Slow cooker vs pressure cooker

horsechestnut

Pressur Cooker definately.
As many of the other people have mentioned you can cook beans in half an hour which saves a fortune on tinned pulses, Bolgnase Sauce in 20 mins.
However I also have a slow cooker which I use occassionaly when I am out all day and want the food ready when I get home.

WhiteHorse

If you have to choose between the two - slow cooker. Cheaper and more versatile.

Pink.

Six of one and half a dozen of the other, for me. They are two different beasts. I use the slow cooker when I'm going to be busy and want tea ready without me doing the prep in late afternoon. The pressure cooker I use to tenderise meat or if I'm late home and need to throw something together in a hurry.

This existing thread has more advice that may help:

Slow cooker vs pressure cooker

I'll add your thread to that one later, to keep the replies together..

Pink

jackyann

Goodness! I'm in the slow cooker camp.
IMO there is a tendency of pressure cookers to make everything the same texture.
I would say though that it is really "horses for courses" and it is best to have both and use them for different things. Remoska too, does some things very well and others less so; but if I had to choose one, it would be slow cooker.

pineapple

I already have a slow cooker (just made an excellent mutton chop stew with Guinness! :j) but wondered about getting a pressure cooker. Not for veg alone (which I steam) but mainly for tougher cuts of meat.
Speed and convenience are not factors in my case. Just wondered how they compare in terms of:
Energy saving
Nutrition
Flavour
If you use both, which do you prefer?
Cheers.

seraphina

Pressure cooker every time There's a big thread on this already somewhere - I'm sure a board guide will be along with a link shortly.

IMO everything cooked in a slow cooker tastes the same. Also, for me it would mean being organised enough to get everything ready in the morning, so that the stuff could cook during the day. I don't eat meat myself but I use the PC a lot for meaty chillies, stews etc for guests and my DH. No complaints yet, and it makes cuts like brisket, shin of beef beautifully tender.

IIRC pressure cooking retains more nutrients as the time of cooking is much shorter - once you get over a certain temperature then the rate at which nutrients are destroyed depends on the time of cooking. In which case 8 hrs + in a slow cooker isn't going to be great.

The PC makes cooking dried beans much more economical, as well as cooking ham/gammon joints etc as well. I think a slow cooker is slightly cheaper to run though.

angeltreats

Another vote for pressure cooker I have both but hardly ever use the slow cooker. I love it for pulses and cheap cuts of meat/ham, as well as things like bolognese sauce/curries which ordinarily would need to be simmered for hours to bring out the flavours. Plus you don't have to be organised and prep everything at night or first thing in the morning. I find I can keep mine (6.5l I think) up to full pressure on the lowest setting of a medium sized ring on the hob so it shouldn't be using too much power.

Honestly if my house was on fire, it would be one of the things I'd grab. It's just so useful and versatile.

Popperwell

A local shopping chain in the North of England is selling an electric pressure cooker at half price but it looks like a variation on a slow cooker to me and if it basically cooks similar items perhaps I'll use the SC as there is only me and I have a small and slightly larger SC. The small uses less power and is probably big enough for one person.

I already had the the larger one when Mum passed away and so it was probably better for two people but she never had a meal cooked in it. The larger one may still have it's uses and I'll not get rid of it. Besides SC's are so cheap to buy.

I find even on the low setting things cook quite quick for me and last night I did a pork mince, gravy, mixed vegetables in approx 3 hours(that was on high setting granted)and I use those roasting bags to save having to clean the SC after using it.

I was tempted to get the pressure cooker but it may become something that remains unused. Even at half price I think it still comes in around £50. I don't know what it is like to run energy wise. I did not even know they did electric PC's.

http://www.boyes.co.uk/home/home_client_img/2012-09/Boyes_Leaflet_2_Sept_12.pdf

pineapple

I must admit when I was working, the slow cooker thing didn't make much sense to me. Yes it was ready when you got in but you had to do all the work at the beginning of the day when you were likely to be just as pushed - if not more.
These days my slow cooker is mainly a means to cook cheaper and tougher cuts of meat. Also it is probably better than a pressure cooker where you want to bring out the flavour of spices - curries etc.
But I can see that a pressure cooker would generally be better at preserving nutritional content.

[Deleted User]

I have a slow cooker and also three different sizes of pressure cooker. I really don`t like the bland wet taste of slow cooked food so my slow cooker is going to be taken to the recycling site. My cookers use hardly any power and they are silent. I started off with the 5litre kuhn rikon from lakeland and it is wonderful. Then I got a 2.5 litre KR which is very fast and ideal for small quantities. My third one came about because I am heavily into preserving and I wanted a tall cooker that could hold my jars. so I got the 8.5 litre wmf. This one is also useful for cooking a large amount of a liquid based food. I use all of them. I had to have ss because I have an induction hob

spices of india is a wonderful company that I have dealt with lots of times. They have good quality pressure cookers and the 5.5 litre works out at about £38 after the 20% discount plus p and p is free.
http://www.spicesofindia.co.uk/acatalog/Hawkins-Classic-Pressure-Cooker.html#aKTW144_2dp