Mini slow cooker
Dora
it was too big. I've been looking at a small, 1-1/2 quart one in
order to make soup, or stews, etc. for one person. Has anyone had
any experience with this size?
itsjoannotjoann
>
>
I've never used one this small as for cooking I think it would just be
too small. But I have known of people using this size to keep cheese
or sauces hot. Thye're marketed sometimes as 'crock-ettes.'
j h
useful. It will do 2-3 servings of Swiss steak, for instance, or
smothered pork chops, etc. I use my larger slow cookers for soups and
such, but the 'baby bear' comes in handy a lot. Luckily I have space to
store extra equipment so can indulge. jan
Al Dykes
I have a 1.5 litre no-name that is so basic that it doesn't have an
on/off switch, just plug it in. I make soup and baked beans in it
several times a week. It cost about $12.
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
Brooklyn1
Sounds silly to me... shoulda kept your 6 qt, you didn't have to fill
it to capacity and it's very silly to have an appliance run all day
for just a miniscule quantity... you coulda made a 6 quart potful and
froze the left overs in portions... then you'd save time, effort, and
money. Stews/soups freeze wonderfully well.
Wayne Boatwright
I have two of these, Dora. David and I often don't what the same dish
prepared the same way, so I use these to prepare two different
versions. They have good heat control, are easy to handle, and the
crocks go right in the dishwasher.
<http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=mini+slow+cooker&hl=en&num=10
&lr=&cr=&safe=images&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=13107115625360055402
&ei=msyrTJrBGIymsQP6vsnhAw&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&res
num=1&ved=0CC8Q8wIwAA#>
--
~~ If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it. ~~
~~ A mind is a terrible thing to lose. ~~
**********************************************************
Wayne Boatwright
Cheryl
news:8h1tbe...@mid.individual.net...
I understand your want of a smaller slow cooker. I've seen in my crock pot
cookbooks that the size should be directly related to the quantity you want
to cook, in other words, you have to fill it to a certain % of the capacity
or else you won't get good results. I have a big slow cooker like you gave
away and I mostly cook for one. I only use it for cooking food that I can
save frozen as leftovers when I'm sick of eating what I cooked in it.
Soooooo, no experience with a small one. Would love to hear your results if
you get it.
Cheryl
news:0fina6hhd9u07ldd6...@4ax.com...
shouldn't cook small quantities in it. They have an ideal % of the capacity
to cook in it.
Janet Wilder
If it's a "crockette" it doesn't get hot enough to actually cook. It's
more of a warmer. I have one and use it for cheese dips.
--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Chemiker
Yes, but I don't find it particularly useful for cooking. A good
compromise would have been settling on the classic 3 qt, and adding a
1-2 qt bain marie. When you want a smaller crock, just put the bain
marie in the main crock, fill it with the ingredients, and then add
water into the crock to the level of the food in the B/M. Cook as
usual plus a few extra minutes to allow for the delay in heating the
B/M. The Bain Marie goes into the dishwasher, the Crock stays clean.
HTH
Alex
Brooklyn1
wrote:
I have a 6 quart Wearever and it's manual says no such thing, and I've
used it to cook about 1/3 its capacity, works perfectly. I can't
remember ever cooking just one quart of anything, I don't own any
cookware smaller than 2 quart. I once bought a set of cookware, years
passed and finally I tossed the one quart sauce pot and the 6" fry pan
into the garbage. They took up room in my pantry for like 20 years
and I never used them, not even once. Of course common sense dictates
not to heat any cookware dry.
Brooklyn1
>On 10/5/2010 7:17 PM, itsjoannotjoann wrote:
>> On Oct 5, 7:14 pm, "Dora"<limey...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> I had a 6-quart slow cooker but gave it away when I moved here because
>>> it was too big. I've been looking at a small, 1-1/2 quart one in
>>> order to make soup, or stews, etc. for one person. Has anyone had
>>> any experience with this size?
>>
>>>
>>>
>> I've never used one this small as for cooking I think it would just be
>> too small. But I have known of people using this size to keep cheese
>> or sauces hot. Thye're marketed sometimes as 'crock-ettes.'
>
>If it's a "crockette" it doesn't get hot enough to actually cook. It's
>more of a warmer. I have one and use it for cheese dips.
Aren't crockettes those long legged gals at radio city who dance
wearing coonskin caps? Janet, Janet Crockette... kilt her a bar when
she was only three! LOL
Julie Bove
I think that's the size I had for many years. It just wasn't big enough for
us. But it worked just fine.
Julie Bove
"itsjoannotjoann" <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:13926427-0551-40e1...@i5g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
I have the Crockette but I think it is smaller still. It only holds a few
cups. I use it for cheese dip.
Julie Bove
"Cheryl" <jlhs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qZQqo.22984$ez6....@newsfe02.iad...
I believe the smallest recommended amount is half full.
projectile vomit chick
You make two to three servings of Swiss steak or smothered pork chops
in a ONE QUART crock?
Wow.
projectile vomit chick
"B/M" is a good abbreviation for what you describe.....
Terry
Bought one for $10 at Kroger, some time back. No controls, just plug
it in. It got too hot for good slow cooking; stuff on the sides
tended to go past caramelization and into 'burnt'. One of these days
I'll wire up a light dimmer switch to it and get some versatility out
of it.
--
Best -- Terry
Catmandy (Sheryl)
Hi Dora,
I have one of these. It's useful; but not extraordinarily so. I bought
mine a few years ago on Black Friday at Walmart for $4, so I have
gotten my money's worth from it. It seemed like a good idea, for all
the reasons you state. Unfortunately, in practice, I just didn't find
it practical to cook one portion of something that takes so long to
cook. I enjoy slow-cooked foods (stews, soups, braises, etc)--why not
make enough for 3-4 meals and either enjoy the leftovers or freeze
them for a day when I want the slow-cooked meal but have no time to
devote to it? I gave away my 6 qt round slow cooker, also. Too big...
I rarely used it and it took a lot of space to store. If I need a
large slow cooker again, they are cheap enough, I'll pick up the large
oval one.
My recommendation is to pick up a 4 qt slow cooker. I have one that is
Crock Pot brand--oval shaped (and red, so I love the color!). This
model goes on sale at Target regularly for about $18. It is normally
$20. The minimum qty to cook in it is 2 qts. I have done 3 stuffed
peppers. 3 or 4 chicken breasts with potatoes, a 2 lb eye of round or
chuck blade roast. It's plenty big for one person with leftovers, and
you will have ample room if you have 2-3 guests for dinner, as well.
It also makes enough chili for 8-10 people if having other appetizers.
I did make a meatloaf in the 1 qt pot once. It took about 3/4 lb of
beef plus all the other ingredients. It was "round" but it was a nice
result. I have also used it to make 1 stuffed pepper for myself. Have
also used it for bean/barley soup. I did use it on a timer, as I
recall, because the quantities were small and the foods I was cooking
would have been overcooked if left on for 10 hours (the amount of time
I was typically out of the house on a work day).
I have also used it to keep cider warm at a party, as well as a
spinach/artichoke dip. But honestly, if I didn't have it, I doubt I
would miss it. (I haven't given it away yet, though b/c it doesn't
take up much space and it's handy for entertaining).
George
Yes, its a simple easy to understand physics thing. Last two crockpots
we bought had similar instructions. It is pretty simple. Crockpots have
a fixed heat input designed for an average fill and are not
thermostatically regulated. So if you try to cook a small amount it will
heat much too quickly and overcook.
George
Sounds way too small to be practical or efficient. Why not just make a
bigger batch of soup or whatever and freeze or even put it in the fridge
if say you will use it later that week?
Wayne Boatwright
Dora is only cooking for herself, and my guess is that she does not eat
massive quantities of food, nor does she want a lot of leftovers to be
frozen. A quart and a half of something like stew is actually quite a
bit for one person.
Brooklyn1
Sheesh... 2-3 TODDLER servings... I think three jars of Gerber's Jr
food is one quart.
I've known lactating women who could express one quart in 24 hours...
2-3 feedings for me... a guy hasta keep his immune system UP too ya
know... nutritionally and for pure pleasure breast milk sure beats the
heck outta pie crust!
I'm sure if scientific studies were conducted they wouldn't find any
gays who were breast fed. And lesbians 'cause their daddy continued
to boink their mommy right up until labor began, that big old daddy
peepee pokin' at their widdle butt was just too traumatic.
Reminds me of an oldie: What's gray and comes in quarts?
~
~
~
~
~
~
Elephants! LOL
Brooklyn1
> I had a 6-quart slow cooker but gave it away when I moved here because
> it was too big.
Every gal I ever knew prefered a big one.
> I've been looking at a small, 1-1/2 quart one in
> order to make soup, or stews, etc. for one person.
> Has anyone had any experience with this size?
I think you've already been spoiled. ;)
A good resource:
http://www.crock-pot.com/Index.aspx
AuntyPalin
>I had a 6-quart slow cooker but gave it away when I moved here because
>it was too big. I've been looking at a small, 1-1/2 quart one in
>order to make soup, or stews, etc. for one person. Has anyone had
>any experience with this size?
I have a 1.5 quart Toastmaster crockpot that I bought at Tar'get
several years ago. I think it was $10 and has no on/off switch.
I usually make oatmeal in it overnight using a wall timer.
It has worked fine for me but then again I first started using small
crock pots in college x years ago. It does seem to run a bit hotter
and I save the long runs for my bigger crock pot. Also, can't do a
full chicken in the wee one.
I guess I could do a cornish in the 1.5 - you know I think I will!
:-)
***********************************
www.AuntyPalin.com, facebook & twitter too
Remember Aunty = Anti
Dora
Thanks for all the comments. They were really helpful.
cshenk
>> I had a 6-quart slow cooker but gave it away when I moved here it was too
>> big. I've been looking at a small, 1-1/2 quart one in
>> order to make soup, or stews, etc. for one person. Has anyone had
>> any experience with this size?
>
> Thanks for all the comments. They were really helpful.
Here's some more Dora.
I have 3 crockpots and they all have their uses. I use the largest one for
a whole pork shoulder but then I am still feeding 3.
The newer small 5-6 cup ones you are looking at also come with more than
just 'on and off' (plugged in or not) now. You want one of those. I saw
one just a few days ago with 'keep warm, low, medium, high' just like my
full units. They are probably fully functional.
Over time crockpots have changed. Many here reference what is little more
than a warmer for the small sizes but many today are looking for a
functional unit for a single or double meal and the market now has them.
By own small 'baby crock' is just the plug in or not but it's usable for
many things. I commonly make carrot or squash soups in there or steam/bake
a few small potatoes or yams.
I can easily make a meal for 1 with a leftover in the small ones.
Bob Terwilliger
> I have 3 crockpots and they all have their uses. I use the largest one
> for a whole pork shoulder but then I am still feeding 3.
>
> The newer small 5-6 cup ones you are looking at also come with more than
> just 'on and off' (plugged in or not) now. You want one of those. I saw
> one just a few days ago with 'keep warm, low, medium, high' just like my
> full units. They are probably fully functional.
>
> Over time crockpots have changed. Many here reference what is little more
> than a warmer for the small sizes but many today are looking for a
> functional unit for a single or double meal and the market now has them.
>
> By own small 'baby crock' is just the plug in or not but it's usable for
> many things. I commonly make carrot or squash soups in there or
> steam/bake a few small potatoes or yams.
>
> I can easily make a meal for 1 with a leftover in the small ones.
Cooks' Illustrated did a comparison of crockpots a few years ago. Their
results were a bit disheartening: Every single crockpot tested would bring
water to a boil, regardless of what setting was selected. The only
difference was how long it took.
If I'm using a crockpot, I do *not* want it to get that hot.
Bob
Sky
> I had a 6-quart slow cooker but gave it away when I moved here because
> it was too big. I've been looking at a small, 1-1/2 quart one in order
> to make soup, or stews, etc. for one person. Has anyone had any
> experience with this size?
Some years ago, I purchased a 1.5 quart crockpot that has three settings
on a dial for warm, hi, and low. It's a "Kitchen Gourmet" brand and
cost about $10. I've seen them at places like CVS & Walgreens. It's
the perfect size when cooking for one with a few servings for leftovers,
not too many though ;) I like to make beef bourguignon with mine. I
think you'll be pleased with the results.
Sky
--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!
Christine Dabney
<virtualgoth@die_spammer.biz> wrote:
>Cooks' Illustrated did a comparison of crockpots a few years ago. Their
>results were a bit disheartening: Every single crockpot tested would bring
>water to a boil, regardless of what setting was selected. The only
>difference was how long it took.
>
>If I'm using a crockpot, I do *not* want it to get that hot.
I am wondering if that is why everything I make in one, has a stewed
quality. I don't like them that much, for that reason.
I do cook steel cut oats in one, and it works well for that. I also
make a paprika chicken dish in it, but I am tempted to see if tastes
better cooked in a Dutch oven, in the oven....
Christine
--
http://nightstirrings.blogspot.com
Al Dykes
My no-controls 1.5L pot brings water to 180F.
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
Al Dykes
I do my oats in the microwave, in the bowl I'll eat from. One less
dish to clean.
Doing rice and slow-cook oats in the crock-pot isn't working for me and
I'm still experimenting with water qty and time. So far it's largely
paste, not "fluffy."
Bob Terwilliger
> Doing rice and slow-cook oats in the crock-pot isn't working for me and
> I'm still experimenting with water qty and time. So far it's largely
> paste, not "fluffy."
The main use I have for the crockpot is keeping chili warm for a Super Bowl
party.
I have cooked steel-cut oats in the crockpot, but I prefer the texture of
the stovetop-cooked oats. When I make them in the crockpot I use one cup of
oats to EIGHT cups of milk. I know that seems like a lot of milk, but what
you get is something with the consistency of tapioca pudding.
Bob
Brooklyn1
Mine has two heat levels, the low setting will not boil, not even
close. The high setting will eventually come to a very low simmer...
that's how it was designed to operate. Mine also has a keep warm
range, will hold at that low heat for four hours after the timer
setting clicks off. It took me a few tries experimenting for the
optimum ratio of pin oats to water and for how long to set the timer
at the high setting for a 2/3 filled pot... now works perfectly every
time. I don't use my slow cooker for actual cooking, to me set n'
forget is not real cooking. I tried a few stews but wasn't happy with
the results so now all I use it for is pin oats (steel cut oats). But
recently I read about another way to prepare steel cut oats in the
microwave oven that I'm going to try now that the weather is getting
cooler... spotted it perusing the Honeyville site.
I have this one:
http://tinyurl.com/6b82wl
http://www.amazon.com/Countdown-SmartPot-Stainless-Cooker-SCVC604-SS/dp/B000BCZ
8XG/sr=1-20/qid=1167350345/ref=sr_1_20/104-4640750-1575137?ie=UTF8&s=kitchen
Christine Dabney
>It took me a few tries experimenting for the
>optimum ratio of pin oats to water and for how long to set the timer
>at the high setting for a 2/3 filled pot... now works perfectly every
>time.
I find I use less water when I cook steel cut oats. Since the water
doesn't really evaporate like it does when they are cooked in a
regular pot, I figured that I should use less water.
I get good results using 3 cups of water to 1 cup of oats, when using
the crockpot for these. And I only cook them til they are just done.
That way they keep their texture a bit more. Usually doesn't take
that many hours to fix.
Christine
--
http://nightstirrings.blogspot.com
J. Clarke
virtualgoth@die_spammer.biz says...
Do-gooders at work. Dunno if it was some crusading lawyer, the Consumer
Product Safety Commission, Ralph Nadir, or some other professional
busybody, but the crock pot manufacturers were "persuaded" that if the
crock-pot won't heat the contents to boiling then everybody will die of
food poisoning, so they all heat to a boil now.
Some deep-fryers, on the other hand, have a low setting that runs to
around the same temperature as the pre-do-gooder crock-pots.
J. Clarke
If it's less than 20 years old what brand and model is it?
Al Dykes
It's about 3 months old. The label on the side says "Rival
Crock-Pot". The tag on the bottom of the unit is "SCR151". This is
it.
http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_SPM589381001P?prdNo=16
If you buy it, measure the temp. I wouldn't expect great quality
control on something like this.
Brooklyn1
The quality control regarding temperture is excellent, those heating
elements are made to the same standards as those used in much more
pricy appliances. But with these types of low tech electric
appliances the temperature varies with the the line voltage to your
residence (same with electric stove tops) and over the long periods
these appliances typically operate voltage will vary considerably. If
these slow cookers had voltage regulating circuitry like a computer
and TV, or even a thermostat, then their temperature would be constant
but they don't. Slow cooker temperature is also very dependant on
which time of day they are used. If turned on early in the day and
left to operate all day until dinner time then that is the period when
voltage varies the most and is typically lower... using a slow cooker
over night is best because that is when voltage is most consistant and
and at it's peak. An electric stove top element will operate at about
a 10% lower BTU rating at noon then at midnight...dinner time is when
electric stove tops perform most poorly, especially when one lives in
a densely populated area, most especially a large apartment complex.
Dinner time is when it takes the longest to bring that large pot of
water to the boil, and have the poorest results stir frying. Late
night is the best time to run your motorized appliances so that they
perform optimally and so their motors last longer... and off peak is
when many utility companies offer a lower rate. People don't notice
the voltage drop at home during daytime because they don't have their
lighting on. In industrial/business areas utility companies supply
more stable voltage, they install better more costly equipment, those
are their big users. Electric companies don't give two beans about
your slow cookers. And this is another reason why gas cooking is
better than electric, more consistant stove top temperature, with gas
I can keep a pot at an evenly consistant temperature all day. The
only real advantages to a slow cooker is that it's well insulated and
its earthernware crock evens out temperture fluctuations... just too
bad there is no thermostat, but it would need to be a probe directly
in what's cooking... I used to have a jumbo size GE microwave that had
a probe, did fantastic slow cooking, especially since I could peek,
taste, add ingredients, and reseason as much as I wanted and it would
electronically adjust the power level to maintain precise temperature.
Dora
>
> Some years ago, I purchased a 1.5 quart crockpot that has three
> settings on a dial for warm, hi, and low. It's a "Kitchen Gourmet"
> brand and cost about $10. I've seen them at places like CVS &
> Walgreens. It's the perfect size when cooking for one with a few
> servings for leftovers, not too many though ;) I like to make beef
> bourguignon with mine. I think you'll be pleased with the results.
>
> Sky
Thanks, Sky. That's the purpose I had in mind.
My problem here in this small retirement apartment is lack of kitchen
storage space, so more compact the better. Pointless pining over my
previous kitchen.
J. Clarke
Interesting. At the price it's tempting--if it still burns my beans I
haven't lost much.