|
|
Up |
|
|
  |
Author: RootworkerRootworker Date: Jul 16, 2007 11:51
I'm about to start remodeling my kitchen, and being a fairly serious chef,
would like to go for something better than the usual home-quality range.
My understanding is that true commercial ranges (e.g., Garland, Vulcan,
Wolf, etc.) cannot be used with 'zero-clearance' environments. Is this
accurate? How about if I use some kind of heat-resistant material between
the wall, cabinets, etc.? Also, I've noticed that most/all of these ranges
have a very high backsplash, which wouldn't work in my layout (I have a 10"
backsplash, below an opening to the dining room). Whatever I do, I don't
want it to void my homeowner's insurance ;^)
Thus far I've been mainly looking at "Pro-style" units, from DCS, Viking,
and Wolf. I realize that these will not perform to the level of a real
commercial unit, and are far more expensive, but I'm wondering whether I'd
just be paying for cosmetics. Any thoughts from owners would be much
appreciate. The feedback I've gotten elsewhere is that the DCS is not as
high quality as the Wolf, but I haven't read anything about the Viking. I'd
be looking at a 36" unit, btw.
Thanks in advance,
Joe
|
| |
|
| | 16 Comments |
|
  |
Author: RootworkerRootworker Date: Jul 16, 2007 11:55
Oh yeah -- I'm looking at gas ranges ;^)
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
  |
Author: Ward AbbottWard Abbott Date: Jul 16, 2007 15:26
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:51:14 -0400, "Rootworker"
rootwerx.com> wrote:
>My understanding is that true commercial ranges (e.g., Garland, Vulcan,
>Wolf, etc.) cannot be used with 'zero-clearance' environments.
Your local building codes inspector might not approve of what
something in another state would approve. Check with them first.
They hold the key to occupancy of your house.
I had a Wolf Rangetop installed without any question from the building
inspector. We had a SS backsplash installed and that is all they
required.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: bob prohaska's usenet accountbob prohaska's usenet account Date: Jul 16, 2007 19:29
Rootworker rootwerx.com> wrote:
> I'm about to start remodeling my kitchen, and being a fairly serious chef,
> would like to go for something better than the usual home-quality range.
>
[snip]
>
> Thus far I've been mainly looking at "Pro-style" units, from DCS, Viking,
> and Wolf. I realize that these will not perform to the level of a real
> commercial unit, and are far more expensive, but I'm wondering whether I'd
> just be paying for cosmetics. Any thoughts from owners would be much
> appreciate. The feedback I've gotten elsewhere is that the DCS is not as
> high quality as the Wolf, but I haven't read anything about the Viking. I'd
> be looking at a 36" unit, btw.
My cousin and his wife (an extremely serious and skilled cook) have a six
burner Wolf range in their home. I was quite astonished to learn recently
that it's uninsulated, to the point they don't use it in hot weather.
Perhaps that made sense at one time in a commercial environment, but I'd tend
to think of superior insulation as a natural part of a superior range.
|
| Show full article (1.44Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: Cape Cod BobCape Cod Bob Date: Jul 16, 2007 19:46
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:26:34 -0400, Ward Abbott terian.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:51:14 -0400, "Rootworker"
>rootwerx.com> wrote:
>
>>My understanding is that true commercial ranges (e.g., Garland, Vulcan,
>>Wolf, etc.) cannot be used with 'zero-clearance' environments.
>
>Your local building codes inspector might not approve of what
>something in another state would approve. Check with them first.
>They hold the key to occupancy of your house.
>
>I had a Wolf Rangetop installed without any question from the building
>inspector. We had a SS backsplash installed and that is all they
>required.
|
| Show full article (0.84Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: Edwin PawlowskiEdwin Pawlowski Date: Jul 16, 2007 20:45
"Rootworker" rootwerx.com> wrote in message
>
> My understanding is that true commercial ranges (e.g., Garland, Vulcan,
> Wolf, etc.) cannot be used with 'zero-clearance' environments. Is this
> accurate? How about if I use some kind of heat-resistant material between
> the wall, cabinets, etc.?
Yes, it is true. There are minimum clearances and no, there is no way to
make it a zero clearance. Some have been installed in residences, but it
takes some work, needs extra venting and generally now worth the effort for
99%% of us.
Also, I've noticed that most/all of these ranges
> have a very high backsplash, which wouldn't work in my layout (I have a
> 10" backsplash, below an opening to the dining room). Whatever I do, I
> don't want it to void my homeowner's insurance ;^)
Don't even THINK about it in that location. Pretty crappy location for any
range for that matter. You will get carry over splatter into the dining
room.
|
| Show full article (1.93Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: jt augustjt august Date: Jul 16, 2007 21:07
In article newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>,
"Edwin Pawlowski" snet.net> wrote:
> Like any high end appliance, you don't get what you pay for. As the price
> doubles, the features go up maybe 20%% or so. Worth it to you? Only you can
> decide. Fact is, you can burn food and boil eggs on the most expensive or
> the cheapest of ranges. The main advantage to the Pro series, is appearance
> and the higher powered burner will being potatoes to a boil a bit faster.
> You can get that hot burner on some of the better models of other brands for
> many $$ less.
To the low end of this comment, I'd like to throw in that I have a low
end Roper, and it has three very powerful large burners, plus one simmer
burner that meets the Viking lower simmer challenge; Viking brags that
their simmer is low low, it can melt chocolate chips on a piece of paper
without setting the paper on fire. I have done this same thing on my
stove several times for friends. The three burners cook as well on the
hot side as any, and since a good portion of my cookware non-stick, I
don't need stove top kilns anyway.
The point is that there are some excellent stoves out there at the lower
end of the price spectrum, you only need to look.
|
| Show full article (1.26Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: RootworkerRootworker Date: Jul 17, 2007 05:28
Interesting - I have a low-end Roper fridge, and it's actually worked quite
well too.
Thanks to all for the insightful comments.
Joe
"jt august" wrote in message
news:starsabre-F20813.23074516072007@inetnews.worldnet.att.net...
> In article newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>,
> "Edwin Pawlowski"
|
| Show full article (1.57Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: GiniGini Date: Jul 17, 2007 08:41
"jt august" wrote
......................................
>
> The point is that there are some excellent stoves out there at the lower
> end of the price spectrum, you only need to look.
==
Heh--But, they don't *look* impressive, and that afterall, is the most
significant factor.
What bothers me is "stainless steel" itself. It's ugly. I predict that
within a few years,
everyone else will have figured that out as well. OTOH, I am so glad that my
beautiful gleaming
white appliances were all a great percentage less than stainless in the same
model.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
|
|
  |
Author: pltrgystpltrgyst Date: Jul 17, 2007 11:29
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:41:52 GMT, "Gini" verizon.com> wrote:
>What bothers me is "stainless steel" itself. It's ugly. I predict that
>within a few years,
>everyone else will have figured that out as well. OTOH, I am so glad that my
>beautiful gleaming
>white appliances were all a great percentage less than stainless in the same
>model.
The point of stainless steel is its functionality rather than its looks. That's
why it had dominated commercial kitchens for decades. And that's what justifies
its higher price.
The fact that some of us find white revolting and like the looks of brushed
metal is simply a bonus.
Although I suppose John Delorean would dispute that...
-- Larry
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|