- This topic has 25 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi. First post so please be kind.
I had a Cannon cooker for 22 happy years – it cooked amazingly and was bomb proof. Sadly one of the door hinges failed and I decided to “treat” myself to a new cooker. Been a disaster – not a patch on the last one, takes ages to warm up etc. Moral: repair it if you love it!
We are having kitchen extended so have decided to buy a new cooker. I would like one which will last as long as my beloved first Cannon. Any suggestions, apart from heat storage aga types which are sadly not green enough for us, in the range cooker department ? Up to about the £3,000 mark ideally.
We have mains gas so dual fuel would be great. Not stainless steel as I have better things to do than clean fingerprints off all the time. Also, if gas hob, pan supports that don’t need a crane to lift them. (Rangemaster supports may be great but they are scarily hefty to move). Not keen on stay clean linings either. One piece hob vital. Not too keen on bells and whistles such as multi function ovens – I think the reason the Cannon lasted so well was that it was built like a tank and the only mod con was a wind up timer!
Help, please.
P.S. Just to muddy the waters, does anyone have any views on the Aga six four series – a dual fuel range cooker with traditional aga styling. Getting on for £5,000 but is it worth the money ?
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
Hi
Take a look at these two manufacturers they are probably about the best that I know of when it comes to quality and longevity of life.
http://www.britannialiving.co.uk/
http://www.falconappliances.co.uk/311.h … lAod-lVFXg
Don
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
http://www.mercury-appliances.co.uk/
Just to add another option.
Not cheap but, we’ve been doing service for over four years now IIRC and I think we’ve had a service call… it was an installation fault. 😉
Bombproof and very, very good.
K.
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
Thanks for speedy replies and suggestions.
Sadly, although it looks very beautiful, I have to reject the Mercury as the ovens are only rated D for multifunction and B for the other. (This is according to the Rangecookers.co.uk website. Mercury’s own site doesn’t seem to have that info.) For that money I would like something more energy efficient.
Falcon and Britannia have much wider ranges (no pun intended) so I will have to spend some time studying them. I like the fact that Falcon have some models with 2 simple fan ovens but the very practical 1000 falls down by only being C and C fuel efficient.
The only showrooms for Falcon and Britannia locally are very posh fitted kitchen studios – should be fun. I need to test the weight of the pan supports as I have a dodgy wrist and dropping some of those I’ve tested could give me a dodgy foot as well!
Any more recommendations welcomed.
Thanks again.
Hi,
I wouldn’t pay too much heed to the energy ratings on cookers as the testing they do for it is, IMO, extremely misleading at best and it offers absolutely no indication of the performance whatsoever. Basically they measure how long a brick takes to heat up in the middle of the oven and that’s it.
K.
Thank you for the comment about energy ratings. I want to buy electrical appliances that are energy efficient, as well as robust, since I want to keep my bills down.
so, basically, you’d be happy to spend an extra, say , £1,000 to save yourself a hefty £10 – £20 a year?
and im probably well over egging the pudding
ratings , as kwatt says, are a bit of a joke, tbh
hth
Guest wrote:Thank you for the comment about energy ratings. I want to buy electrical appliances that are energy efficient, as well as robust, since I want to keep my bills down.
Understandable, but the energy ratings used on cookers aren’t really telling you that at all. All it’s telling you is how well it heats a brick using a few calibrated thermostats, no more.
I doesn‘t tell you how good the insulation is. How well the cooker actually heats or, importantly, retains heat as that is not measured in the test. Anything about longevity. Anything about cooking performance or indeed pretty much anything really other than the result of some crazy test dreamt up by the EU.
But, if you don’t want to take the advice then that’s fine.
K.
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
Apologies if you thought I was ignoring your advice. To show my ignorance I admit I had no idea that the difference in energy ratings amounted to so little in terms of energy used and cost per year. I get the feeling that the general public such as myself are being hoodwinked as to their significance.
Spending money wisely is important to me, hence the idea of buying a cooker which will outlast several cheaper ones (and maybe me as well!). I’ve been very disappointed in the standard of the ones I’ve seen so far.
Oh dear,now I sound like one of those old dears who complains that “things were better made in the olden days” I’m off to look out my shawl and bonnet………..
Thanks again for your help.
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
Guest wrote:Apologies if you thought I was ignoring your advice.
No problem at all.
Guest wrote:To show my ignorance I admit I had no idea that the difference in energy ratings amounted to so little in terms of energy used and cost per year. I get the feeling that the general public such as myself are being hoodwinked as to their significance.
To a large extent, this is a totally correct summation. The differences are blown (spun) out of all proportions by many a PR agency. 😉
To be honest you will actually save more I’d expect by way of the appliance lasting longer and requiring as little maintenance as possible, this is where you can make the big environmental savings as you don’t scrap machines early thereby saving all the costs in production of a new one as well as the cost to you to buy it.
K.
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
Surely when it comes to cookers (no moving parts apart from a couple of fans), longevity isn’t an issue?
If an element fails, you replace it yourself. £12 for an oven element, 15-minute job even for a klutz like me.
Unless you want the toys, I really don’t see the point in spending much on cookers.
Yes the paint will peel eventually, but if aesthetics are an issue you’ll be wanting to change after 3-5 years anyway.
With cars, vacuum cleaners, microwaves, TVs etc etc I’ll buy the most reliable I can afford (OK I was seduced by the shinyness and flashing lights of my LG washing machine, but still). SO I have a (pre-Renault takeover) Nissan car, Miele vacuum, Sharp Microwave and Panasonic TV.
Cookers? Cheapest I can find. Hence I have a (ahem) Beko. It’s an impressive feat to get a cooker wrong — same with fridges IME.
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
jjames wrote:Cookers? Cheapest I can find. Hence I have a (ahem) Beko. It’s an impressive feat to get a cooker wrong — same with fridges IME.
It isn’t that simple I’m afraid.
The quality of the components vary depending on specification and that also can affect the performance as well. Thinner metals, poorer finishes etc all affect the longevity and when you cut costs all areas get affected, including these and service levels.
It just isn’t as mind numbingly simply as you make out.
K.
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
So explain to me then why I’ve had the same £200 cooker for the last ten years, and only had to replace the oven element (twice)?
I just don’t see the problem on a device with no moving parts. Indeed the more expensive units are likely to be the ones that are more likely to fail, not less — sophisticated PCB boards with timers and the like are the parts that will fail first, and a cheap cooker simply lacks them altogether.
Thank you kwatt for confirming that it is worth buying a quality product that will last – including a cooker. I’m not after a status symbol or all the latest bells and whistles but simply a cooker that is a pleasure to use, well designed and which will not end up in a skip in 3 – 5 years.
A £500 range cooker used for 3 years will cost exactly the same p.a. as a £2,500 one which lasts for 15. I know which I would prefer to use. It just seems a pity that I feel as though I am having to pay more for quality than I did in 1984. Or maybe I’m just more of a skinflint now…………
Anyway, I think I have decided on the Falcon 1000 – it seems to tick all the right boxes. Many thanks for all your help.
PS (edit) Posted above after jjames commented about his cooker lasting so long – I cook a lot so maybe I wouldn’t be that lucky. I shall leave the pros and cons of circuit boards etc to the experts.
Re: Quality long lasting cooker
3 years out of a £500 cooker?
Have I woken up in 2043 or something??
If I spent £500 on a cooker and only got three years out of it, I’d be absolutely disgusted.
An element is an element. My cooker has no “brain” — it’s a collection of wires, switches and connectors.
What is there to go wrong? Should I be buying £30 light switches rather than £2.50 ones as well then?
I applaud the concept of buying quality items (I guess few others here would spend £4000 on a mostly hand-made hi-fi separates system), but £2500 for a cooker just to avoid build quality gremlins that IMO don’t really exist is overkill.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.