Are Remoskas worth it?

nhoneymon

I’m considering getting a Remoska, I understand they use far less electricity than a conventional oven but am wondering if it would be worthwhile or an expensive piece of kitchen equipment that doesn’t get used.

I’ve noticed that there don’t seem to be many recipe books available, there is one on Lakeland but the only others I have found are on Amazon or eBay for very high prices.

Opinions from anyone that owns one would be appreciated.

MattMattMattUK

You can cook most things in it that you can cook in an oven. Personally I think it would be something that would sit in a cupboard largely unused, but some people seem to love them. 

still_hopeful

I use mine several times a week and wouldn't be without it. I've had it over 20 years. They are very expensive but worth it. They do come up on eBay sometimes, or if you're very lucky in a charity shop.

As far as recipes go, most things you cook in an oven work in a Remoska. Or Google roasting tin or traybake recipes - basically, one-pot recipes for the oven.

There are several remoska groups on Facebook if you want to get inspiration for recipes or seek advice on which remoska to go for.

I also use a Wonderbag, try googling that or hay box cooking if you really want to go off-piste...

Northern_Wanderer

I don't have a remoska, but wouldn't a Ninja multi-cooker be better? The remoska looks like something out of the 70s and the position of the flex screams danger to me. Lots of ninja recipes online. Had my Ninja a month now and my electric usage is down 70kwh last month! Hardly used my hob or oven since getting it and it's so quick and easy to cook everything.

Astria

I just use a standard air fryer and it's pretty much replaced my oven and grill. The oven is gas but the air fryer appears to use even less energy than that, probably because it's much smaller, which also means that it cooks things faster.

still_hopeful

Perhaps it comes down to what you would actually cook in it. I do know many people have both the Remoska and a Ninja and use them for different things.

For many people the Remoska is great because of it's sheer versatility, you can use it for curries, roast dinners, cakes, bread, Yorkshire pudding, one-pot main meals, pies and pastries, biscuits, scones and so much more. The Tria model can be used on the hob and also has a pressure cooker function.

I take mine camping and sitting in the sun eating fresh homemade bread is a real joy!

Ninjas, Remoskas etc are expensive bits of kit so you need to think carefully about what you like to cook/eat and which would work best for you. Everyone is different so there is no one answer.

Capyboppy

The Remoska costs pennies to run; unlike most other appliances. An Airfryer is quick but costs more to run as you are using high powerful heat even though for a shorter time than a standard oven. 

As Northern_Wanderer says, the flex and the danger of burning yourself was an issue for me which is why I sold mine. I didn't want to sell it but the heat from the lid and struggling to put it upside down on a heatproof mat was dificult as I am not very strong and have disability issues. Even for someone healthy, they would have to be aware of the radiating heat after use from the lid. However if you way that up against the electric saved it can be a good option.

still_hopeful

I think the newer ones have a removable flex, but I would have to check that, mine is ancient!

littleteapot

We currently use a combination oven (I think it's an earlier version of this one: Panasonic NN-CF87LBBPQ Combination Microwave Oven, Metallic Silver (johnlewis.com) for most of our cooking. After some experience we can cook most things pretty well in it now including chips, roast potatoes etc. Would an air fryer give enough energy saving over this to warrant the additional outlay?

Thankfully we didn't pay anywhere near the list price as we got ours used but like new and only a few months old for a fraction of that price!

Section62

wittynamegoeshere said:

How is the statement that they use far less electricity than a normal cooker compatible with the laws of science?

To this scientist, the position of the element looks extremely inefficient - it looks very likely to cost much more than probably any other method of cooking.

The fact that it gets very hot should indicate that it's wasting lots of heat.

Looks like another of those illogical fads to me.

Because the heat they produce is concentrated into a smaller area/volume?

In the same way that using a small conventional oven uses less electricity than a large conventional oven, or using a small hob hotplate uses less electricity than a large one.  Or using a travel kettle vs a full-size one.

The flip side is only being able to heat/cook a smaller quantity of food at a time.  You use less energy because you are heating less - which is a form of energy saving if your requirement is for a smaller amount of food.

The principle isn't illogical.  What may be illogical is spending a fair bit of money buying one if the amount of use it gets won't generate sufficient savings vs using alternatives.  There may be better ways of saving money such as batch cooking using an existing larger oven and freezing/microwaving the extra food portions as and when needed.  But it will depend largely on each person's circumstances.

Section62

wittynamegoeshere said:

I'd suggest it's a certainty that it would use more energy than simmering in a pan on a hob, of any variety.

Possibly.  But you can't simmer roast potatoes and Yorkshire puddings.