# Crockpot Help Needed (merged)



## EmsMommy7 (Oct 3, 2007)

Hi everyone! I need some help, big time. I thought the Crockpot was the easiest thing to cook with in the world... but I seem to not have the hang of it. I actually returned a crockpot a few years ago, because I thought it was defective, and now I am having similar problems. It seems that my food is cooking really fast. I put it on the "low" setting for 8 hours, but it seems done in 4 and is boiling, popping, piping hot! I thought the idea was that it was a SLOW cooker? lol.... Here's my question.. do you have to totally fill the pot up to the top rim when cooking a dish? Could this be my problem? Is it just that I'm not putting enough? I have the regular round sized Rival one that most people have. I had the oval one (larger) and that's the one I returned. Any advice anyone can give me? I don't lift the lid to stir, the lid is on and sealed, and I follow the recipes exactly. Help! TIA!


----------



## Barb L. (Oct 3, 2007)

Welcome to DC, as for you question, the only thing I can think of, is the newer crockpots Are cooking hotter.  Someone with a newer one will come by and offer some help.  Good luck !


----------



## Hoot (Oct 3, 2007)

Howdy and welcome!  Mrs Hoot is my expert on slow cookers. I will ask her to read this and see what she thinks. It may well be that a smaller amount in the crock pot will cook quicker. We generally fill it up and we have never had trouble. Again, welcome!


----------



## Michelemarie (Oct 3, 2007)

Ems - my crock pot cooks extremely fast.  A few days ago I cooked a 2.5 lb. pork roast in 3 hours - actually - it was 30 degrees above the temp I wanted it. I turned it off and let it sit there for another 1.5 hours, it was still very good and remained juicy.  Since I bought my new crockpot, I usually cook things in 4-5 hours depending on what it is. I check the temp to be sure.


----------



## Jeff G. (Oct 3, 2007)

One of the biggest misunderstandings is crockpots.  Yes you CAN cook a meal in 8 hours, it doesn't mean you should.... 

I have yet to see one that doesn't have everything done in under 4 hours...

You can let it set longer but it will be REALLY done....


----------



## Constance (Oct 3, 2007)

The new crock pots are like that. Mine does the same thing. I'm guessing that the change has to do with food safety issues. It's unsafe to let food set too long without getting up to temperature, so they've set the thermostat on the crock pot to get it there faster.


----------



## keltin (Oct 3, 2007)

What are you trying to cook? About the only thing I’d let go longer than 4 hours is dry beans. Typically, a roast, chicken, Cornish hen, spaghetti sauce, etc, can be done in under 4 hours depending on how much you’re making. Naturally, the fuller it is (big batch of stew for instance) the longer it will take. 

I’ve never caramelized onions in one before, but I think that takes longer than four hours.


----------



## Katie H (Oct 3, 2007)

My question is, how old/new is your crock-pot.  As someone already mentioned, the newer ones tend to cook hotter even at the lowest setting.

You might want to fill it with water, set it on LOW for about 3 hours and then take its temperature.  This way you would get an idea at how hot the appliance actually cooks.

Do the same thing on HIGH and you can then adjust your recipes accordingly based on temps.

Best wishes on working through your dilemma.


----------



## *amy* (Oct 3, 2007)

EmsMommy7 said:


> Ooh I didn't see THIS forum before.. there are so many here! I apologize if I posted this in the wrong place. I'm new... be gentle....
> 
> Hi everyone! I need some help, big time. I thought the Crockpot was the easiest thing to cook with in the world... but I seem to not have the hang of it. I actually returned a crockpot a few years ago, because I thought it was defective, and now I am having similar problems. It seems that my food is cooking really fast. I put it on the "low" setting for 8 hours, but it seems done in 4 and is boilingl, popping, piping hot! I thought the idea was that it was a SLOW cooker? lol.... Here's my question.. do you have to totally fill the pot up to the top rim when cooking a dish? Could this be my problem? Is it just that I'm not putting enough? I have the regular round sized Rival one that most people have. I had the oval one (larger) and that's the one I returned. Any advice anyone can give me? I don't lift the lid to stir, the lid is on and sealed, and I follow the recipes exactly. Help! TIA!


 
Hi Ems. Welcome to DC. I have a Rival (programmable), round, large CP, as well, & it does cook/get hot quickly. As I recall, my manual instructions call for filling the CP 3/4 of the way. I don't add too much liquid to the pot & the veggies go either on top oir bottom. If you still have the manual, I would double check. Like yourself, I cook on LOW for shorter times & check halfway through (if I'm around). Hope that helps.


----------



## DramaQueen (Oct 3, 2007)

Jeff G. said:


> One of the biggest misunderstandings is crockpots. Yes you CAN cook a meal in 8 hours, it doesn't mean you should....
> 
> I have yet to see one that doesn't have everything done in under 4 hours...
> 
> You can let it set longer but it will be REALLY done....


 
*Your first statement is right.  Not everything requires 8 or even 6 hours of cooking.  I have a Rival crockpot that I bought about 8 years ago.   It cooks slowly and I can cook food in a 6 or 8 hour period with no problem.  I bought a new one, just so I could have 2, a couple of months ago.  It cooks wayyy too fast.  Everything I put into the pot, filling it half or 2/3 full by the way, cooks in 3 to 4 hours.*
*I contacted Rival and this is what I was told by the customer service rep:*
*Because people tend to put ice cold food into a crockpot and because the pot brings the temp up very slowly, there was too  much danger in food spoiling before it safely reached cooking temperature.  Sooooo Rival upped the temperature and the speed with which it reaches that temperature.   The temps used to be 250 low, 300 high.  Now they're at 300 low and 350 high.   Way too high as far as I'm concerned to cook for long periods.   The reason people use crockpots is so that thay can go to work or wherever and be gone for 8 and the food is cooked when they get home.   If it cooks in less than 4 hours, the crockpot is useless.    But you still have to fill the crockpot at least half way up to keep food from burning or cooking too fast.   If you have a small family, or usually make a small amount of food, then I would suggest using a 4 qt. pot.   THE OWNER'S MANUAL TELLS YOU THIS. *


----------



## Jeff G. (Oct 3, 2007)

DramaQueen said:


> *Your first statement is right.  Not everything requires 8 or even 6 hours of cooking.  I have a Rival crockpot that I bought about 8 years ago.   It cooks slowly and I can cook food in a 6 or 8 hour period with no problem.  I bought a new one, just so I could have 2, a couple of months ago.  It cooks wayyy too fast.  Everything I put into the pot, filling it half or 2/3 full by the way, cooks in 3 to 4 hours.*
> *I contacted Rival and this is what I was told by the customer service rep:*
> *Because people tend to put ice cold food into a crockpot and because the pot brings the temp up very slowly, there was too  much danger in food spoiling before it safely reached cooking temperature.  Sooooo Rival upped the temperature and the speed with which it reaches that temperature.   The temps used to be 250 low, 300 high.  Now they're at 300 low and 350 high.   Way too high as far as I'm concerned to cook for long periods.   The reason people use crockpots is so that thay can go to work or wherever and be gone for 8 and the food is cooked when they get home.   If it cooks in less than 4 hours, the crockpot is useless.    But you still have to fill the crockpot at least half way up to keep food from burning or cooking too fast.   If you have a small family, or usually make a small amount of food, then I would suggest using a 4 qt. pot.   THE OWNER'S MANUAL TELLS YOU THIS. *



Well,,,,  that explains it.. Morons call it a slow cooker and it isn't.  Get an electric roaster.  You can set its temp where you want it.


----------



## QSis (Oct 3, 2007)

Thanks, Drama, for the answer from the horse's mouth!

I wish I hadn't thrown my old crock away when I got my new one.  It used to be so wonderful to toss dinner in my old crock, go to work, then come home to a perfectly cooked meal.

I'm bummed that I can't do that anymore.

Lee


----------



## MsAnya (Oct 3, 2007)

I have heard a lot of people complaining about how the new Rival crocks cooks way too fast.  I'm lucky that mine is still holding up after 6 yrs because I'm dreading getting a new one.  You might check ebay for an older crock that doesnt cook as fast if you are needing a true slow cooker


----------



## keltin (Oct 3, 2007)

QSis said:


> Thanks, Drama, for the answer from the horse's mouth!
> 
> I wish I hadn't thrown my old crock away when I got my new one. It used to be so wonderful to toss dinner in my old crock, go to work, then come home to a perfectly cooked meal.
> 
> ...


 
Actually you still can. Simply go to Home Depot or Wal-Mart and get an AC Timer. Plug your crockpot into that, and set the timer to come on 4 hours before you get home. 

I used to use one of these timers for a plant light a few years back. The cats eventually decided I didn’t need that plant anymore , so I’ve come up with other creative ways to use that timer! Works like a champ!


----------



## Caine (Oct 3, 2007)

My Krups rice cooker, in additon to it's rice cooking function and steaming function, has a slow cooker function. I can set the time I want the slow cooker to cook the contents, anywhere from 60 minutes to 9 hours, and then it will automatically switch to the "keep warm" setting until I turn it off.

But, I have an original, 30 year old Rival Crock Pot with a removable stoneware crock that takes anywhere from 4 to 12 hours to cook most things, depending on whether I use the LOW, HIGH, or AUTOSHIFT setting, so I've never had the opportunity to use the slow cooker function of my rice cooker.


----------



## Barb L. (Oct 3, 2007)

Great idea Keltin, luckily I have older ones !


----------



## DramaQueen (Oct 3, 2007)

QSis said:


> Thanks, Drama, for the answer from the horse's mouth!
> 
> I wish I hadn't thrown my old crock away when I got my new one. It used to be so wonderful to toss dinner in my old crock, go to work, then come home to a perfectly cooked meal.
> 
> ...


 
*Well, first I get called a moron, then a horse's mouth.  Hmmmm.*


----------



## Caine (Oct 3, 2007)

DramaQueen said:


> *Well, first I get called a moron, then a horse's mouth. Hmmmm.*


 
Be glad it wasn't the OTHER end of the horse!


----------



## DramaQueen (Oct 3, 2007)

keltin said:


> Actually you still can. Simply go to Home Depot or Wal-Mart and get an AC Timer. Plug your crockpot into that, and set the timer to come on 4 hours before you get home.
> 
> I used to use one of these timers for a plant light a few years back. The cats eventually decided I didn’t need that plant anymore , so I’ve come up with other creative ways to use that timer! Works like a champ!


 
*I wouldn't recommend plugging a timer to come on 4 hours before you come home because if you leave the house and are gone for a total of 8 or more hours, your food will be unrefrigerated for 4 hours or more. .  This could cause more problems than it would solve.*


----------



## keltin (Oct 3, 2007)

DramaQueen said:


> *I wouldn't recommend plugging a timer to come on 4 hours before you come home because if you leave the house and are gone for a total of 8 or more hours, your food will be unrefrigerated for 4 hours or more. . This could cause more problems than it would solve.*


 
Interesting. I see your POV, but isn’t it the same difference as using the older crockpots. And with the timer, you could always set up to 3 on-off cycles so that it comes on for two hours, off for two, on for one, off again, on again, etc.


----------



## pacanis (Oct 3, 2007)

Fill it up with what, the food, the liquid? I do neither and never had a problem, but the liquid does boil after a while (I have only done roasts btw). The thing is, it doesn't dry anything out or toughen it up..... at least in my case.


----------



## elaine l (Oct 3, 2007)

My experience is that my old crockpot does fine but the new one....whoa talk about over cooking.  I made cocktail franks in a sweet and sour sauce for a potluck while camping.  They actually turned black.  My dh said "no way I am carrying that up to the dinner"  I now know that it requires very little time to cook anything.


----------



## EmsMommy7 (Oct 3, 2007)

Thanks!  

Well gee... that makes sense to me.  THe new ones are cooking hotter?  I have my mom's old one... probably 40 years old at least....  and it never did this.  THe cord was kinda frayed in one spot, crushed I guess....  and it was old, I figured I deserved a nice new crockpot, so I got one.  

I made a beef/broccoli recipe, and the thing burned up in about 3/4 hours.  That is when I returned that crockpot, actually.  I'll bet if I make the same recipe again, the same thing will happen.  I just thought "low 8 hours" or "low 10 hours" meant that it would take that long.  It would be kinda nice to set it in the morning, go to work, come home, dinner's done... but I find that meals are done much earlier.  

Yes, fill it up completely, to the lid.  I thought maybe because I only filled it 3/4 of the way (say with the veggies, meat, little liquid, depending on the recipe) that that is why it didn't take as long to cook.  

What if I just call the 800 number or something, talk to a rep. at Rival?  

I am stumped!  The food IS tasty...  when it's not overcooked.


----------



## Hoot (Oct 3, 2007)

Mrs Hoot pretty much echoes everyone here. New crock pots are fast.
We always make a potful..beef stew..pork and sauerkraut, etc.
I like the suggestion of an AC timer..I might have to look into that.
Good luck!


----------



## Michael in FtW (Oct 3, 2007)

Well, we had a discussion on this a couple of years ago and we did some research, but I can't find that thread. 

Now, while a Rival service rep might _*claim*_ that ... _The temps used to be 250 low, 300 high. Now they're at 300 low and 350 high*.* _That's not the  situation with the original old Rivals.

The old original Rival Crockpots (you plugged it in to turn it on and unplugged it to turn it off) never reached boiling temps - they simmered at around 170ºF. The first generation of Low/High models were the same - they only simmered ... about 172º for Low and 194º for High. Neither setting would *ever* reach a boiling point.

I don't know when exactly they started upping the temps - but I do know that one of those original pots did a great job of cooking a meal by simmering for 8 hours ...


----------



## keltin (Oct 3, 2007)

I was checking the Crock-Pot site to see if there were any answers, and all they say is this:

Question: 
What temperatures do the "Low" and "High" settings reach?  

Answer: 
We can not specify temperature ranges for the "High" or "Low" settings. Our slow cookers differentiate "High" and "Low" by wattage. These wattages are set to ensure that a standard food load (as described in AHAM spec SC-1-1979) will reach a safe internal temperature within approximately four hours. The wattage required to do this is different for different models, and many variables are involved; (start temperature, food load, room temperature, etc.). Eventually slow cookers will reach a maximum temperature, however the temperature will be different for different environmental conditions and different food loads. Given enough time most food loads will reach the same maximum temperature on both "Low" and "High."


----------



## Uncle Bob (Oct 3, 2007)

kelton said:
			
		

> Given enough time most food loads will reach the same maximum temperature on both "Low" and "High."


 
This is what I have been told as well. At either setting it will reach maximum temp. On low it just takes longer to get there. What that temp. is, I have no clue. It is definitely hotter than the older models. I think the legal department requested this change. Ya think??


----------



## EmsMommy7 (Oct 3, 2007)

First of all... I LOVE this site!  Everyone is so friendly and helpful!  Thank you all for posting, researching, etc...  I really appreciate it! 

Okay, second of all, I am confused as heck.. I posted twice, in two different forums, and I replied to the one in the other thread, but now my reply is here too!  I know they were "merged," but until I get used the format here, it is making me loopy!  HA! 

So FINALLY I have some answers!  I am going to keep my new one, for when I need a second crockpot, entertain, am home to cook something, etc.  And...  I am going to look into getting the cord on my mom's old one replaced.  It has Off/Low/High settings!  I used to use that thing like crazy... beef stews, chicken dishes, and I HAVE carmelized a whole bunch of onions in the thing, omg awesome!  THey cooked the entire day and by evening were so tasty.. I made a French Onion Soup!  So here I am, going by my old practices with my mom's old crockpot, though I have this new one that's super hot, super fast, not meant to cook all day long....  They should have just left it alone.. .I mean it's called a SLOW cooker!!!  

I can't thank you all enough!  Looking forward to chatting some more on DC! 

Nancy


----------



## keltin (Oct 3, 2007)

Uncle Bob said:


> This is what I have been told as well. At either setting it will reach maximum temp. On low it just takes longer to get there. What that temp. is, I have no clue. It is definitely hotter than the older models. I think the legal department requested this change. Ya think??


 
I definitely think the legal department was involved!!  Water boils at 212, with added salt and other ingredients, a bit higher than that. In my crock-pot (a Rival, about 4 years old), the liquid is bubbling and boiling where it touches the side, so I know it’s outputting heat around 220+ on Low!


----------



## m00nwater (Oct 4, 2007)

This thread explains why I keep getting horrible roasts out of my slow cooker as well. I was starting to think it was me, or the cut of meat. I think I might go back to oven-roasting.


----------



## DramaQueen (Oct 4, 2007)

m00nwater said:


> This thread explains why I keep getting horrible roasts out of my slow cooker as well. I was starting to think it was me, or the cut of meat. I think I might go back to oven-roasting.


 
*You CANNOT roast meat in a crock pot.  You can only stew, braise, or simmer.  Roasting is a method of using dry heat.  You have to add at least a cup of water to your crockpot in order for it to work properly.  If you want to roast meat or poultry you have to use a dry oven method.  *
*AGAIN, READ THE OWNER'S MANUAL.   *


----------



## keltin (Oct 4, 2007)

DramaQueen said:


> *You CANNOT roast meat in a crock pot. You can only stew, braise, or simmer. Roasting is a method of using dry heat. You have to add at least a cup of water to your crockpot in order for it to work properly. If you want to roast meat or poultry you have to use a dry oven method. *
> *AGAIN, READ THE OWNER'S MANUAL. *


 
Actually, that poster never said they were roasting in the crock-pot. They said they were getting horrible “roasts” from the crock-pot.....as in a cut of meat and not a cooking methodology. They are now considering changing the cooking methodology for the roast, a cut of meat, from crock-pot slow cooking to oven based roasting.


----------



## keltin (Oct 4, 2007)

And actually, you can cook in the crock-pot without added liquid. Look at most of the meatloaf recipes that are out there. It's not as common, but it can be done.


----------



## m00nwater (Oct 4, 2007)

keltin said:


> Actually, that poster never said they were roasting in the crock-pot. They said they were getting horrible “roasts” from the crock-pot.....as in a cut of meat and not a cooking methodology. They are now considering changing the cooking methodology for the roast, a cut of meat, from crock-pot slow cooking to oven based roasting.



Thanks keltin. And ya, I use plenty of liquids, I know you can't "roast" in a slow cooker. How else would I get my gravy?


----------



## Michelemarie (Oct 4, 2007)

I use my crock pot alot - trying alot of new and different recipes and cooking the same old ones too.  I have made a roast successfully - not a beef roast but a pork roast.  I added a cup of chicken broth with 1/2 cup cranberry juice with a cup of dried cranberries. The two lb. roast cooked in 3 hours - sooner than I thought. I turned the crock pot off and it sat for 1-1/2 hours. I made sliced it with the electric knife and it was very juicy. I made a gravy by added a bit more cranberry juice mixed with cornstarch on the stove. 

I have also cooked a turkey breast in the crock - no liquid - and it is fantastic! I have also made a whole chicken - again, no liquid - again fantastic - with lots of juice when it is done (plenty to make a gravy with). 

PM me if you would like the recipes.


----------



## EmsMommy7 (Oct 4, 2007)

I have also put a whole chicken in the crockpot (the perdue oven stuffer roaster,) and I watch for when the little thing pops up.  It usually takes less time than I imagine.  I have put onions, carrots and cerely chunks in the bottom, than sat the roaster on top.  Yum.. comes out so tender, and I usually make chicken salad from that.  I'm doing this tomorrow, as a matter of fact!  (I'll be sure to NOT set it early in the morning.. maybe come home and set it around noon for it to be done by 4.)  In the mean time... my hubby said he will look into replacing the cord on my old crockpot.  Yay!


----------



## BarbieDawl (Oct 5, 2007)

Girl, I will tell you what, my bf and I are both pretty busy during the day and I have school on Tues and Thurs and don't get home in time to start dinner before the old man gets home.  (He is stove illiterate )  So right before I leave around ten I cut a whole onion in large slices and put them in the bottom of the crock pot.  I then fill the crock pot with salsa or bbq sauce and slice up a rack of ribs, into about four ribs per portion.  If you have a bigger crock pot to fit bigger rib portions, I recommend it.  But I let them cook on low for 6 hours and then serve them right out of the bowl.  They are tender and have a wonderful taste.


----------



## Katie H (Oct 5, 2007)

Reading through this  thread,  I  feel  so badly for all  the folks who are owners of the newer crock-pots.  I still have my original Rival one I bought in the early '70s and it's still cooking like a champ.  All - yes I have bunches  more in many different shapes and sizes  (all Rival) - the others are older ones I've  purchased at yard sales or thrift stores for almost pennies.  I wouldn't have the new ones if someone gave one to  me.  I wish  everyone well who is struggling with their new crock-pots.   I  wish there is a good solution to your dilemma.


----------



## keltin (Oct 5, 2007)

Actually, it just occurred to me that there IS a way to convert the new slow cookers back to the days of old. Rival has stated that the cooking temperatures are set by the Wattage being used by the heating element. Wattage is a measure of power:

P = I * V

P = Power
I = Current
V = Voltage

I is further expressed as V / R

V = Voltage 
R = Resistance

So, P = (V^2) / R

That’s V squared divided by R.

This means that the Resistance of the unit is preset and tuned at the factory, and it is set for a 120 volt AC input. Obviously, if the voltage is greater than 120, the power (wattage) goes up and it runs hotter. Conversely, if the voltage goes down, then the wattage too goes down, and the unit runs cooler. THAT is the interesting part!!!

Before moving on, it should be mentioned that this is inversely true of resistance. If the resistance goes down, wattage goes up, and vice versa. Obviously there is not much we can _easily_ do about the resistance of the unit as it is preset in the factory.

However, you can easily change the input voltage with a simple device known as a table-top dimmer.

By adjusting the dimmer to a lower setting (lower voltage) you are decreasing the voltage available to the unit thus decreasing the total wattage thereby decreasing the total cooking temp. 

If you have a VOM (Voltage Ohm Meter) then measure the resistance across the AC plug of the crock-pot. With the unit turned off, it will measure infinite (open) resistance. On low you get a reading, and on high another reading. But don't plug the unit in for this! Simply measure across the plug at each of the switch settings! This measurement shows you what the AC voltage is confronted with when it enters the unit.

For mine, it measures:

Low = 71 ohms
High = 61 ohms

In knowing that the input voltage is 120VAC (that’s nominal; realistically it is anywhere between 110 and 120), we use the formula of V / R to find I (current)

Low = 120 / 71 = 1.69 Amps
High = 120 / 61 = 1.96 Amps

The power formula then gives us: P = V * I 

Low = 120 * 1.69 = 202 watts
High = 120 * 1.96 = 236 watts

Thus proving that Low and High cook at different temperatures and speeds.

Now, if we _change_ the input voltage with the dimmer to say about 90 volts, we get:

Low = 90 / 71 = 1.28 --> 90 * 1.28 = 115 watts

This is 87 watts lower than the factory set position. The only thing is, we don’t have the actual temperature settings for each wattage (i.e. 202 watts = 230 degrees, etc), but a little trial and error with the dimmer and a thermometer would easily allow you to find the perfect cooking temps of the old days that is around 170 degrees.

And that concludes today’s DIY electronics lesson! 

Oh, but if you do try this, then make sure you get a dimmer rated for the max your slow cooker can draw. On the bottom of mine there is a UL sticker that states it is rated to 250 watts. The dimmer I’ve linked to is 300 watts, so it is perfectly fine for my cooker. All slow cookers should have a UL sticker showing it’s max possible power consumption (wattage used). If there isn't a sticker then calculate max power using the VOM readings for your cooker and formulas given here.


----------



## Katie H (Oct 5, 2007)

Brilliant, keltin.  Now, all those folks with the newfangled "hot" crock-pots  can  have the same  wonderful cooking experience as  those of us who have the older crock-pots.  Good thinking.

However, how  many people  will actually make the change...that's the  real  question.


----------



## keltin (Oct 5, 2007)

It’s a neat trick if anyone wants to try it. Just on guesstimation, I’ll say my unit runs at 230 degrees max on low. Low gives me resistance of 71 ohms and 202 watts of power.

So, 230 degrees / 202 watts = 1.13 degrees per watt. Ok, and I want 170 degrees of max temp. 

170 degrees / 1.13 = 150 watts

The formula shows that P = V^2 / R.

I want 150 watts, so P is known. The crock pot has 71 ohms resistance on low, so R is known. So, we need to figure out V for the dimmer!

V^2 = P * R --> SQRT(V^2) = SQRT (P*R) --> V = SQRT(P*R)

V = SQRT(150 watts * 71 ohms)
V = SQRT(10650)
Take the square root of that:

V = 103.1 volts

Sooooooooo…..if I set my dimmer to output 103 volts, assuming it runs at 230 degrees unmodified, then my new input voltage will give me the old school cooking temp of 170 degrees, thus I can turn it on at 6 AM and go to work and then come home to a perfectly cooked meal with no burning! Isn’t math fun!! 

And this is simple. Once you find the sweet spot on your dimmer, mark it with a permanent marker or sticker so that you always know where to set the dimmer switch for your crock pot cooking.


And if no one does it, it was still geeky fun for me to explain how to do it!


----------



## Katie H (Oct 5, 2007)

keltin said:


> Isn’t math fun!!
> 
> And this is simple. Once you find the sweet spot on your dimmer, mark it with a permanent marker or sticker so that you always know where to set the dimmer switch for your crock pot cooking.



Yep,  keltin, I'm a math junkie.  Also a  "detail" junkie.  Good suggestion about marking the timer. Hope this solves some folks' crock-pot challenges.


----------



## keltin (Oct 5, 2007)

Katie E said:


> Yep, keltin, I'm a math junkie. Also a "detail" junkie. Good suggestion about marking the timer. Hope this solves some folks' crock-pot challenges.


 
I imagine the guys at Rival would give us a high five for this.....but the FDA guys that probably mandated the change are rolling over about now! 

WAIT.....was that a knock at my door????????


----------



## Katie H (Oct 5, 2007)

Go hide  inside of your biggest crock-pot!    I'll distract  them.


----------



## EmsMommy7 (Oct 6, 2007)

Holy Cow!!!!!!  Who knew it would come to this!  

Actually, that is a great idea....  I'm sending my husband to Home Depot.  I'm doing it!  Thanks!


----------



## keltin (Oct 6, 2007)

EmsMommy7 said:


> Holy Cow!!!!!! Who knew it would come to this!
> 
> Actually, that is a great idea.... I'm sending my husband to Home Depot. I'm doing it! Thanks!


 
Glad to help out. Let us know if you try this and how it works for you. And I don't think your hubby is going to complain about this particular errand....ANY reason is a good reason to go to Home Depot!!


----------



## DramaQueen (Oct 7, 2007)

_Okay now YOU do the math.  The new crockpots are running at a minimum temp of 300 degrees according to Rival, not 230.  And do you really want to cook your meal for 6 or 7 hours at a temp of 170?  You're looking at some dangerous stuff here.  Think about it.  _


----------



## keltin (Oct 16, 2007)

DramaQueen said:


> _Okay now YOU do the math. The new crockpots are running at a minimum temp of 300 degrees according to Rival, not 230. And do you really want to cook your meal for 6 or 7 hours at a temp of 170? You're looking at some dangerous stuff here. Think about it. _


 
I checked the Rival site and all documents, and they declined to give a temperature but instead gave a wattage rating. I’ve posted that statement from the Rival site earlier in this thread, but I’ll post it again here for reference:

_Q: What temperatures do the "Low" and "High" settings reach? _

_A: We can not specify temperature ranges for the "High" or "Low" settings. Our slow cookers differentiate "High" and "Low" by wattage. These wattages are set to ensure that a standard food load (as described in AHAM spec SC-1-1979) will reach a safe internal temperature within approximately four hours. The wattage required to do this is different for different models, and many variables are involved; (start temperature, food load, room temperature, etc.). Eventually slow cookers will reach a maximum temperature, however the temperature will be different for different environmental conditions and different food loads. Given enough time most food loads will reach the same maximum temperature on both "Low" and "High."_ 

However, if you have documentation from Rival showing the actual temp, it would come in handy here. Could you post a link please. 

And what exactly is dangerous about cooking food at 170 for several hours? The FDA states that the danger zone is between 40 degrees F and 140 degrees F. 170 degrees is well outside the danger zone. Further, extended coking times at low temp is quite common. Look at Sous Vide, cold smoking and curing meats, making jerky, or smoking a brisket.

And if you’re uncomfortable with all the math, the easiest thing to do is find out what temp your crock pot cooks at, and divide that number by 4. If you say 300 degrees, then divide by 4 = 75 degrees. So, for each 1/4 position on the slide, you get 75 degrees. Obviously, at the halfway mark, the temp is 150, and 3/4 it is 225 and a bit hot. So, the sweet spot for a 300 degree cooker would be between half and 3/4.


----------



## suziquzie (Nov 6, 2007)

So exactly how "old" are we talking here? Mine is about 10-12 years old ??? I think. It seems to cook really fast also, but I guess I've been sorta chalking it up to operator error. I don't remember how it did when I first got it. I was in my early 20's and WAY too busy for such things!!! I think I used it 3 times before I started my family at least 6 years later.


----------



## Michelemarie (Nov 6, 2007)

Oh, I saw this a couple of weeks ago and forgot to post here - At Target I saw  a crock pot that actually has a temperature setting and also a probe that can  be inserted into the food - I also think you can program the crockpot to switch from "on" to "warm" when the  food reaches temperature you want.  I was in a quick hurry but thought of this thread when I saw it - fyi -----


----------



## Caine (Nov 6, 2007)

suziquzie said:


> So exactly how "old" are we talking here?


 
I have had my original Rival crockpot, with removable crock, since before my son, Plague of Locusts was born, and he just turned 26. It has three settings: LOW - HIGH - AUTOSHIFT. If I set it on LOW, it will take 8 to 10 hours for food to actually cook. I have never used HIGH when it's unattended, just to reheat things while saving stove top space for something else. AUTOSHIFT will get hot enough to boil tomato sauce in about two hours, but then shifts to LOW to keep the contents warm until you're ready to serve it.


----------



## decolady (Nov 8, 2007)

I still have my original avocado green Rival that I got in 1976.  It cooks wonderfully.  A couple of years ago I bought a new crockpot for the farm.  Of course it cooks way too hot.

My spouse is an electrical engineer.  I'm going to print out the math stuff for him and see if he can fix up something for the newer pot.  Do they make dimmers that will handle the load of a heating element?


----------



## EmsMommy7 (Nov 10, 2007)

When I say "old," I mean... I am 36.  This thing was my mom's for as long as I remember... figuring she got it as a wedding present, which means 1965.  How old is that?  42 years?  It has Off/Low/High.  Since I originally posted this, my husband replaced the damaged cord.  I plan on doing a beef stew tomorrow.  We'll see how it goes!  One of these days when I have a free afternoon (ha!) I am going to make a recipe twice... once in each crockpot... and check out the difference!   My new one has an autoshift to warm when it's done, but it will go to that after the 8 hours on low.  Of course, 8 hours will burn it to a crisp.  Not sure about a probe.  Hmmm....   I have used my "new" crockpot a few times since this thread, but I never set it in the morning and get it when I get home from work.  I just use it during a weekend when I'm here, and the cooking time is always super fast.  I plan on going back to using my mom's old one.  I'll use the new one for parties when I need two crockpots going or something!


----------



## DramaQueen (Nov 12, 2007)

*I bought my daughter a crockpot when she went back to work a couple years ago. She complained that hers was cooking things to death and drying the food so I experimented. Had her bring hers over to my house, put identical recipes for Chicken Tarragon in both (mine is a about 8 or 9  yrs old.) Mine cooked the chicken perfectly with a very slow simmer. Hers cooked it to death, as she said, dry, and very brown around the edges. I have to admit that cooking chicken breasts in a crock pot is not a good idea and really isn't recommended. Breasts, having no fat, cook very fast and there is no reason to cook them for a long time. I reserve the crockpot for meats that are tough and require long, slow braising. *


----------



## helenrose (Nov 17, 2007)

Hi Everyone I am new to this board, Helen is my name. I am intending to buy a new crockpot (my old one was purchased in 73 I dont trust it any longer) I searched to see what reviews, if any, could be found and stumbled across your community. As you can see, I found my answer and want to thank you all. You saved me hours of time and answered my question and provided me with additional info. What a nice community.
Thanks all for reading my mind and having this thread all ready for me. lolololol

Really though Thank You
Helen


----------



## VaporTrail (Nov 28, 2007)

Just as a quick thing... max temp for a crock pot is a very sticky animal...

*Beware, massive geekery ahead!*

Power is a measurement of applied energy, a watt is one joule of energy applied per second. We have the wattage of our appliance (and a way to vary that wattage between a maximum and a minimum). 

But how do we convert that to temperature change?

The British Thermal Unit (or BTU) is defined as as the energy required to raise one pound of water, one degree farenheit (those of you who have had recent experience with a water heater or air-conditioner/furnace will recognize this term). Well, lets convert this to a metric unit so we won't have to muck around with it later. 

We know that 100*C x 9/5 + 32 = 212*F which means that a 1*F change is 5/9ths of a 1*C change. So the Evolved unit is "energy to raise one pound of water 5/9*C".

And we know that 1 pound equals .4536 kilograms. So the Evolved unit is "energy to raise .4536 kilograms of water 5/9*C".

So our Metric Thermal Unit (which is directly equivilent to a BTU) is the energy required to raise .4536 kilos of water 5/9ths of a degree Centigrade. 

Well, now we need to know the volume of what we're cooking. Lets say we have a 4 quart pot, and a standard load of 3/4 full. Which works out to 3 quarts. One quart is about .9464 liters, so 3 quarts is roughly 2.84 liters. Lets convert that to mass of water (as water is probably the most abundant thing that's going into the pot) as 2.84 kilos.

Lets figure on a final temperature of about 175*f or about 80*C and a starting temperature of about 65*F or 18*C (figures agressively rounded). So we need to change our mass 62 degrees C. 

So we need to change 2.84 kilos of water 62 degrees C. 

2.84 kilos / .4536 kilos = '6.26 blocks' of water to be heated. Each of which must be heated by 62*C / (5/9*C) = 122.4 "units" of temperature. Therefore we need 766.224 MTUs (applied evenly throughout the mass) to instantly heat our water to desired temperature. Or that amount of MTUs applied over time (neglecting any cooling effect). 

So what's a good time frame to hit 170ish F? Well, we don't want to hit 170 at the end of the cooking cycle, and we don't want to hit it too early. So lets say we want to hit 170ish in 2 hours. Which means we have to apply 766.224 MTU over two hours... or about 383 MTU/Hour. 

Thankfully we have a handy little constant that will convert from our MTU (which is effectively a BTU) to watts... One BTU/hour is equal to .293 Watts. Which means 383 MTU/hour x .293 = 112.219 watts.

So we hit 170ish in two hours at 112 watts (neglecting cooling). Thing about that is, at that rate we hit a temperature change of 62*C every two hours... which means that by the end of the cooking time we'll have exceeded 500*F... and we know that doesn't happen (in a crock pot at least). 

The thing is, that most crock pots don't operate by thermostat, they operate by continually putting heat into the pot, and the principle that heat moves from hot objects to cooler objects. So the heat generated in your crock pot moves through the walls and into the air. When heat in equals heat out, your crock pot is at max temp. 

Which means that the absolute Max Temp that your crock pot will reach is not determined by the wattage, but by exactly how fast heat escapes from your crock pot. This changes depending on exactly how hot the crockpot is, what it's made of, air temperature, airflow around the crock pot, and a few other factors.

So it's a balancing act. We want enough heat going into our pot to raise the temperature to our desired levels, but we don't want to put so much heat into the pot that the level of heat gets too high (which is what it's doing as a regular thing). So we need to reduce the wattage used, but not by too much.

When you reduce the wattage used by the appliance, you don't lower the max temperature so much as change the balance point of energy added vs energy lost, because the rate that heat moves out of an object changes dependant on the difference in temperature between the object and it's environment (or trying to use a crockpot outside in the snow will not give you the same results as one used in a sauna). 

I expect if you plotted the max temp vs wattage for any individual pot, you'd wind up with something that looks more like an exponential function, rather than a linear one, so we can't use a direct relation between wattage and max temperature. 

"Enough about heat transfer, how does this apply to my crock pot?" you ask? Well, if you want a functional answer, rather than a mathematic one, you use what Keltin already thought up. Get a dimmer (Keep in mind that this dimmer is going to be getting pretty hot it's own self, it's basically just a big variable resistor, and when you run voltage through resistance, you get power expressed as heat) and set it so you get the right wattage in your pot. But where to start?

Keltin started by using a voltage example. If you wanted the dimmer to use 1/4 the voltage (and leave 90v left for the crock pot) you would set it to approx 1/3d the resistance of the crock pot. So if your crock pot was 60 ohms you would set your dimmer to about 20 ohms. You'd have a total resistance of 80 ohms. You would be putting through a current of 1.5a. 120v/80 Ohms = 1.5 ampres. 

Lets take that info and find the wattage developed by the pot. Twinkle twinkle little star, power equals I-squared R. or P = I^2 x R. 

(1.5a)^2 x 60 ohms = 135 watts. 

Well lets see what we need to set our dimmer at to develop 120 watts (our figure of 112w above, plus 8 watts to negate cooling) in our pot. 

120 watts, divided by 60 ohms equals the square root of 2 amps, or 1.414.

To get 1.414 amps flowing from 120 volts. we need a total resistance of 85 ohms. That means we have to set our dimmer at 25 ohms to get the total resistance (Don't forget, your dimmer will be developing (1.414^2) x 25 = 50 watts of power itself). The fact is though, 120 watts is probably way low to actually be a viable slow cooker wattage, simply because of all the real world losses that come into play. I'd start somewhere closer to 130-135. 

Now if you need more heat, (and if you use 120w as a starting figure, you probably will) you lower the resistance of the dimmer (which raises current, and wattage deveoped by the pot.)

So get your pot, measure the resistance of the coil on low. Call that figure 'C'.
Now divide your desired wattage (130 is probably a good place to start as it's probably lower than what you have now, but isn't so low that you're gonna have to work back up). Call your desired wattage 'D'. 

Divide D by C and take the square root of the result (for example using D= 130 and C=60 gives us a result of 2.17 or an answer of about 1.47). Call this number 'I'

Divide 120 by I (voltage of the circuit by current) to get total resistance, then subtract C. (for I=1.47, 120/1.47= 81.63, that minus 60 is 21.6 (or 22 is close enough...). Call this number 'S'. 

Grab your multimeter and set your dimmer for your value of S. Fill your crock pot to a normal level (basically with about how much mass you usually cook, Water is your best bet, as you can't be sure exactly how well this will cook), plug your contraption into the wall, set to low and wait for about 3 hours. Measure temp. Wait another hour or two, measure temp. If they were both close to the same and where you want them to stay during cooking, mark your dimmer and you're done with low. If not, choose a new wattage, run the calculations and try again.

Then repeat for high. 


And now I'm done.


----------



## suziquzie (Nov 28, 2007)

Thank you Vapor...

my head hurts, but thank you.


----------



## VaporTrail (Nov 28, 2007)

You're welcome. This is what comes of boredom, forum surfing, a subject I understand, and knowledge I haven't used in years.


----------



## c3clark (Nov 29, 2007)

Hi Everyone!
Try this crockpot:
*Farberware FSSC500 5-Quart Slow Cooker*
Most of the reviews on Amazon are really good. My daughter has a rival smartpot, and roasts and other foods would burn or be very dry. She bought this Farberware a few months ago, and says it does cook MUCH slower. (She's also giving me one for Christmas!) Now she only uses her smartpot for soups, which come out fine. I have a 4quart rival (red oval) and I've never had a problem with things being dry or burned, but it does cook a lot more quickly than the recipe says. I'm really excited to get the Farberware!


----------



## la guera loca (Feb 18, 2008)

MsAnya said:


> I have heard a lot of people complaining about how the new Rival crocks cooks way too fast. I'm lucky that mine is still holding up after 6 yrs because I'm dreading getting a new one. You might check ebay for an older crock that doesnt cook as fast if you are needing a true slow cooker


 
I am an Ebay addict, but you could always check your local thrift stores, or yard/garage sales for one of the "old" ones.  Make sure to plug it in and test to see if it gets warm on the inside though, you never know who is going to donate their broken one!


----------



## Quint (Jun 17, 2008)

WOW !! some great stuff here love all the power calculations. I do have one question, many of the new crockpots have digital displays and controls, by dropping input voltages to 90vac you may well be dropping out of the low end that your electronics can operate at. Has anybody tried this yet to see if there is a problem. 

As far as the timer suggestion, again with the newer electronic displays and controls operator interaction is required when the unit is turned on, so mine for instance will just sit there when the timer turns it on waiting for me to do something.


----------



## EmsMommy7 (Nov 11, 2009)

Ha!!!  Found my original crockpot thread!!!   

So the other day I was trying a new chili recipe in my crockpot.  Turned out I couldn't fit it all in, so I grabbed my SECOND crockpot and cooked it in both.  Wouldn't you know in my NEWEST crockpot the chili was hot and boiling and bubbling and crazy hot in no time, even on the LOW/10 hour setting.  The chili in my mom's old crockpot just slowly cooked away all day long and was ready after 8-10 hours.  Unbelievable how fast this crockpot cooks.  I still am not sold against the idea that there is a malfunction going on, but again...  this is actually the 2nd one.  I returned the first "new" crockpot because of this and thought maybe something was wrong with that one.  But now this one does too, so I really think it's just that the new crockpots cook so so much faster than the old classics.  Today I'm using my crockpot, and I always reach for the "old" one that belonged to my Mom (with the replaced cord from hubby!) to use.  Isn't the purpose of a slow-cooker to SLOW COOK?  haha....  Anyway, looked to do a chicken in the crockpot today and was looking for a different recipe to try, as far as veggies, sauces, what to add in there.  My search turned up this thread.  haha!  Long time no see!  I  miss this forum!


----------



## mcnerd (Nov 11, 2009)

The "hot" slow cookers are newer RIVAL brand Crock-Pot®'s and they intentionally run hot by direction of their attorneys.  They are afraid of being sued for cooking food slowly and not hot enough.  Go figure.  I buy Hamilton Beach brands until I come across an old slow cooker at a garage sale.


----------



## Dillbert (Nov 11, 2009)

mcnerd said:


> The "hot" slow cookers are newer RIVAL brand Crock-Pot®'s and they intentionally run hot by direction of their attorneys.  They are afraid of being sued for cooking food slowly and not hot enough.  Go figure.  I buy Hamilton Beach brands until I come across an old slow cooker at a garage sale.



if memory serves, the (?)FDA passed some "rules" which now require slow cookers to cook faster - they were afeared a full pot of crock would spend too much time in ".....the danger zone........"


----------



## mcnerd (Nov 11, 2009)

If you can find that FDA "rule" please share it.  I have not seen it, though I have seen the comments from RIVAL on the issue.  And so far as I know the other brands of slow cookers do not share the extreme heat issue.


----------



## Michael in FtW (Nov 11, 2009)

Well, I spent quite a bit of time researching the temps of the old vs new crock-pots when this thread first got started a couple of years ago and I'm guessing that what I found then is still true today. The old pots had one temp, about 170ºF, when they added a High-Low switch the temps were 172ºF and 194ºF, today the lowest setting is going to be between 250ºF and 300ºF - which explains why the old pots didn't boil and the new pots can't help it.


----------



## getoutamykitchen (Nov 12, 2009)

This thread really caught my attention since this year I'm doing my thanksgiving turkey in my slow cooker. I bought a Hamilton Beach 8 qt. last week and decided to test the temps yesterday after reading this thread. I filled it with water ( a bit more then 3/4 full). This cooker has 3 temps.
On the keep warm setting after about 3 hours the temp reached about 120-122 degrees.
I set it on medium and waited a few more hours and the temp reached 170 degrees.
Set it on high and after a few hours it was  just starting to boil and the temp reached just shy of 220 degrees.

Just thought ya'll might be interested. By the way I'm cooking 6lb. boneless turkey breast and have no idea how long it will take. This is my first slow cooker thanksgiving. But since no else in my family volunteers to cook I figured they can suffer through my experimental cooking.


----------



## Dillbert (Nov 12, 2009)

mcnerd said:


> If you can find that FDA "rule" please share it.  I have not seen it, though I have seen the comments from RIVAL on the issue.  And so far as I know the other brands of slow cookers do not share the extreme heat issue.



reviewed the old thread (which was how to control slow cooker temp with a dimmer switch . . . )

I didn't re'find the exact references but apparently the FDA expressed 'concerns' and under apparent thread of regulation (?) the industry adopted a new standard (AHAM.org ? - don't recall exactly) which is how slow cookers got hotter&faster.

I wonder if slow cookers are required to observe the "industry standard" to get the UL label...?


----------



## bigdaddy3k (Nov 12, 2009)

EmsMommy7 said:


> Ha!!! Found my original crockpot thread!!!
> 
> So the other day I was trying a new chili recipe in my crockpot. Turned out I couldn't fit it all in, so I grabbed my SECOND crockpot and cooked it in both. Wouldn't you know in my NEWEST crockpot the chili was hot and boiling and bubbling and crazy hot in no time, even on the LOW/10 hour setting. The chili in my mom's old crockpot just slowly cooked away all day long and was ready after 8-10 hours. Unbelievable how fast this crockpot cooks. I still am not sold against the idea that there is a malfunction going on, but again... this is actually the 2nd one. I returned the first "new" crockpot because of this and thought maybe something was wrong with that one. But now this one does too, so I really think it's just that the new crockpots cook so so much faster than the old classics. Today I'm using my crockpot, and I always reach for the "old" one that belonged to my Mom (with the replaced cord from hubby!) to use. Isn't the purpose of a slow-cooker to SLOW COOK? haha.... Anyway, looked to do a chicken in the crockpot today and was looking for a different recipe to try, as far as veggies, sauces, what to add in there. My search turned up this thread. haha! Long time no see! I miss this forum!


 
If you are talking about the 4, 6, 8 and 10 hour setting one, it initially gets up to boiling then turns down to low for the slow cook. If you look on the panel you will see that the 4 and 6 hour setting are refered to as "High" and the 8 and 10 are "Low". However all 4 settings will start at high temp.


----------



## bigdaddy3k (Nov 12, 2009)

getoutamykitchen said:


> Just thought ya'll might be interested. By the way I'm cooking 6lb. boneless turkey breast and have no idea how long it will take. This is my first slow cooker thanksgiving. But since no else in my family volunteers to cook I figured they can suffer through my experimental cooking.


 
Is the crock removable? I do this but then at the end, I remove the crock, uncover and brown the breast in the oven to make it look perfect.


----------



## mcnerd (Nov 12, 2009)

Dillbert said:


> I wonder if slow cookers are required to observe the "industry standard" to get the UL label...?


I agree that the new standard is for a "hotter" temperature for slow cooker than existed with the one our grandparents had, but RIVAL went way beyond that on their own crusade, to-wit, the Crock-Pot® to me is no longer a "slow cooker."

The choice is still up to the consumer, but the information is important so people are not "surprised" when their food boils on the low setting and it is impossible to let the food cook all day while you are at work.


----------



## getoutamykitchen (Nov 12, 2009)

bigdaddy3k said:


> Is the crock removable? I do this but then at the end, I remove the crock, uncover and brown the breast in the oven to make it look perfect.



Yes, it's a ceramic insert!


----------

