal in it, stacked up in separate containers, but I cannot remember just what! I would prepare everything in one spell of being capable, and eat it in the next.
I have also used a very small one for breakfasts. It was stupidly small, I thought when I saw it in the shop, about the size for baking one apple. But when I thought of breakfast I got one in the sale. Just right for porage, but also able to cook bacon and sausage and tomato. Or something I got off a Texan site, without the chilli, potatoes and other breakfasty stuff, with a beaten egg. Some of those needed much less time, so I used a timer. I was doing breakfast in my bedroom at the time so as not to disturb the couple downstairs under my kitchen.
The company now sells that size for chocolate fondue.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 04:32 PM

Becca... I don't have OCD but I don't let any electrical device that is not essential run while I am out of the house for a long while. That includes washer, dryer, oven, whatever. I would never run a slow cooker while I was gone for an 8 hour work shift. They can cause fires as is documented... VERY remote chance, but it HAS happened, usually due to a lack of liquid to distribute heat from the element(s).

With me, it would simply be a way to get more time for work in the late afternoon in my home office. As I start work between 4 and 6AM most days, it may work out well.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Becca72
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 04:00 PM

I am fairly new to slow cookers myself but really like it. I have a touch of OCD and anxiety about leaving it going while I'm not home so I use it overnight.
So far I have used it for pot roast, boiled dinner and beef stew. It's nice to be able to throw everything in and let it do its thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 03:33 PM

DougR... "I've tried several crockpots and the best I have found for the price is made by Hamilton Beach."

Good info, as well as the rest of the posts. Doug... have you had a better one regardless of the price? If so, which?

I am learning a lot from this thread and from the internut. Thanks for all the advice and recipes.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 03:01 PM

For those who want to short-cut the soaking and biling of the beans, canned cooked 'organic' beans of several varieties are in the stores.
Pinto (my favorite), kidney, black, etc.). No tepary yet.

In the crockpot, put in together with other ingredients, or partially cook them first, since over-cooking reduces the pinto and kidney to mush. Cook just long enough to meld the ingredients and flavors of the spices. If meat is part of the recipe, brown it in a skillet or pot and then transfer to crock pot with vegetables and onion; cook a bit then add canned beans and cook on low to blend it all.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: DougR
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 02:35 PM

I've tried several crockpots and the best I have found for the price is made by Hamilton Beach. You can cook either manually, with a probe (for roasts and larger pieces of meat) or program it. It sells in the U.S. for about $60. The Internet is full of excellent sites for recipes. I use All Recipes most.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: open mike
Date: 23 Aug 10 - 10:55 AM

some crock pots come out of their cookers and can be immersed to clean
this is adviseable.   i did not know aobut the bean poison thing...my
room mate and i often cook pinto beans in the crock pot for eventual use as re-fried beans (i originally typed re-friend beans...a new word for the facebook dictionary?)

they also work great for making hot cider or for serving other hot dishes.

i also see recipes for baking bread in them...
bread pan covered with foil with water in the bottom of the cooker.
http://www.crock-pot.com/Recipes.aspx

it seems one would be better if it had a timer or programmable setting.

they make cookers just for rice, but can you cook rice in a crock pot?

yum iseearecipefor Pandowdy....fruit on bottom, crust type mix on top
http://www.crock-pot.com/Recipes.aspx

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: leeneia2
Date: 22 Aug 10 - 11:41 PM

Hello, gnu. So you are branching out in your cooking! Nice to hear.

I have two slow cookers, a small and a large. They have ceramic pots which can be removed and put on the table. I like that feature. ]

Although there are only two people in our household, I use the large one quite a bit. For example, once a month friends come over and we play music on a Sunday afternoon. I make a nice rich soup in the large pot and we all have it, then we play.

When you buy the pot, it should come with a recipe booklet. That ought to get you started.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: IvanB
Date: 22 Aug 10 - 04:35 PM

Although our household is just my wife and I, we have two crock pots, one 1.5 qt. and the other 4 qt. I use the small one for cooking soup, Irish oatmeal, and, sometimes, just the meat portion of a meal for which I cook the starch and vegetables separately. The larger one is used for larger soup recipes as well as one-dish meals. Many times I just throw random stuff into the pot with seasonings and let it do its thing.

One caution: despite the fact that liquids don't boil off in the crock pot, meat which is overcooked in them WILL be dry. Cuts which are naturally tender aren't good choices for the crock pot, they'd just be ruined. Use the traditionally tough cuts for the pot and tend more to the undercooked, but flavorful than to overcooked and dry.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: gnu
Date: 22 Aug 10 - 03:07 PM

Q... iffin them thar cowboys had hammerheads from bein in the saddle all day, I should think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Aug 10 - 03:03 PM

Our crockpot brings any contents to a good boil on the high setting.
All Phaseolus vulgaris beans contain the toxin, the red kidney the highest, but the high setting will destroy the worst of it, rendering them safe for the most nervous Nellies.
Pinto beans belong to the same species.

A stray thought- the camp cook or cocinero who cooked the dry beans for cowboys on cattle drives used dry beans, and often undercooked them.
Did the cowboy yodel develop from the painful yelps of poisoned cowboys?

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Aug 10 - 02:15 PM

The slow cooker has become our favorite for stews, chili, bean soups and similar recipes.
Ours has a warm setting in addition to high and low. Useful when we make up the contents one day but want to repeat the feast the next.
(Any left-over is frozen).

Many brand names in the stores, but most (like microwaves, toaster ovens and other counter-top appliances) have the same innards. If buying new, watch for a sale at your favorite superstore.

We also like the brown container, commented on above.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Penny S.
Date: 22 Aug 10 - 08:12 AM

I would support gnu's post about the beans - I gave myself lathyrism from a veggie slowcooked casserole - no red kidney beans but a variety of other pulses. I now use tinned pulses of various varieties for safety's sake - except lentils, which seem to be OK. The alternative is to bring the casserole to a good simmer for the last 10 minutes of cooking - that way the flavour works better.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: gnu
Date: 22 Aug 10 - 05:00 AM

From Wikipedia (good to know)

``Raw kidney beans, and some other beans, contain the toxin phytohaemagglutinin, which is destroyed by boiling for at least ten minutes, but not by the lower temperatures of a slow cooker, so dry beans must be boiled prior to slow cooking to avoid poisoning. Even a few beans can be toxic, and beans can be as much as five times more toxic if cooked at 175°F (80°C) than if eaten raw[citation needed], so adequate pre-boiling is vital. Cases of poisoning by slow-cooked beans have been published in the UK; poisoning has occurred in the USA but has not been formally reported.[8]

Slow cookers do not provide sufficient heat to compensate for loss of moisture and heat due to frequent removal of the lid, e.g., to add and remove food in perpetual stews, (pot au feu, olla podrida). Added ingredients must be given time to cook before the food can be eaten. If the food is allowed to cool below about 158°F (70°C) and not reheated, toxic bacterial growth is possible; some toxins, once present, are not destroyed by later heating.``

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Melissa
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 10:11 PM

I went to buy a crock pot last fall when it was obvious that I wouldn't be able to afford propane for heat and wanted to avoid using the cookstove. I shopped around and ended up buying an electric skillet instead.

My only experience with crockpot food was assorted meals I'd been fed. There are probably ways to keep from cooking gray meat..but for me, the skillet seemed easier. I like the option of choosing the temperature.
I've really put it to work.

There are a LOT of crock pot styles these days! I was tempted by one that came with two crocks.
Whichever kind you choose, I hope you're as pleased with it as I am with my adventure in a similar direction..if your arm is still a problem, you might look at skillets while you're shopping..they're considerably lighter to heft around.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Beer
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 09:45 PM

The first receipt i tried and turned out great was a small roast with a can of mushroom soup (Campbell's) poured over it and cooked it for 8 hours on low. Add what ever spices you like.
Ad.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Maryrrf
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 09:38 PM

They are great for lots of things - soups, stews, roasts. I used mine a lot when the kids were growing up - put everything in the slow cooker in the morning, come home and dinner is ready. I still use it some, but not as much. Mine is almost 30 years old and works like a charm. I second the suggestion that you don't need a lot of fancy features, but mine has one that is really useful. It's a setting where it cooks for four hours on high and then switches to low automatically.

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: JennieG
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 06:59 PM

Definitely get one. Although our family is small (Himself and me, plus two cats) I cook large amounts, then we have our meals for the next few nights taken care of. Not so long ago I cooked this which has to be the yummiest meat I have ever had; we had a few hot dinners (it was a big leg of lamb) and lunch sandwiches too. Other recipes on Julie's site are good too, and she uses the slow cooker a fair bit - Julie is a food writer in Calgary.

I second the bit above about getting an oval shape rather than round, and go up a size - rather than getting the smallest size, go for the next size. You can always cook a smaller amount in a larger pot but you can't fit a joint of meat in some of the small cookers. It's wonderful for making soup in cold (or any other!) weather to.

Cheers
JennieG

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 03:46 PM

First one I ever had, I just did chicken & noodles in it.

recipe? put in whole chicken, add water, cook either over night on low or 4hrs on high. Take chicken out onto platter with a couple spatulas and scrape good parts to side, throw away bad parts. Put good parts back in and add noodles for 'awhile'

For other chicken soup ideas, add veggies or whatever seasonings you wish.

Now I do all sorts of things like BBQ Sloppy Joes...lemme think a bit...

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 03:03 PM

gnu

try this and this for starters, I think it will keep you happy once you have chosen your device.

People keep saying I should get one so it's been useful me looking on the web.

You throwing a slow cook party then with folk recipes?

lol

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 03:00 PM

1. Whatever size you choose pick one with an oval crock as it is a more felxible shape for joints etc than a round one.

2. Don't be seduced by fancy controls. High, Low is good enough.

3. Buy one with a brown crock as as the white stain and scratch to a fetching shade of grey when scoured.


I would buy the larger size espsecially if you entertain, cook for the freezer, or have a family. If you have a large cooker and want to cook smaller portions remember that you can use a smaller pyrex dish and submerge this into the crock and then fill the crock with boiling water so the dish cooks baine marie style. This method can also be used to cook two things at once ie spuds in a dish submerged into a stew. HTH

Anyway, have a look at this link http://slow-cooker.org.uk/

Subject: RE: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: sapper82
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 02:35 PM

OOHHHH!!! My favourite cooking impliment!

First, energy. About as much as a 60W lightbulb.

Almost any of the ones you find in electrical shops or supermarkets will be satisfactory.

For a single person, 1 to 1.5 litres.

Recipe?
If you are not a veggie, cheap cuts of meat; lots of vegetables, seasoning to taste and a small amount of water.

If you are a veggie, ditto but without the meat.

Also excelent for a pot roast of things like brisket etc.

Go forth and experiment!!

Subject: BS: Slow cooker... which and why?
From: gnu
Date: 21 Aug 10 - 02:13 PM

What brand, model, size, and whatnot do you have and what do you like/dislike about it?

Recipes, with amounts for the particulr size cooker, would be a bonus on this thread.

One thing I have wondered is, what's the wattage on these cookers? Are they energy hogs? Also, I assume they don't give emit much moisture... correct?