Slow Cooker runs too hot

[didds]

...

"When set to ‘low’, the internal temperature of the slow cooker reaches around 90°C. On the other hand, the ‘high’ setting will see the internal temperature rise to around 150°C."

...
How can 'internal temperature' of the contents rise to 150C, 50C above boiling point, without a corresponding and enabling rise in pressure?

I presumed that temperature was (effectively) an air temperature not a wet food temperature?

[swill453]

How can 'internal temperature' of the contents rise to 150C, 50C above boiling point, without a corresponding and enabling rise in pressure?

The boiling point of an aqueous solution of salt and (other stuff) will have a boiling point higher than 100C.

(150C is a stretch though.)

Scott.

[Mike4]

With respect to my last post.

75C is good for most meats. Here is USDA safety advice on temperature (in F, pick the hottest and convert to C, or use the thermometer and think in F).
https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2011/05 ... mperatures

Remember though that you should get the surface hotter to kill surface bugs.

Looking forward to Mike getting back with the temperature of the "Low" setting.

100C exactly, having just got home!!

[Mike4]

It's how it should work, IF you do things properly.
First get your food up to boiling for 5 to 10 minutes. Then turn it down to warm (75).

Ah yes, you're right. I remember this requirement in the manual for the old slow cooker we had in the 1980s, and is how we used it. Bring one's stuff to the boil in a saucepan to get the heat energy into it, then transfer it to the slow cooker where it can stay for hours.

Far too much trouble for people today to bother with, or perhaps more accurately, understand the need to do.

So as an experiment to mimic this and test the "warm" setting (i.e. the setting stressed as "NOT for cooking", according to the manual) further, I turned the slow cooker up to "High" lat night to get the boiling again, then down again to "Warm".

After about four hours, the temp of the water had subsided to 80c. Perfect.

So it looks as though I can use use it on "High" to warm up the contents, then switch over to "Warm" setting for actual slow cooking.

I wonder if the OP's appliance also has a "Warm" setting, which the manual says is not for cooking.

[Mike4]

We were given one a while back and it is a Russell Hobbs Chalkboard cooker.

We have tried about twenty recipes and in all cases the food cooked in about half the suggested time, even on Low as always.

The liquid is often bubbling and the temperature is 99 degrees C. I.e boiling not simmering.

Surely it is not right to be this hot?

Looks pretty much the same as mine, but yours is posher.



I see yours too has a "warm" setting, which I have more or less established is present on mine for proper "slow cooking", once the "High" setting has been used to properly heat up the contents. Despite the instructions to the contrary in the manual.

[88V8]

It's how it should work, IF you do things properly.
First get your food up to boiling for 5 to 10 minutes. Then turn it down to warm (75).

Ah yes, you're right. I remember this requirement in the manual for the old slow cooker we had in the 1980s, and is how we used it. Bring one's stuff to the boil in a saucepan to get the heat energy into it, then transfer it to the slow cooker where it can stay for hours.

But if one has a pressure cooker, that 5-10 minutes will actually cook the meal... thus making the slow cooker rather pointless, unless has more free time before work - to prepare the meal - than one does after work.

V8

[Mike4]

Ah yes, you're right. I remember this requirement in the manual for the old slow cooker we had in the 1980s, and is how we used it. Bring one's stuff to the boil in a saucepan to get the heat energy into it, then transfer it to the slow cooker where it can stay for hours.

But if one has a pressure cooker, that 5-10 minutes will actually cook the meal... thus making the slow cooker rather pointless, unless has more free time before work - to prepare the meal - than one does after work.

V8

I can imagine this turning into a taste contest. Uncle E holds that long, slow and low heat cooking brings a "richer" flavour. You hold that cooking a nice tomato and basil soup in seven minutes flat at 850C in a pressure cooker is the perfect solution!

(I might have exaggerated somewhere. Perhaps.)

[feder1]

It is possible that the booklet which came with the new RH was written a long time ago and since the cooker was made in China, they may not have realised to rewrite the excessive timings.

200w heater for a "3.5l " cooker may be overkill.

Attn. Mike4!
However, an idea I may try , is to sit the ceramic pot on a little piece of something on the bottom of the cooker in order to raise the ceramic upper lip to enable some warm convective air to rise up the sides and thereby reduce overall heat input to the pot. (Patent applied for.)

Normally the top lip fits tight against the outer container.

[Urbandreamer]

But if one has a pressure cooker, that 5-10 minutes will actually cook the meal... thus making the slow cooker rather pointless, unless has more free time before work - to prepare the meal - than one does after work.

V8

No it won't. Or more accurately it will only do so for meals not designed and chosen for slow cooking. I say that as someone who made pulled pork in my pressure cooker recently. One hour is not enough time, so I cook it for two when I produce pulled pork.

Some cuts of meat, ie brisket or pork shoulder benefit significantly from long slow cooking to denature the connective tissue. Cooking quickly just doesn't do that.

Why do I cook pulled pork in a pressure cooker? Well I don't have a slow cooker and don't want too many appliances.

[servodude]

We were given one a while back and it is a Russell Hobbs Chalkboard cooker.

We have tried about twenty recipes and in all cases the food cooked in about half the suggested time, even on Low as always.

The liquid is often bubbling and the temperature is 99 degrees C. I.e boiling not simmering.

Surely it is not right to be this hot?

Looks pretty much the same as mine, but yours is posher.

I see yours too has a "warm" setting, which I have more or less established is present on mine for proper "slow cooking", once the "High" setting has been used to properly heat up the contents. Despite the instructions to the contrary in the manual.

I love my slow cooker and have read this thread thinking "how the hell can they have screwed up a slow cooker"
Our new one is probably 20 years old - it was a "we never use it gift from the in-laws a long time ago"
Settings are Low, High and Auto
It definitely has a thermostat... or there's a light pretending to be in sync with the element!
And the setting we use is always "Auto" - which I'm suspecting switches to whatever the "warm" thing mentioned is once it determines stuff is cooked. What I am trying to work out is "how"?
I need to get a smart monitor socket to work out what it's doing power wise.. or I think I might have a clamp meter that can output to serial in the shed.