zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. polyno+(OP)[view] [source] 2016-01-24 22:36:37
How does this work? If you are using the exact same heat source, then the only difference seems to be the metal/composition/thickness of the kettle vs. a cooking pot. Which doesn't intuitively seem like it will save 13 minutes out of 15.
replies(3): >>Symbio+wD >>moogly+XV >>koide+1k1
2. Symbio+wD[view] [source] 2016-01-25 12:41:38
>>polyno+(OP)
You'll always save time with an electric kettle — it's likely to be better-insulated, have a lid, and the heating element is in contact with the water. It will still take 4-5 minutes though, even with a powerful kettle.

In case you're not familiar with them, we're discussing something like [1], or, to show these are very widespread commodity appliances, [2], which costs $7 including tax.

[1] http://www.amazon.co.uk/Andrew-James-Cordless-Indicator-Warr...

[2] http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/9016710.htm

3. moogly+XV[view] [source] 2016-01-25 16:17:05
>>polyno+(OP)
An induction stove with booster function will come close to the performance of an electric kettle, but I don't have one of those. Any other type of hob will heat water a lot slower.
4. koide+1k1[view] [source] 2016-01-25 19:50:56
>>polyno+(OP)
I guess he means an electric water heater...
[go to top]