Infrared grills

Page 1 of 2  
Seem to be about $150 or so more than non, at least at CharBroil. Worth it or hype?
--
?Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.?
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:

Worth it. Look at the rotisserie in any kebab shop - IR burners. I have a basic little $99 IR grill and it does a wonderful job for high heat searing, putting out in the neighborhood of 1,200F which is otherwise only attainable with charcoal and its attendant wait to start cooking.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/11/2014 9:39 PM, Kurt Ullman wrote:

No personal experience. Others on the bbq and cooking newsgroups like them though. If I had the option on my Weber Summit, I'd have bought it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am curious as to whether or not it is worth the extra $150. What does the infrared do that "standard" ones don't.
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/12/2014 11:56 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:

Heat, lots of it.
Check the spec though as some lower priced IR burners may not be a big deal. Better quality IR burners give a much higher temperature than you can get with a regular flame. The advantage to that is the ability to sear a steak.
Some of the steak houses have burners in the 1600 degree range.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/11/2014 9:39 PM, Kurt Ullman wrote:

I had steaks from my son's IR grill this week and steaks from my regular gas grill. Can't say that they cooked any faster or tasted any better.
I don't grill that often and wouldn't spend the extra money anyway.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 12:48:02 -0400, Frank

On the grills I have seen and the one I have, it is just the back burner behind the rotisserie that is IR That is good because it does not catch fire like the burners in the bottom do. You can spin up a chicken and forget it for a couple hours. When you get back it is great. I usually turn the IR down as low as I can get it so the chicken cooks without burning the skin. It just gets brown and crunchy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:

Direct radiant energy and much higher temperatures than an ordinary gas burner. An IR burner can produce similar results to a really hot charcoal grill, something an ordinary gas grill can't even dream of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I bought one about 5 years ago when they first went off patent and starting showing up on the private label grills at Lowes and Home Depot. I didn't find it all that useful. They take a bit longer to light, the IR burnerl under the grill rack gets dirty quite quickly and I never used the rotisery, so the IR burner on the back never was used.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/11/2014 09:39 PM, Kurt Ullman wrote:

The infrared feature chars the meat faster and charred meat is carcinogenic.
I know, nobody cares...until they are taking chemo treatments.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/12/2014 7:44 PM, Elmer wrote:

Studies suggest eat well done/charred meats can lead to a 60% increase in the chance of developing pancreatic cancer.
There's a 1.5% lifetime risk of pancreatic cancer for persons in the US, so eating charred meats could increase that risk to about 2.5%.
In other words, it would still be highly unlikely that one would develop pancreatic cancer.
I'll take those odds.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/16/2014 09:34 AM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:

Don't worry, ObamaCare has got your back!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/16/2014 3:20 PM, Joe Biden wrote:

I'm all for keeping our citizens alive and healthy. I hope you are, too.
If you've never been without health insurance, or were turned down for a pre-existing condition, or had your policy cancelled as a result of filing a claim, count your blessings. It won't happen in the future, thanks to Obamacare. It's already saving billions of dollars and many, many lives.
Mark my words. In five years or less the Republican Party will be claiming credit for Obamacare since it was their proposal in the first place. They're only opposing it now because the credit is going to a Democratic President who managed to get it pushed through. Once they're back in power, they'll waste no time in reminding the public whose idea it was in the first place.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, June 16, 2014 5:15:27 PM UTC-4, Moe DeLoughan wrote:

Which of course has nothing to do with Obamacare being the right or the totally wrong approach.

Saving billions of dollars for whom, exactly? Those paying the new taxes to pay for it? The millions of folks who were told they could keep their policies, it wouldn't effect them, only to find out that the policies were cancelled as a direct result of Obamacare and the new policies cost substantially more?

If it's all those rascally Republicans, why is it that polls continue to show that most Americans continue to oppose Obamacare? It's 52% against, 39% in favor in the average of the most recent polls:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html
And that is with all the mainstream lib media in the tank for Obama and the Republicans not in the same league as the spin misters at the WH. So, if it's so good, why is it that Americans are against it? And what happens when the new premium notices go out just prior to the November election that start to reflect the true mix and costs of those that are enrolled? Course, that probably won't happen. The emperor will just issue another edict along with the 38 or so other ones on Obamacare, so it will be delayed until after the election.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oren posted for all of us...
And I know how to SNIP

In Elmers case it will be of boredom.
--
Tekkie

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/12/2014 5:44 PM, Elmer wrote:

My bet the cancer is from all the hormones the cow was fed, the plastic packaging, the plastic film, the sanitizers and disinfectants, or any one of fifty other things.
Elmer, you need to hide in the closet and have your meals prepared and sent in through a straw. If charred meat causes cancer, we are all doomed, except the vegans, and they will die from lack of protein, which will cause their muscle tissue to waste away.
Vegan - Old Indian word for poor hunter.
Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/15/2014 08:37 PM, SteveB wrote:

The only hunting carnivores do today is hunt for a handicap spot at Walmart and then hunt for an obesecycle to ride while in the store.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Americans don't have a good grasp of the difference between absolute and relative risk. Absolute risk is risk stated without any context. For example, you have a 50 percentchance of flipping a coin and getting heads, or a one in a hundred chance of getting lung cancer if you have never smoked. The relative risk is a comparison between different risk levels. For example, your relative risk for lung cancer is (approximately) 10 if you have every smoked, compared to a nonsmoker. This means you are 10 times as likely to get lung cancer. If the risk is about one percent for a nonsmoker, this translates to about 10 percent for a person who has smoked (it is even higher for heavy smokers). Americans seem to have an aversion to putting things in context. Thus the headlines about something doubling the chances something might happen w/o indicating in many cases that the actual chance something will happen just went from infinitesimally small to just slightly less infinitesimally small. A couple of years ago after my annual physical, I told my wife that based on my cholesterol and other measures, the AHA heart attack risk calculator said that my chances of having a heart attack in the next 10 years doubled from last year. They had gone from a 2% chance to a 4% chance. So the absolute risk doubled but the relative risk was essentially the same.
--
?Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.?
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nah. A couple friends of mine and the guy I talked to at Lowes noted the junk that used to get on the burners now gets on the infrared panels. They said it tends to rust out of the infrared panels over a couple years and you have to replace them. Seemed sorta dumb to pay $150 bucks more get to something I would have to replace for around $60 every couple years for marginally better meat. K
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not even close. The parts they agreed with are mainly the concept of playh or pay. But most of the extra hooha, expecially the taxes and extra bureaucracy involved with the exchanges isn't even close. Especially if you go all the way to the original work by Daniel Patrick Moynihan when we worked for RMN (talk about a political odd couple).
--
?Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.?
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.