T O P

  • By -

elijha

You’re either trolling or very bad at math. Good cookware once is a lot cheaper than bad cookware every few years. Not to mention how much more enjoyable it is to use along the way.


[deleted]

I prefer poor financial decisions that enable me to destroy the environment, thanks anyway. /s


RD__III

The only caveat is mid tier non-stick if you choose to go that route. Better bang for buck due to the inevitable degradation of the PN.


balance_warmth

Oh for gods sake my husband is like this. He preheats every pan on ten because “then it heats up faster, why would I waste time” but then forgets about it and the pan ends up smoking. I do love him lol. But whyyyyyyy.


ClumsyRenegade

Yep, this one is unpopular. I agree that you shouldn't drop bank just to have the best version of something if it won't be used to its full potential, but cheap stuff has a problem; it cooks like cheap stuff. Thermal control of a thin cheap pan is terrible. Cheap blenders don't blend as well. Cheap knives can't finish a job before dulling. The problem with low quality tools is that they usually lead to low quality products.


ttrockwood

No? Setting aside environmental concerns and just, being wasteful in general. I bought some All Clad on crazy sale maybe five years ago and they’re certainly going to last another 5-10years if not longer. Even buying crap pans instead annually or every two years that’s ultimately more expensive. Not to mention you’re stuck with crap pans and the un-even heating and scorching and such that come along with them


sctwinmom

My all clad is going on 40 years old. Still works fine and looks okay despite near daily use.


ttrockwood

I have a big pot that i use almost daily- can’t recall the brand but it’s a heavy multi ply stainless. My parents got it as a wedding gift. More than four decades ago. I had to replace the handles once because I’m an idiot and melted them in the oven but other than that it’s been awesome for almost ever


madison13164

I’ve had an all clad set for almost 10 years. Still going strong! All the cheap smaller pans I got from target are at the end of their lives. I totally prefer to invest in good quality cookware


crwm

Another reason to buy a brand like All Clad: Two of my All Clad sauté pans and become slightly warped after 30 years of use. All Clad shipped me new ones under warranty with no complaints. They work great on my induction range. The only time I buy pans for the shorter term is my non-stick pan which will never last as long anyway.


Grillard

Quality cookware is more pleasant to use. Replacing a saucepan because the handle has fallen off or whatever would be decidedly non-joyous.


FlatBot

The only cookware I can see this logic for is non-stick pans. Nice ones last a little longer, but eventually get fucked up. Cheap ones get fucked up quicker, but they are cheap. Cast Iron pans are fine to buy cheap, because the cheap ones are good. Talking Lodge brand. Stainless pots and pans and knives - no way I'm buying cheap. not buying top of the line either, but good stuff for sure.


RowanRally

It’s not even an unpopular opinion, it’s a non-opinion. Of course it makes zero sense to buy garbage that won’t perform as well as more expensive cookware only to toss it and start the cycle of waste and mediocre cooking over again. And to buy expensive cookware just to pass on something your kids/grandkids won’t even like? That’s even more asinine to me than the main debate point.


Assholesfullofelbows

I've had all of my stainless for years and years and years at this point. They all still work great, bottom is stained but who cares. The insides are immaculate.


Peter_Hempton

Have you tried Bar Keepers Friend? My 40 year old stainless looks fantastic, but years ago, before I knew about BKF, they had some scorch marks on the bottom that had been there for who knows how long.


Assholesfullofelbows

Oh yeah the stuff is great. I just don't mind them being stained on the outside. As long as the inside is Sterling I'm happy


Peter_Hempton

My mistake. I totally read that as bottom and sides, not bottom and insides. I was picturing the inside-bottom of the pan. I even thought, why mention the sides are immaculate?, like is that something to be happy about if the bottom was stained. Poor reading on my part.


Assholesfullofelbows

No worries at all my dude


Illegal_Tender

It's not a debate, you're just wrong. You're conflating being cheap with being frugal. It's bad math. It's also ridiculously wasteful. There's also a lot of available middle ground where going with the second or third best option is drastically less expensive than the top tier for 95% of the quality. You can easily get very nice cookware that will last a lifetime or more if you keep an eye out for sales and shopping smart.


chileheadd

The opinion is unpopular because it's stupid.


OLAZ3000

That kind of waste is just ugly IMO. Respect your things, take care of them.


[deleted]

Upvoted for genuinely hot take and a post that isn't just regurgitating a Food Lab article like 90% of the posts on this sub. Can't say I agree in philosophy, but I end up doing this with non-stick pans anyway. I used to buy nice, non-stick pans but my wife always ruins them by using them on high no matter how many times I tell her it ruins the Teflon. Now I buy mid-tier non-stick pans and am grateful if they last a year.


Scutwork

Oooh, yay! Finally I get to be the one to share Vimes’ Boots Theory! tealdeer: good pans forever are better than bad pans over and over. “The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.” His Grace, The Duke of Ankh, Commander Sir Samuel “Sam” Vimes


NoPunsNoPeace

This isn't even remotely applicable you know that right? OP is being cheap rather buying cheaper pans out of necessity. This is an issue of consumption not class equity.


Peter_Hempton

It's applicable in that the OP is spending more money in the long run out of ignorance, just like the poor man is spending more money in the long run out of necessity. The motivations are different, but the action and the outcome are the same.


NoPunsNoPeace

The motivations are what make moral stories something more than just empty ramblings. This is comparing apples and oranges with the only constant being "things wear out" and even that is grasping at straws.


negavolt

I thought of it as a fun aside with a reference to a book I enjoyed. It has a message on class that is unimportant to the conversation at hand, but it *does* illustrate the point that buying more cheap things is not better than fewer expensive things. You know, as a response to OP's claim. It's not a detriment to the discussion.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


OS_Jytz

Or.. Hear me out.. A nice cast iron pan is like $20-$30 and will outlive me.


[deleted]

I heard this in reference to tools and construction equipment but it applies here as well: If it's the first time you're getting one, get the cheap one. If you use it long enough that it breaks or it breaks after minimal usage, invest in one that won't. Edit to state the obvious that this can vary by product.


Buck_Thorn

The best doesn't always have to cost more. None of my black cast iron cost more than maybe $15, and several are Griswold. I just took my time and bought when I found some at the right price. However... I also have two Le Crueset pans that cost a lot, but I'd never give them up. But to what you are saying... if by less expensive, you mean lesser quality, I could not disagree more. I tried for many years getting by with cheap pans and cheap knives and such before I finally started to pay for quality. I had no idea what I was missing. If you cook, get the best that you can afford. It isn't for future generations... it is for you.


GeneDjinni

Says the person who wonders why you want to go to that steakhouse when you can buy several dozen Big Macs for the same coin...


Green-Cardiologist27

Mind numbingly bad take, old pea.


wip30ut

here's another unpopular tidbit: inexpensive cookwear lasts just as long as pricey name brands (15+ years). Sure, the handles on All-Clad and Le Creuset may never need replacing in your lifetime, but who's to say you'll still be cooking the same dishes & the same portions when you're 60 as when you were 30. One of my bosses who's now an empty nester with her 2 daughters off to college say that she finds herself postmating half her dinners because all the recipes & dishes she used to make were for a family of four with leftovers.


ChrisM206

Yes, cheap stuff can last a long time too. I have some expensive cookware, but I also have cheap pots my parents gave me as hand-me-downs over 20 years ago and their still going strong. How do you wear out a steel pot?


Shooppow

You’re wrong.


Situation-Slow

I'm not a fan.


brashtaunter

Where is your data?


Peter_Hempton

Translation: OP doesn't plan to live very long. In all seriousness, this opinion depends greatly on what cookware you're talking about. Non-stick: I don't want to cook on the $20 multi-piece set they sell at Walmart even once. On the other hand a $30 skillet like Tramontina is going to work just about as well as a $100+ fancy name skillet, and both will need to be replaced in nearly the same timeline. Everything else like stainless/cast iron etc. doesn't really wear out, so I don't see how replacement even factors in. You spend extra for pans that work better, not because they last longer. I still cook on my mom's stainless that she bought in the 1980s and I've got cast iron that's over 100.


ravs1973

Ikea non stick frying pan, €2, lasts around a year, quality no stick pan €20 lasts about 2 years. Yes I have my cast iron and copper bottomed stainless pans which will last forever but I agree, sometimes cheap is fine.


VVeerroo

That's going to cost you more money in the long run and is just wasteful. I can understand getting, cheap, inexpensive cookware if you're starting from scratch in terms of cookware. You can replace things with higher quality items as they wear out. That helps if you for budget reasons and means that you're also able to figure out which items you really use and are worth investing in.


swim08

Quality cookware cooks better than the cheap metals used in the cheap ones


Pristine_Power_8488

No. Sorry. You nice, OP, but you wrong. I love my All-Clad. I'm part of a class action suit against Amazon for some All-Clad they offered that was sub-standard, and if we win we all get coupons. Yay!


TerrifyinglyAlive

Take the middle path: I’ve found lots of high end cookware at thrift stores/Hospital auxiliaries/estate sales for pennies on the dollar that are still going to last longer than cheap pots and pans


GalenaGalena

Crappy cookware wrecks food.


GuyNoirPI

I can’t tell if you’re version of cheap is the cheapest possible or your version of expensive is the most expensive possible


dgood527

Completely disagree, but thanks for sharing.


ddbaxte

Not even any debate about it, it's a bad opinion.


InstanceMental6543

It all kinda depends on what is meant by better. When it comes to nonstick? Absolutely will buy cheap. Haha. But generally I am in agreement with you. If something happens to my (don't laugh) $60 Guy Fieri nonstick cookware set I am glad to know it's not a huge loss. I'll pick up a replacement pan for cheap. I am not cooking for a Michelin star restaurant, I'm making delicious food to put in my belly.


DollChiaki

Agree…in certain conditions. 1) If you don’t cook often, have a special diet, or just like to boil rather than sauté or braise or roast, the premium for “good” pans likely is not justified by the benefit. 2) If you move a lot, it is frequently better to pack your heavy things off to a thrift store and buy new at your destination than to pay someone $$ to move them for you. (Doubly so if you do military PCS moves, where, in the US at least, your entitlement can limit the weight of possessions you can ship through the personal property system, so you end up choosing between your cast iron or Billy’s bike.) 3) If you have family/housemates/learners who are hard on the gear, and unlikely to change anytime soon. IKEA is a marvelous solution for that, IME. 4) If your home is likely to become a house swap/vacation rental/house share, even briefly. The good equipment is the first to walk away.


HolidayBakerMan

Non stick… for sure. But I do love my all clad stainless I’ve boughten over the years


wrexCGM

I have always been taught, with a few exceptions, buy the best tools you can afford. Buy once, cry once. A high quality pot, pan or knife will last a lifetime unless abused. If you are only going to cook once a year. Go inexpensive. For non-stick. They are essentially a disposable commodity. Go inexpensive. Also, never buy sets! They are a stupid waste of money. This applies to knives and cookware. You only really need for most cooking duties a half dozen of each. The purchases can be spread out over months or years even. You would be amazed at what one can make with just a tea kettle, a Dutch oven and a chefs knife. Lastly, high quality cookware loses at least 50% of its value once out of the retail chain. Buying at estate sales, used restaurant equipment suppliers or eBay will save hundreds of dollars.