This pan has several good features, which (unsurprisingly) are why I bought it: non-stick, a diameter which indicated a size suitable for two to three servings of vegetables/pasta/potatoes, a handle which won’t get hot in use, glass lid and a lid handle that also won’t get hot.
It’s well made: robust coatings, welded/fixed handle is very secure, lid fits well (not always the case by any means!).
But boy, did I learn my lesson when buying online: look at ALL the dimensions.
This pan is shaped like a section of a chimney pot! Or possibly a bucket.
It means that you get a huge capacity pan, but most people expect something that is (depth-wise), in proportion to other 18cm pans. What this translates to, is a weighty pan because it is a deep, deep pan, by stealth.
I am early-stage mildly arthritic in my fingers and thumbs. The pain is mild and intermittent and it was a generally pain-free day when I collected this pan from my local M&S Foodhall. I haven’t used it and it’s going back to M&S tomorrow, because its shape, as well as the weight, made it painful to hold. It’s cumbersome to manoeuvre.
I use a cast-iron skillet for steaks and stir-fries, cast-iron casseroles by a well-known French brand and handle them absolutely fine. There is something so odd about the proportions of this pan that I know that I’d regret keeping it.
I was in M&S on Oxford Street yesterday and saw the 16cm version. The proportions aren’t so pronounced but it’s still an oddly deep pan, but it looks like it will do the job I wanted this 18cm one for.
I also bought the stainless steel 18cm pan (for using metal utensils with) and it’s the same issue in terms of proportions and the weight is even more of an issue with steel. Oddly, though, the 16cm stainless steel pan isn’t proportioned the same as the 16cm black/non-stick/aluminium one.
My “recommendation to a friend” rating is based on this bizarre diameter:height issue and the distorting effect it has on (empty) pan weight..
Hope that this helps.
Originally posted on marksandspencer.com (UK)
