Slow cooker beginner - question/s

B0bbyEwing

Vegastare said:

Bobby now we have got past Rice Gate......I recently purchased the non digital Sear and Stew of MR.  Have had an old crockpot which is still working and 35 years old, have to admit the new slow cooker cooks well, but even with my past experience it is a different machine and has taken a little getting use to, so stick with it....my new pot really cooks quicker than I expected even on low, so a learning curve for me.  Think of me this Sunday when I try a pork loin roast.  Got the pork got the recipe just need hubby to say tastes good.

My old one is smaller but ideal for cooking a sponge pudding and the Christmas pudding. (No I have never made rice pudding in it!!)

If I have one tip it would be don't over do the liquid you add, the moisture hits the lid and creates a lot of liquid.

Good luck with your effects - am sure you will get into the swing of things.

Ok I'm going to have to ask. I know it puts us back on rice-talk but it's come up a few times now. 

This isn't directed at you Vegastare as you say you haven't done it but have any of you had slow cooker rice-pud?

To be perfectly honest I haven't had home made rice-pud, never mind slow cooker version. I've only ever had it out of the tin & love that stuff. 

I just wonder how home made compares. 

I'm sure those who've had it will say "better". I'm just looking for something a little more descriptive  

ariarnia

B0bbyEwing said:

Vegastare said:

Bobby now we have got past Rice Gate......I recently purchased the non digital Sear and Stew of MR.  Have had an old crockpot which is still working and 35 years old, have to admit the new slow cooker cooks well, but even with my past experience it is a different machine and has taken a little getting use to, so stick with it....my new pot really cooks quicker than I expected even on low, so a learning curve for me.  Think of me this Sunday when I try a pork loin roast.  Got the pork got the recipe just need hubby to say tastes good.

My old one is smaller but ideal for cooking a sponge pudding and the Christmas pudding. (No I have never made rice pudding in it!!)

If I have one tip it would be don't over do the liquid you add, the moisture hits the lid and creates a lot of liquid.

Good luck with your effects - am sure you will get into the swing of things.

Ok I'm going to have to ask. I know it puts us back on rice-talk but it's come up a few times now. 

This isn't directed at you Vegastare as you say you haven't done it but have any of you had slow cooker rice-pud?

To be perfectly honest I haven't had home made rice-pud, never mind slow cooker version. I've only ever had it out of the tin & love that stuff. 

I just wonder how home made compares. 

I'm sure those who've had it will say "better". I'm just looking for something a little more descriptive  

i have. i think i mentioned it in the middle of a post again but easy to miss. 

home made rice pud you use rice, sugar, vanilla/nutmeg, milk, butter (and cream). then cook it slow and the rice releases starch which thickens it over a long time.

the shop bought rice pud is made in the can during the canning process (so very quick at a high heat). and they use ingredients like oil and sweeteners and thickeners to achieve the same kind of end result. there's nothing wrong with that and we eat shop bought happily. 

that means the main difference then is that you can taste the butter and sugar rather than the oil and sweeteners. it's creamy because of the cream and the slow cooking time not because of the thickeners so it tastes different in the mouth. it's almost caramelised because of the slow cooking. 

I'm trying to think of a good example. if you eat a loaf of bread made fresh with 4 ingredients and a loaf of white sandwich bread with 20... they're different. you might want the white sandwich bread for a fish finger sandwich and the hand made bakery bread for a weekend brunch of poached egg on toast. 

make sense?

Pollycat

B0bbyEwing said:

Pollycat said:

B0bbyEwing said:

1) How much water?

What does the instruction/recipe book suggest?
Even my 50 year old slow cooker specified how much liquid.
After that base, I could work out myself if a recipe needed more or less liquid.
It really wasn't hard.
I wouldn't say it was something you could just 'eyeball' when you have no experience of how it works.

Are you using the functions correctly?

And did you research the right model for you?
Sounds like you maybe didn't.

Just saying...

The fact that
* 3 days after my OP (when you've already made posts between now and then) you quote something from the OP that can easily be pulled apart & finger pointed at
* Your post being after your 11:00am "last bit of advice" post
* the post exchange between us around approx. page 6 or so

It certainly seems to me like you came back to have a swipe. Especially considering the way you ended your post.

The bit I put in bold there. Are you asking did I research the right model (as in - in my last post I said I wasn't sure and linked to one on Amazon that basically looked the exact same) slow cooker that I have?

If that was your question then even moreso I believe you're coming to pull apart my posts because it's a little irrelevant (and no I didn't double check). Now say the model numbers go 001, 002, 003 - whether mine is model 002 & the one in my Amazon link is 003 isn't really important. I was using the link to show what mine looked like exactly & I'd already previously said that timers on MY slow cooker are pointless due to how it works.

If when you asked if I've researched the right model you meant something else, then we have crossed wires - the joys of text on a screen. 

Regardless whether that is or isn't what you meant, the way you closed out says to me you're just looking now to pull apart what I say purely because we didn't agree a couple pages back.

I could now close out with just saying, since we're all just saying, but i'm not here for tennis.

I hope I've got all of that wrong, but I really don't think so.

I re-read your original post as I couldn't understand why there had been so much discussion about rice. Which is not something I'd cook in a slow cooker (ref the thread title).

I wasn't talking about the micro-difference between models. I was talking about the difference between brands and what their different models offer.
i.e. a basic brand from Lidl or an all-singing, all-dancing one from a market leader.
Or, to be accurate, did you know what you wanted from your slow cooker before you bought it?

ariarnia

Pollycat said:

B0bbyEwing said:

Pollycat said:

B0bbyEwing said:

1) How much water?

What does the instruction/recipe book suggest?
Even my 50 year old slow cooker specified how much liquid.
After that base, I could work out myself if a recipe needed more or less liquid.
It really wasn't hard.
I wouldn't say it was something you could just 'eyeball' when you have no experience of how it works.

Are you using the functions correctly?

And did you research the right model for you?
Sounds like you maybe didn't.

Just saying...

The fact that
* 3 days after my OP (when you've already made posts between now and then) you quote something from the OP that can easily be pulled apart & finger pointed at
* Your post being after your 11:00am "last bit of advice" post
* the post exchange between us around approx. page 6 or so

It certainly seems to me like you came back to have a swipe. Especially considering the way you ended your post.

The bit I put in bold there. Are you asking did I research the right model (as in - in my last post I said I wasn't sure and linked to one on Amazon that basically looked the exact same) slow cooker that I have?

If that was your question then even moreso I believe you're coming to pull apart my posts because it's a little irrelevant (and no I didn't double check). Now say the model numbers go 001, 002, 003 - whether mine is model 002 & the one in my Amazon link is 003 isn't really important. I was using the link to show what mine looked like exactly & I'd already previously said that timers on MY slow cooker are pointless due to how it works.

If when you asked if I've researched the right model you meant something else, then we have crossed wires - the joys of text on a screen. 

Regardless whether that is or isn't what you meant, the way you closed out says to me you're just looking now to pull apart what I say purely because we didn't agree a couple pages back.

I could now close out with just saying, since we're all just saying, but i'm not here for tennis.

I hope I've got all of that wrong, but I really don't think so.

I re-read your original post as I couldn't understand why there had been so much discussion about rice. Which is not something I'd cook in a slow cooker (ref the thread title).

risking opening back up the topic of rice we've cooked this recipe a few times and it's absolutely fantastic. a proper layered biryani using the slow cooker to mimic traditional cooking methods. it's not a quick and easy recipe but if you like curry and fancy trying something new you might like it. 

https://www.thekitchn.com/recipe-chicken-rice-biryani-228935

YoungBlueEyes

This isn't a very MSE suggestion but could you buy a timer'd (?) slow cooker, and keep the one you have now for a spare?  I did this when I saw a hair-dryer on offer that was better than mine.  Mine was starting to play up so I bought the improved one (as it was a bargain) so I had it ready to go when mine died.  It didn't, it healed itself so I put it in the wardrobe as a spare and am using the new one.

Like I say, not exactly money saving, but is that an option?

B0bbyEwing

ariarnia said:

make sense?

In a way. I've only ever had home made bread once but I know what you're saying about it.

I think the only real way to find out is to give it a go. My wife doesn't like rice pud. I can't remember if it's one of those don't like it  (but have you ever tried it? No) or whether she actually doesn't like it. Either way it'll be just me having it.

Which wont necessarily be a bad thing

Pollycat said:

Or, to be accurate, did you know what you wanted from your slow cooker before you bought it?

Well a it's a new day, although your post was made yesterday, I'm glad it looks like we wont be continuing this back & forth. 

So drawing a line & starting afresh - 

Yes/no would be the answer to your question.

We wanted a slow cooker. That's as much as we knew. We wanted to start trying them out as due to us both working basically the same hours (I'm out the door by 6:30, wife was out the door by 7:00 but now 8:00 & we were both back by 6pm at the very earliest (wife now 5pm, sometimes a tad earlier)) we thought a slow cooker would help free up some time in the evening so that we're not just work-home-cook-shower-bed-work-repeat. It might give us a bit more time to have some self-time. 

So initially we went by capacity but even with that we were just assuming.

Picked out a digital one as we thought oh that's handy, we can set it for that specific time & that's it done.

What we didn't do is think down the line we may want XYZ.

B0bbyEwing

YoungBlueEyes said:

This isn't a very MSE suggestion but could you buy a timer'd (?) slow cooker, and keep the one you have now for a spare?  I did this when I saw a hair-dryer on offer that was better than mine.  Mine was starting to play up so I bought the improved one (as it was a bargain) so I had it ready to go when mine died.  It didn't, it healed itself so I put it in the wardrobe as a spare and am using the new one.

Like I say, not exactly money saving, but is that an option?

Yes it's an option.

Not sure it's one I'd take up but it is an option. 

I've just had a mass clear out of the house & you should've seen some of the stuff I got rid of (in that we had so much stuff we didn't use any more or never even did - I'm talking a range of everything, electronics, clothes, everything), so I'm not really wanting to fill the house back up with anything that's just sitting around as even though I've cleared out a load, we still don't seem to have any room for things as we just somehow accumulate 'stuff'.

Although drifting off topic perhaps, I was looking in to lubing my bike chain with wax & you can do that with a slow cooker. Whip the chain off, give it a clean, buy specific wax, stick it all in the pot & then do it that way. I wouldn't want to do it in a cooker we use for food so it's a thought. 

Farway

B0bbyEwing said:

YoungBlueEyes said:

This isn't a very MSE suggestion but could you buy a timer'd (?) slow cooker, and keep the one you have now for a spare?  I did this when I saw a hair-dryer on offer that was better than mine.  Mine was starting to play up so I bought the improved one (as it was a bargain) so I had it ready to go when mine died.  It didn't, it healed itself so I put it in the wardrobe as a spare and am using the new one.

Like I say, not exactly money saving, but is that an option?

Yes it's an option.

Not sure it's one I'd take up but it is an option. 

I've just had a mass clear out of the house & you should've seen some of the stuff I got rid of (in that we had so much stuff we didn't use any more or never even did - I'm talking a range of everything, electronics, clothes, everything), so I'm not really wanting to fill the house back up with anything that's just sitting around as even though I've cleared out a load, we still don't seem to have any room for things as we just somehow accumulate 'stuff'.

Although drifting off topic perhaps, I was looking in to lubing my bike chain with wax & you can do that with a slow cooker. Whip the chain off, give it a clean, buy specific wax, stick it all in the pot & then do it that way. I wouldn't want to do it in a cooker we use for food so it's a thought. 

Way OT, but back in the days of me lubing chains you could buy chain wax in a large flat tin that went on the hob on low heat with chain curled neatly on top of the hard wax, as it melted the chain sank in and after X minutes you fished chain out, using the handy bit of string you had tied to the chain before it sank

At least saves washing up. The wax solidifies in the tin BTW ready for use another day

Katiehound

I wasn't going to write here again but just to say, I know you don't want to spend more money, however I have a cheap as chips SC.
It cooks 2-3 portions and will stay on ... as long as you leave it
to give you an idea of size cooks a £3.50 ish ham joint perfectly in cola, or 3 to 4 bone in chicken thigh joints
I am going to try a pond pudding next.
Only £13
https://www.currys.co.uk/products/logik-l02rc21-slow-cooker-silver-10220860.html

I read the reviews on this and the cheapest Crockpot & this one won out because it has a red light to show that it's on  whilst the Crockpot does not.

My thought would be to experiment with a cheap one, then batch cook in the larger one when you are at home.
HTH

maman

Thanks @Katiehound, useful information for anyone that wants to try a SC or have an option of different sizes. My Crockpot is very old and was going to replace like for like but I'll take a look. 🤔