# Calphalon anodized aluminium vs. cast iron



## mark76 (Jun 26, 2015)

When I was in the USA some time ago I cooked a steak in a pan made of anodized aluminium. The brand was Calphalon, which isn't sold where I live.

The pan performed better than a cast iron pan, IIRC. No wonder, since it was made of quite thick aluminium, which has a higher thermal mass than iron. (It also has a better conductivity, but that matters less if you warm up the cast iron pan properly.) At the same time the aluminium pan was lighter than a cast iron pan. The aluminium was anodized, so it wasn't reactive. 

This anodized aluminium pan seems the ideal pan to me for steaks etc. But, as I said, I've used it only a few times and I have to import it from the USA.

So I was wondering: is my impression correct that anodized aluminium is even better for steaks etc. than cast iron? And is there a catch which I'm not aware of?


----------



## Zwiefel (Jun 26, 2015)

mark76 said:


> quite thick aluminium, which has a higher thermal mass than iron. (It also has a better conductivity,



I don't think the first is true, but the latter certainly is. I haven't used that particular line from Calphalon before, but I find them to be rather expensive.


----------



## mark76 (Jun 26, 2015)

Isobaric mass heat capacity of aluminium is 0.897. That of iron is 0.450.

Thus, per unit of weight aluminium stores more heat.


----------



## mark76 (Jun 26, 2015)

I cannot edit my previous message anymore, but the reason you may think iron has more thermal mass is that most aluminium pans are quite light. Iron is much heavier than aluminium. If you have an aluminium pan and an iron pan with bottoms of the same thickness, the iron pan will have a better heat capacity (though not much). But if the pans weigh the same (and thus the aluminium pan has a thicker bottom), aluminium easily wins.


----------



## Zwiefel (Jun 26, 2015)

mark76 said:


> Isobaric mass heat capacity of aluminium is 0.897. That of iron is 0.450.
> 
> Thus, per unit of weight aluminium stores more heat.





mark76 said:


> I cannot edit my previous message anymore, but the reason you may think iron has more thermal mass is that most aluminium pans are quite light. Iron is much heavier than aluminium. If you have an aluminium pan and an iron pan with bottoms of the same thickness, the iron pan will have a better heat capacity (though not much). But if the pans weigh the same (and thus the aluminium pan has a thicker bottom), aluminium easily wins.



Interesting. Still, "more thermal mass" and "more thermal mass per unit" are quite different. I stand semi-corrected


----------



## Pensacola Tiger (Jun 26, 2015)

Before I remodeled my kitchen and went to an induction hob, I had a collection of Calphalon pans that I was fond of. They were good performing pans, but the bottoms of both the 12" skillet and 5 qt sauté pan warped sightly over a period of a few years use. They were still usable, but rocked on a flat surface.

I don't recall using them for steak, but I really liked them for pork chops and chicken breast filets.

One downside was that over a ten year period, the anodized surface on the 3 qt saucepan wore away. 

Rick


----------



## mark76 (Jun 26, 2015)

How did your Calphalon pans compare to cast iron pans in cooking performance, Rick?


----------



## Pensacola Tiger (Jun 26, 2015)

mark76 said:


> How did your Calphalon pans compare to cast iron pans in cooking performance, Rick?



For even heating and retention, they were on a level with cast iron, but the food release was inferior. Anodized aluminum doesn't season.


----------



## daveb (Jun 27, 2015)

Mark, I don't know how long ago you were here but Calphalon, like most cookware companies has "evolved" to try and capture a larger market niche. I started using them in the late 80s or early 90 when they were labeled as "Commercial" cookware. A skillet was quite robust with similar properties to quality stainless. It would sear, caramelize, deglaze with the best products of the time. To increase market share they targeted the "Target" market, reducing manufacturing costs, price points, and inevitably quality. They introduced a non-stick offering that wasn't.. And they became and remain a department store brand. 

The only skillets I've found that will perform like cast iron are carbon - in my case de Buyer. They are a little lighter and easier to use than CI. With de Buyer being manufactured in France I would think they would be readily available to the European market.


----------



## Zwiefel (Jun 27, 2015)

daveb said:


> Mark, I don't know how long ago you were here but Calphalon, like most cookware companies has "evolved" to try and capture a larger market niche. I started using them in the late 80s or early 90 when they were labeled as "Commercial" cookware. A skillet was quite robust with similar properties to quality stainless. It would sear, caramelize, deglaze with the best products of the time. To increase market share they targeted the "Target" market, reducing manufacturing costs, price points, and inevitably quality. They introduced a non-stick offering that wasn't.. And they became and remain a department store brand.
> 
> The only skillets I've found that will perform like cast iron are carbon - in my case de Buyer. They are a little lighter and easier to use than CI. With de Buyer being manufactured in France I would think they would be readily available to the European market.



Wow. I've bought their target stuff for camping, but I didn't realize they no longer have a high end line. That's a little sad.


----------



## aboynamedsuita (Jun 27, 2015)

The only aluminum cookware I have is Gastrolux, just a few nonstick pans for those delicate dishes (usually egg or fish) when you don't want the high heat sear to aide in food release.


----------



## daveb (Jun 27, 2015)

Z, It's possible that back at Caphalon HQ their opinion is different than mine...

I do like the "Commercial" line for stock pots - they're available on the bay. Though I'm moving towards induction compatible now.


----------



## mark76 (Jun 27, 2015)

Thanks guys, I didnt know Calphalon was no longer high-end. The hard anodized aluminium pan I used look quite sturdy. It was heavy and especially for a fully aluminium pan that must mean it is quite thick. And I thought anodized aluminium meant that all aluminium was anodized and there wasnt a layer on top of the core aluminium like Teflon. But after your reports I googled it and anodizing indeed results in a very thin layer that can wear off (although it isnt actually put on top of the core material).



daveb said:


> The only skillets I've found that will perform like cast iron are carbon - in my case de Buyer. They are a little lighter and easier to use than CI. With de Buyer being manufactured in France I would think they would be readily available to the European market.



Yes, they are. You cannot walk into a cookware shop without stumbling over them :biggrin: . But Ive got a cast iron skillet already, which I love. An advantage of de Buyer would be that it is a bit lighter than cast iron.

Does the coating of your de Buyer hold as well as on a cast iron pan? (I understood that a cast iron pan has an advantage here, since the material is a bit rougher.)


----------



## chinacats (Jun 27, 2015)

The commercial line was pretty good, but I've looked at replacing the ones I've over used/abused and their new stuff is not the same quality.

My good cast iron is actually rather smooth.


----------



## knyfeknerd (Jun 28, 2015)

We got the whole gigantic set of Calphalon Anodized pots & pans for our wedding 10 years ago. Heavy-duty construction, decent conductivity of heat......but AWFUL food release!
AWFUL! 
AWFUL! 
It renders the skillets and/or sautee pans useless. I can't cook eggs or potatoes in them. Maybe sear a steak, but it's been a while and I've been using better pans. The cheapo aluminum pans from the restaurant supply store are superior to the Calphalon in all ways except the "heavy duty" aspect.
The stockpots and such are fine, just say no to the sautee/skillet.


----------



## Mucho Bocho (Jun 28, 2015)

I had almost a full set of had anodized too. The ones with stick stainless steel handles that were 5mm thick. I also had several of the very early non stick pans. They have been out of rotation for years and collecting dust in the attic. Then someone told me to send them back under warrantee. That's just what I did and they replaced the whole set with their contemporary line non stick. No questions asked. I ended up selling them anyway. Kept one 12" skillet for eggs. Send them back


----------



## gic (Jun 28, 2015)

Costco sells an inexpensive "kirkland" brand of anodized aluminum that are quite inexpensive and may be worth checking out. There are costcos in England and Spain now and they would have it...


----------

