Mark Bittman, in a column about his small kitchen (bigger than mine!) in last Sunday’s Times, brought up something I’ve been thinking about:
> I’ve developed material for my column and books when cooking on electric stoves (heat is heat, after all), in unfinished basements using hot plates and microwaves, and in borrowed kitchens all over the world. The equipment can make things more or less difficult, of course, but after all, cooking is cooking.
I’ve used cheap gas stoves, cheap electric stoves, and expensive gas stoves. The expensive gas stoves are definitely the best. But I’d argue–and this seems to be a minority opinion among cooks–that cheap electric stoves are much better than cheap gas stoves.
It’s all about the heat output. My cheap electric stove gets really, really hot (the large burners do, at least). Not Viking-hot, but hot enough to do a respectable stir-fry. Every cheap gas stove I’ve used has annoyed me by being wimpy. When we had one, I got used to it, but if someone had under $1000 to spend and asked me which kind of stove they should get, I would say electric, definitely.
The only thing I’ve ever felt an electric stove was holding me back from accomplishing is dolsot bibimbap.
I completely agree. I now have I decent gas stove, which kicks out some serious heat – however for as long as I can remember before that I have been cooking on cheap electric stoves – all the way from those ones where you see the ring, up to the ceramic surface/glass top ones. They consistantly give out WAY more heat than cheap gas stoves – which are by far my least favorite thing to cook on.
My parents in law have the most terrible cheap gas stove, and I swear it takes nearly 20 minutes to boil enough water for a small amount of pasta. Forget searing anything too.
Sure, a cheap electric stove might take a while to heat up, but it is pretty bloody hot when it is – you just work around the burn-in time.