# Size Matters. Stock Pot Deep Thoughts...



## HumbleHomeCook (Dec 25, 2020)

I recently posted a thread about a Vollrath stock pot and got some really good information.

Again, it's just my wife and I at home now and I put a 4qt sauce pan, 3.5qt saucier, and 1qt sauce pan through their paces but I find myself rarely reaching for the 8qt pot. Ours is worn out (Calphalon Teflon) and I need to replace it with something. That something will be stainless steel. We also have a 12qt aluminum stock pot I bought years and years ago. When the kids were home my wife used the hell out of that pot and she still uses it from time to time. Enough so that she declared she will not be without one. That pot is pitted, warped, hard to control heat, mars the sink, etc.

But there I was yesterday, just so many days the last couple years, making a big pot of stock and then poaching a whole chicken in it and eventually making chicken soup.

I have an adult daughter with significant digestive issues and chicken is something can pretty consistently handle. So a couple times a month I poach chicken for her and/or make different soups.

It go me to thinking about my uses of the "standard home" 8qt pot (wider and shorter) vs. the, I don't know, "traditional" stock pots that are narrower and taller. I'm starting to think that for now, I might just go with a solid stainless 11-12qt tall pot. Yeah I give up some surface area on the bottom but I gain the larger capacity for what we seem to be using a larger pot for these days. The wife has another wok-ish style pan she likes for sauces (it makes her happy). And I have my cast iron Dutch oven.

Long story only a little shorter, I think I'm talking myself into the larger pot right now.

This is only an issue as I'm in the process of replacing our cookware and costs add up. I'm in a pretty good place with our frying pans (carbon and stainless steel), we've got some good bakeware, and I'd prefer to put more money toward a quality 4qt pan that we use all the time.

What do you think? It's okay to tell me I'm over thinking it. I tend to do that...


----------



## M1k3 (Dec 25, 2020)

I like taller pots for putting in say whole chickens. For vegetable stock, doesn't really matter, except a wider surface area bringing it to boil quicker. 

I do like keeping a bit of height to help balance it better than short and wide would.

In my opinion, the thing that makes the biggest difference is having walls that are thick enough to transfer heat up the sides.


----------



## HumbleHomeCook (Dec 25, 2020)

M1k3 said:


> I like taller pots for putting in say whole chickens. For vegetable stock, doesn't really matter, except a wider surface area bringing it to boil quicker.
> 
> I do like keeping a bit of height to help balance it better than short and wide would.
> 
> *In my opinion, the thing that makes the biggest difference is having walls that are thick enough to transfer heat up the sides.*




Really? Interesting and thanks for commenting. I was thinking that on the sidewalls it would be less important being on the stovetop...?


----------



## M1k3 (Dec 25, 2020)

The sidewalls help transfer heat. A good base is definitely important along with handles. It definitely helps with the heating. Not so much the quality of the end product.


----------



## Michi (Dec 26, 2020)

I bought this one many years ago. From memory, I paid less than $50 during some sale. Essteele brand, and really solid.

24 cm (9.5") inner diameter and height. Nominal volume is 10.8 litres (if I were to fill it all the way up to the rim). Call it 9 litres (2.4 gallons) for a more realistic fill level. I use it to make stock (obviously) as well as pasta (when I need to make a lot, say, 1 kg or more).


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 26, 2020)

I have several old pots. The Revere ware was made in USA in 1993. I bought them new. The small one is 12 qt and the back large one is 16 qt. Our off-brand pasta pot is a little large now for the 2 of us. I want a smaller pasta pot so I am very interested in what you find out here as I may buy 1 also.

My pasta pot is too wide so I am looking for a narrower one to use less water which will be a faster boil. I like the idea of tall and narrow as you can add more water if you need to cook more pasta.

I am not interested in buying a China made pot either. So, it needs to be US or European made.


----------



## esoo (Dec 26, 2020)

Reading with interest as I go from a 4.5qt to a 20qt. Looking for a 10-12qt.


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 26, 2020)

I have been looking online. I found this which would be smaller than my current model. It is on sale for $100 off.
Amazon.com: Viking 3-Ply Stainless Steel Pasta Pot with Steamer, 8 Quart: Kitchen & Dining

Amazon pickups up on what you are doing and made it easy for me to find this one. Does anybody own one of these, plus & minus?
It looks like all the current pasta pots are low and wide to make for faster boiling time since a wider pot is more energy efficient

I still like the idea of tall and skinny. I am not trying to hijack the thread so let me know if I am helping. Also, I think if the strainer basket goes to the bottom of the pan it will be better for a faster boil.

PS
It looks like it was US designed but maybe made in China.


----------



## daveb (Dec 26, 2020)

Viking makes good stuff for the most part.


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 26, 2020)

Maybe there would be more options if we looked at pots and used a colander rather pasta basket. The problem I see with a lot of pasta baskets is the bottom of the basket is too high to where you need to add a lot more water to the pot.


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 26, 2020)

daveb said:


> Viking makes good stuff for the most part.



I am now thinking you need to buy the Viking 5-Ply Professional or 3-Ply Mirror to get US made. Viking 5-Ply Hard Stainless and 3-Ply Contemporary is China made. Does anybody know?


----------



## daveb (Dec 26, 2020)

HumbleHomeCook said:


> What do you think? It's okay to tell me I'm over thinking it. I tend to do that...



Ding, ding, arriving at over thinking. (Whoops I guess that is directed at coxhaus but sentiment is same.)

There are less utilitarian requirements for a stockpot that any other pot/pan in the kitchen. It's got to hold water. It's got to have a footprint that will fit on your stovetop. It's got to have decent handles to support the weight when fully loaded. Done. Nice to have a pasta insert when using it to blanch things or cook pasta. Said insert should reach the bottom of the pot to take advantage of the full water column. Nice (essential to me) to be induction compatible. 

Buy the cheapest one you can find that meets basic requirements and anything else (size) you deem important.


----------



## HumbleHomeCook (Dec 26, 2020)

daveb said:


> Ding, ding, arriving at over thinking. (Whoops I guess that is directed at coxhaus but sentiment is same.)
> 
> There are less utilitarian requirements for a stockpot that any other pot/pan in the kitchen. It's got to hold water. It's got to have a footprint that will fit on your stovetop. It's got to have decent handles to support the weight when fully loaded. Done. Nice to have a pasta insert when using it to blanch things or cook pasta. Said insert should reach the bottom of the pot to take advantage of the full water column. Nice (essential to me) to be induction compatible.
> 
> Buy the cheapest one you can find that meets basic requirements and anything else (size) you deem important.



Yep. I'd settled on that and then starting seeing shiny things... But back to my plan of inexpensive. I'll put the good money toward a new stainless 1 and 4 qt.


----------



## HumbleHomeCook (Dec 26, 2020)

Found a 9.5"x9.5" 8qt on Amazon that all-in was shy of $50. Ordered and done.


----------



## aboynamedsuita (Dec 27, 2020)

Most “stockpots” I’ve seen when I was researching my purchases have about a 1:1 diameter:height ratio, but have also seen some exceptions. 

here are some of mine, all are stainless steel and induction compatible (bottom to top, specs are approx. from memory):

Browne / thermalloy 32qt 13.5”x13.5”
Zwilling commercial 18qt 11”x11”
Demeyere Atlantis 8qt 9.5”x7” (also has pasta and steamer inserts)
Zwilling asparagus/pasta pot 4.8qt 6”x8” (with mesh basket inside)
I also have a Browne / thermalloy 8qt but I think it’d hit the ceiling if I tried to put in the tower (it’s mostly for the wok strainer and other things when I don’t want to use the $$$ Atlantis pot)


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 27, 2020)

Well, I ordered a used Revere ware copper bottom 8 qt pot US made from eBay for $54 including shipping. I wanted to find out if 8 qt is a good size for me. I plan to give my old pasta pot to my daughter. It has a real thick aluminum bottom which I ordered for my old house when I had electric which my daughter has. I am thinking the thick bottom is taking longer to heat up to boil water on my gas stove now. When I get the new pot, I will test them to see which one boils faster.


----------



## Michi (Dec 27, 2020)

aboynamedsuita said:


> I also have a Browne / thermalloy 8qt but I think it’d hit the ceiling if I tried to put in the tower


Anyone for a game of Jenga? The sound effects would be spectacular


----------



## HumbleHomeCook (Dec 28, 2020)

daveb said:


> Ding, ding, arriving at over thinking. (Whoops I guess that is directed at coxhaus but sentiment is same.)
> 
> There are less utilitarian requirements for a stockpot that any other pot/pan in the kitchen. It's got to hold water. It's got to have a footprint that will fit on your stovetop. It's got to have decent handles to support the weight when fully loaded. Done. Nice to have a pasta insert when using it to blanch things or cook pasta. Said insert should reach the bottom of the pot to take advantage of the full water column. Nice (essential to me) to be induction compatible.
> 
> Buy the cheapest one you can find that meets basic requirements and anything else (size) you deem important.




Thank you sir for kicking me out of analysis paralysis. Didn't go with the Vollrath as the wife had a discount and free shipping so grabbed another brand.

Arrived today. Seems solid and good to go.


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 28, 2020)

It looks nice. Mine is coming from slow eBay. Do you think 8 quarts are going to be the right size?


----------



## Michi (Dec 28, 2020)

coxhaus said:


> Do you think 8 quarts are going to be the right size?


You'll get about 4 quarts of stock that way, or maybe even a little more. I don't know how much stock you use, but 8 quarts sounds pretty generous to me


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 29, 2020)

I am mainly looking for a pasta cooking pot with fast boil times for 2. I have stock pots. I don't know if I am pushing it to think about a 6-quart pot? I still need to have room for foam up and boil over cooking pasta.


----------



## Jovidah (Dec 29, 2020)

Personally I wouldn't overcomplicate a pan for pasta. In the end you're just boiling water. You can basically cook pasta in any container that's large enough, and in a pinch even in one that isn't. You can basically boil it in a metal bucket if need be. It's just that having an actual pasta insert makes things far more convenient. At our climbing club we had older bigass cheap uncoated aluminium pans to cook for pasta for larger groups. Worked really well, and I can imagine they probably heat up faster than something stainless.
Size depends mostly upon how many people you intend to serve with it. Simple 5 liter (roughly 5.2 quart) Ikea pan with their el cheapo insert works fine for 4 big eaters on a one course meal for me. I'd be inclined to look at restaurant supply stores to just get something no-frills that works, but then again; I'm a cheapskate. 


I'd rather save the money from an expensive pastapan where it doesn't really matter and put that towards pans where quality does matter (frying pans, cast iron stuff, more knives, whatever).


----------



## btbyrd (Dec 29, 2020)

Contrary to conventional wisdom, there's no need to cook pasta in a large volume of water. The only reason larger pots might be preferable is if you're cooking a bunch of pasta at once or to accommodate longer noodles. But even with long noodles, a big pot isn't necessary. Harold McGee cooks spaghetti in a wide skillet.


----------



## Jovidah (Dec 29, 2020)

Yeah that's what I was referring to in my 'large enough and even in one that isn't comment. Big pot with a lot of water does feel easier / less fussy / more foolproof tho. Can just set a timer and forget about it. Wasn't always that way for me when I used smaller pots; cooking time would increase, probably due to the water cooling down too much when I dunked it in.
Iduno why Hardol McGee makes it sound like pasta is complicated 'the old fashioned way'... Even for first year uni students without any cooking experience it's hard to **** up pasta.


----------



## esoo (Dec 29, 2020)

btbyrd said:


> Contrary to conventional wisdom, there's no need to cook pasta in a large volume of water. The only reason larger pots might be preferable is if you're cooking a bunch of pasta at once or to accommodate longer noodles. But even with long noodles, a big pot isn't necessary. Harold McGee cooks spaghetti in a wide skillet.



I've liked a moderately large pot about only half full of water so about a 5qt with about 2.5qts of water. Even that amount will feed 4 with no problems.

The reason is that as I've experimented with adding more salt to the water (which seems to result in a more tasty pasta), the pasta seems to let off more starch which leads to boil-over when running the burner at a full boil. Having more pot wall above the water line contains that.

Of course, I can reduce the heat, but for some psychological reason, I love seeing pasta at full rolling boil....


----------



## coxhaus (Dec 29, 2020)

esoo said:


> The reason is that as I've experimented with adding more salt to the water (which seems to result in a more tasty pasta), the pasta seems to let off more starch which leads to boil-over when running the burner at a full boil. Having more pot wall above the water line contains that.



This is exact problem I am trying to solve for 2 people. This forum has inspired me to solve this and have fast boil times. My daughter wants my old big pasta pot so I have to follow through.


----------



## BazookaJoe (Dec 30, 2020)

I bought this pot (8qt) back in March, very happy with it. Really wanted a pot with a pasta insert as it makes draining so much easier (and safer!). That said, I do wish it was a little bigger. They have a 12qt version, but it doesn't have the pasta insert.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000CSCQBG/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## damiano (Dec 30, 2020)

So, what kind of pot are you looking for now? Got kinda confused, or it is the prosecco doing its thing.. 

Few soundbites already. Sidewall heat is not important for stock pots: the best stock pots are aluminum disc bottomed pots. For cooking pasta get something light, e.g. Vollrath Optio. If you want to spend more look at Paderno Grand Gourmet and/or Fissler Original Profi. You cook on gas? Another option is Falk stainless steel lined copper, though it's much more expensive than the beforementioned and not better.


----------



## HumbleHomeCook (Dec 30, 2020)

Wahnamhong said:


> So, what kind of pot are you looking for now? Got kinda confused, or it is the prosecco doing its thing..
> 
> Few soundbites already. Sidewall heat is not important for stock pots: the best stock pots are aluminum disc bottomed pots. For cooking pasta get something light, e.g. Vollrath Optio. If you want to spend more look at Paderno Grand Gourmet and/or Fissler Original Profi. You cook on gas? Another option is Falk stainless steel lined copper, though it's much more expensive than the beforementioned and not better.



Hi. If you're talking to me, I've picked up a pot since starting this thread. I went with an inexpensive but solid pot with a disc bottom. I'll put my "premium" dollars into a couple new small sauce pans and maybe saute pan. Probably Made In brand. 

I have an old raw aluminum 12qt pot that has done it's job well enough for many, many years. It's beat up and pitting so it will get replaced in time (we don't use it much any more) and it too will be with an inexpensive but solid option.


----------



## tomsch (Dec 30, 2020)

I have one big aluminum one I picked up about 6 years ago from a well known on-line restaurant supply store. We don't use it that much but it is perfect for crab and lobsters. We were able to drop in two live lobsters last year with enough room.


----------



## DavidPF (Jan 5, 2021)

coxhaus said:


> Do you think 8 quarts are going to be the right size?


If you often make soup for a really large crowd, it would be too small. If it's not for a lot of people, 8 quarts is easily enough. When buying a large pot for home use, saying to yourself "Seriously, how much soup will we normally make at once?" and getting a pot that will comfortably hold that much, should be successful.

Also, "We're going to need a bigger pot" is a fairly cheap and easy problem to solve. It's not like a high-end frying pan where you want to make a careful decision, you can just grab one that looks like it won't fall apart.


----------



## swarfrat (Jan 6, 2021)

btbyrd said:


> Contrary to conventional wisdom, there's no need to cook pasta in a large volume of water. The only reason larger pots might be preferable is if you're cooking a bunch of pasta at once or to accommodate longer noodles. But even with long noodles, a big pot isn't necessary. Harold McGee cooks spaghetti in a wide skillet.


Ever since I read that Serious Eats article my pasta "pot" has been one of these.


----------

