Years. Really. I believe it's not even out in Germany yet, though that's supposed to be this Fall. Maybe. Don't hold your breath.

Looks pretty real on this Aussie site.

Here is a link that might be useful: Aussie site

And this German site lists some vendors having them 'in stock' or with 2-5 day delivery times.

These are cool as all get out. We haven't been totally happy with our temporary Max Burton portable induction hob (mostly because we find 10 settings is not fine enough and when you do food that requires lifting the pan frequently it beeps annoyingly (but works OK)) but we'd love to have one of these zoneless induction surfaces in addition to gas if we had the room (from videos it looks like these Gaggs have 20 heat settings plus boost).

I am actually surprised by the "low" (LOL!) prices on that website--some folks here were speculating they'd come in around $10K.

So they are about $5k in Europe?

I would expect to see them here in 3 years or so.

If that really is the going price in Europe, Gagg is much more affordable there (esp given it has VAT included already). The Australian price is listed at $12,000 in this press release, which also confirms the Australian availability will be by Nov 2011.

Checking other Gagg equipment on the shopping sites listed, the pricing is at a similar discount to the US. I'm not sure whether these are trustworthy vendors, though.

The link below shows the Gagg CX 480 100 for 3460 euros which is just under $5k

Here is a link that might be useful: Gaggenau CX 480 100

Why does it take so long for something like this to be introduced in the U.S.? Is it really that difficult to manufacture and ship these products here? OK, vent over, there are probably good reasons but I have to say I'm a little flabbergasted. And disappointed. It's a brilliant idea. Although a downside is that one can still only place a max of four items on the cooktop.

Is anyone here surprised that this isn't now on the U.S. market?

And if full surface induction were available in the U.S., would it convince you to make the jump vs. a CC or BS range? Despite the aesthetics of many folks wanting their range to be a "focal point"?

@jmcgowan: I down't own an induction or a captial yet but i had ordered a capital and will be changing to induction (i tried cooking on both).

Jmcgowan, No, those of us who hang out here are not really surprised. Thus it ever is. The American market is very large, expensive to enter, and merchandising oriented. It reacts far more to price than technology, and reacts very negatively to things being brought to market with shakedown flaws. Australia is actually a great test market for something like this before they bring it to North America. There are a lot of cultural similarities (in the way they live--they may be more open to new tech), and the market size is manageable. I don't know about the regulatory rating, but it would seem logical that they'd accept the European one, and if so, there'd be no analog to UL as well.

I know someone who was looking into getting one immediately last month, right before they actually went on sale in Germany, who decided that it could wait for the next kitchen.

And if full surface induction were available in the U.S., would it convince you to make the jump vs. a CC or BS range?

For me, full surface induction is like Disneyland.

Kinda cool,I would like to visit but I would not want to live there.

Plus,for the cost of FS induction cooktop plus a few hundred dollars you can get an entire range from BS or Capital.

If it cost the same as Germany,truth be told it will probably be more expensive here.

plllog, thanks for educating me -- your points all make sense. I liked your analogy, deeageaux...but why "wouldn't you want [it]"? And especially if cost wasn't an issue? (I know, it always is, though!)

I wonder if electrical power in Australia is more similar to that in Europe (vs. the US), which -- in addition to what plllog mentioned above -- might ease the transition to that market.

Besides cost, there is also the space issue. There are lots of threads here discussing the advantages/disadvantages of gas and induction. It depends on your cooking style.

We don't have room for both gas and induction and went with a CC range for these reasons:

1. Our family cook sometimes uses all 5 burners of his current gas cooktop. Thus we want at least 6 burners.

2. He uses the flame to grill peppers (chile and sweet) and to quickly toast up his homemade tortillas somewhat frequently.

3. He wants a gas broiler and a gas oven rotisserie. (as an engineer, I am resistant to calling gas plate-based broilers 'infrared' as the marketing does since ALL broilers including wimpy wire electric burners heat via infrared. Please read Modernist Cuisine's testing of the uniformity of infrared heating via wire electric broilers if you want more detail).

4. We have a very large collection of cookware, many specialized, including well-seasoned but not flat bottomed cookware we love. Some are family pieces handed down. Also, it would be a bummer if 5 to 10 years down the line an induction pot warped slightly and then didn't heat evenly or became a noisy buzzing pot on induction.

5. We'd need to make sure that if the induction top 'beeped' when removing pots, that this sound could be disabled. We are both highly annoyed by such 'features'.

That said. we would totally have both if there was room since induction has fantastic advantages itself (cleaning, speed of heat change, evenness of heating, efficiency, safety, etc)

Personally, I'm just waiting for them to realize that not everybody that wants induction in the US wants an ultra modern cooktop. Where are the ranges like these (maybe by the time they introduce them here they can be zoneless as well):

{{gwi:1476289}}

"Why does it take so long for something like this to be introduced in the U.S.?"

Ever heard of Underwriters Laboratories (UL) or Tort lawyers ???

That's the main reason.

deeageaux...but why "wouldn't you want [it]"? And especially if cost wasn't an issue? (I know, it always is, though!)

I make more than the average American but I am not Bill Gates so cost is an issue.

Long term durability and cost of repair are unknown.

Pro-Style gas ranges are a mature technology.

Plus I like cooking with fire.

It fulfills some pre-historic caveman DNA need I suppose.

Tort lawyers: it's a fear, and it represents reality. Therefore yes it is an obstacle. Combine it with a third factor: the budget commitment to do the whole country in one go. Add to this a fourth factor: the dirty fighting that happens behind the scenes. Since it's a big place, there is a lot more at stake than in Australia or Canada or any other test market. Behind the scenes you can get skewered without knowing who done it. You get invisibly done over. It's not like that in a smaller place where everyone has been "gentler" forever and the worst thing they can imagine to do is to whine about you. Yes, I'm exaggerating, but you need a big budget to overcome the market obstacles that remain invisible to "consumers".

Underwriters Laboratories (UL) : not a big obstacle. It's minor.

Torts, ROFLMAO! Germany actually puts the burden of proof on the manufacturer in a lot of product liability cases to show they didn't screw up! But hey, say anything that helps you make money, right? The American way!

Wow, gregincal, those ranges are awesome!

There are many brands of ranges sold in England, France, Italy and elsewhere that aren't sold here. Some Europeans actually don't want to bother with/can't invest in the American market where the demands appear to be very different than the rest of the world and the distribution is difficult not to mention service.

I think full surface induction looks amazing. Hoping over time it will be developed by more than one company.

UL is an obstacle in that it costs $$$$$ to get a product tests and approved. And that cost has to be balanced against estimated profits of units sold. A cooktop that costs upwards of $5000 and more will not sell like hotcakes.

5 or 6 years ago, pretty much the only induction equipment had to be imported from Australia, New Zealand, UK, Germany or France. Now you can get several here in the US, and Canada, though not as advanced as Europe. Perhaps we'll see this in another 5 years or so.

UL costs. Yes.

I think there are UL equivalents in every country. If this is true, then its cost is not a barrier in one specific country.

David, please don't bring obvious facts into the conversation. It interferes with talking points that could increase manufacturers' and dealers' profits at consumer expense. Let's all clap along instead and pretend German consumers regularly buy uninspected, unregulated exploding stoves.

Guys/gal - UL is not so much an obstacle or a $$$ drain as it is a waiting game.

You have to await approval before you can start the process. You don't make a bunch of cooktops and warehouse them waiting on the UL stamp and then go out and sell them.

This is really why an appliance from Europe or AustralAsia takes longer to hit the U.S. market.

wow, two humorous posts in a row. Both dry humor. This is impressive. Maybe missed something. Explain it all again. Draw pictures will help. Thx in advance.

I'm not quite following this tangent. I have been told by many different people in the appliance manufacturing, distribution, and sales sectors that Manufacturer X doesn't want to bother getting UL approval for Appliance A. The whys range from cost to time to paperwork to a combination of all three. When I was looking for a 24" induction cooktop with more power levels than Diva's, it came up over and over that (North) Americans just don't want small (presumably meaning in sufficient numbers for it to be profitable), and they'd have to pay for a second UL approval even if it was exactly the same as the 36" unit, minus one end.

This may be standard smoke that they all use for talking to consumers, and "pay" may be shorthand for "by the time it's approved we'll be on to another model, and keeping up with the certificates is way more trouble than we want to invest in a niche market", but that's what they all do say, whether or not it's true, sort of true or downright false.

OTOH, I was warned here that I would have code trouble and insurance trouble with a direct import that is certified in Europe. Turns out that the only requirement was that it be installed by a fully qualified electrician. It was. He was given the wrong instructions by the service company (I think they were for the country of manufacture rather than sale) and it took Davidro1 and some other electrical forum habitues to explain the way it should properly be connected, but it was installed by a fully qualified electrician. :) The European equivalent of UL was adequate for the potential party poopers.

"It interferes with talking points that could increase manufacturers' and dealers' profits "

And what's wrong with that marcolo - the profits I mean ???

Without it there would be no stores around for you to find a bargain or sale at or even a place to go play with the toys or try on a shirt or pair of shoes. There wouldn't even be a place for you to work at in order for you to have any $$$ to buy any of this stuff with. PROFIT is necessary in a capitalist economic system.

I think you have a VERY VERY selfish view if you think you as a consumer are due or entitled to a "bargain" or "sale" on everything you purchase. This is the same thing your are wailing on about evil business and corps - sticking to the consumer , only it's OK because it's you who benefits from sticking it to the "man". Same behavior , just the other side of the negotiation table.

FWIW - sometimes the Euro elect. listing (and almost always with the German TuV. certification) is more stringent than our UL listing. Won;t really matter if there is a problem and your house burns or someone is killed. What do you think the first thing the lawyers are going to zone in on? Right - "the product you sold wasn't UL listed". How do you think a jury is going to find when they hear that big ol fat rich dirtbag corporation didn't get their appliance certified because it was going to cost $50k or whatever. It's not going to matter a hill of beans that it was deemed safe by another agency - I mean, dem 4ereneeers don't no notin anyway.

I have no idea what on earth you are on about.

You implied that it's the big mean lawyers and regulators who are keeping European toys off American markets, because our lawyers and regulators are so much worse than theirs. This is a crock. Many of their tort and regulatory standards are much tighter than ours.

To a European manufacturer, North America is a big market across the ocean with very high costs for distribution, advertising, marketing, operations and everything else. They have to decide whether all those costs are worth it. The answer is yes, if it's a product that can be sold at high margins in significant volume. The answer is no if it's something that only appeals to a few, and will cost a lot at retail once it gets here. That simple.

I think pretty much everyone agrees that the euro certs are generally as or more stringent than UL, but that's not really the point. The problem is that local codes, statutes, insurance policies, contracts, etc sometimes (not always) specifically reference UL listing as a requirement for approval/coverage. This makes some sense, as then no one has to argue whether or not another standard is equivalent. It becomes a black and white issue, and allows inspectors etc. to made decisions that are consistent and don't require independent judgment calls. This makes administration of the rules easier/more efficient, increases predictability of potential liabilities, and generally lowers costs (for everyone but the consumer).

This is a classic problem with laws. Greater specificity = greater predictability of outcomes but less freedom to apply common sense and allow for variation to reflect real-world situations. Less specificity = more flexibility and more freedom, but a loss of predictability and a concurrent increase in potential costs for lawsuits, etc., when people argue over whether an interpretation is reasonable.

I have no idea what it costs to get UL listed, or what is involved, so can't comment on that. I suspect, however, that the bigger issue may be manufacturers being unwilling to commit to maintaining parts and expertise for what they perceive as products with small markets. If they don't think the product will sell well, they can't justify stocking and supporting the item regardless of whether there would be certification issues. For example, Blanco produces many many more models of silgranit sink for european markets than they import to the US; indeed, they import a few more to Canada than they do here. This isn't a certification issue. But for every model they officially import, they have to warrant that model, stock it, and ensure warranty coverage by keeping replacements and parts in stock...all of which have costs. Of course, sometimes the manufacturer will make something available they know full well has little actual market, as a "halo" product to attract customers to the brand in general. You see this in cars, for example. Haven't seen it so much in appliances.

I love the "retro" induction ranges too, but I think that the manufactures probably rightfully believe that the market for them here would be very very small. Indeed, it seems like almost no one has been willing to risk marketing a high-end/expensive induction range...the only two that I think have been offered so far are the Diva 365 (defunct) an Viking VISC (which I suspect is only available because the ranges are modular, they already offered an electric range they could use as a base/model, and they are already producing induction cooktops so it doesn't take a lot to slap a range together from the parts they already have. I am probably vastly oversimplifying the situation).

That being said, to go back to the original question I have no idea why they would think this applied to full-surface induction. It seems obvious that those willing to pay the already pretty exorbitant costs of Gaggenau induction would probably be willng to pay more for full-surface. Maybe there is actually some technicial issue in converting the more complex electronics of the full-surface units for US electricity? I don't know. Curious to see what happens.

I don't think there is actually an electrical issue. There are lots of places with electricity similar to ours. Saudi Arabia (probably a good market for high end goods) is listed as 127V/220V, 60Hz, for instance.

While getting a letter from my insurance company that my imported cooktop was okay was easy, one of the other warnings I had was about the Hertz being different. I finally got an okay from the Gaggenau serviceman who said I'd need to make a chart to use the timer, but otherwise it should work fine. Unnecessary. Turns out that my German cooktop, made for the UK market, is rated for 50 OR 60 Hz. One presumes because lots of places have 60 Hz. and it's easier for inventory and manufacture costs to put whatever gizmo it is into the electronics that will accept either than to make one kind for one set of countries and one for others, the way they have to do with right hand drive cars.

zartemis writes: "We have a very large collection of cookware, many specialized, including well-seasoned but not flat bottomed cookware we love. Some are family pieces handed down. Also, it would be a bummer if 5 to 10 years down the line an induction pot warped slightly and then didn't heat evenly or became a noisy buzzing pot on induction."

Zartemis, anybody who tells you that induction requires perfectly flat bottom pots never has used induction. Flat bottom pots are NOT NECESSARY with induction. Anybody who says differently is simply, plainly, wrong. Flat bottom pots are called for in glass-top thermal cooktops, and -- because induction cooktops are glass-top -- some -- ignorant -- people think that induction cooktops require flat bottom pots. (Note: ignorance, which can be remedied by education, differs from stupidity; no one, least of all me, is accusing of the ignorant of stupidity.) Induction cooktops do not require flat bottom pots.

Very interesting...

Gregincal, totally agree, I wish there were a wider range of options for induction ranges. You posted some nice eye candy!! BTW, what's the first brand? - having a hard time seeing this.

Very interesting...

Gregincal, totally agree, I wish there were a wider range of options for induction ranges. You posted some nice eye candy!! BTW, what's the first brand? - having a hard time seeing this.

herring_maven, I'm not sure we disagree. I agree that pots needn't be perfectly flat to work on induction (not that there is such a thing as a theoretically perfectly flat pot anyway). It's a matter of degree. Perhaps we differ in what we would consider 'slight warping'.

And it was not speculation. We are currently cooking on induction during our remodel and several (slightly, in my opinion) warped pans did not heat evenly because parts of the bottoms were not near enough the surface. These were generally thinner pans which over decades and hard use can warp more easily than, say, cast iron. I'd take a photo for you as example, but all but our few induction-happy pans are in storage for several months.

Now, that such pans might tend to be more buzzy when warped, was speculation. It could be something else about the pan. We sent the excessively buzzy pans to storage as well.

I'm not the only induction-user that has had problems with warped pans: this thread includes someone who claims to have been using induction for 3 years who has noticed problems with 'slightly' warped pans as well.

The users' manuals do warn against using warped or non-flat pans. They don't explain why. I defer to Zartemis on the warping. I don't have warped pans yet. I'm sure my thin, carbon steel will warp, especially since I forget to be careful of shocking them. :)

As far as I can find out, the problem with pans with an outer ridge or other non-flatness, isn't that they won't heat. My cooktop will recognize and heat even my big double griddle/grill with the very deep ridges. The problem is the build up of hot air underneath. There's a potential for burns as one lifts the pan, and there's a potential (which someone more physics minded explained to me but I can't reproduce) that the heat thingie in the whizjam vs. the other heat thingie in the snafflefratz will stress the glass and cause it to crack.

So, I don't use my big, heavy griddle/grill on the induction. I'm actually kind of scared that I'd drop it anyway. It's probably not as heavy as my 15 qt. cast iron roaster, but it sure feels like it is. (It's not Le Creuset, and is much thicker and heavier.) However, I think nothing of deglazing my Graniteware enamelled steel roaster (don't know the official size but the bottom part holds 8 qts. of liquid.) with the embossed tree in bottom on my big induction element. All but the very corners fit in the ring, and it works great. It's not for long, and not very hot, and I don't think any of it is flat enough to create a sealed air chamber anyway.

zartemis writes: "We are currently cooking on induction during our remodel and several (slightly, in my opinion) warped pans did not heat evenly because parts of the bottoms were not near enough the surface."

zartemis, I do not question your experience with uneven heating in some of your pans; I do question the causation that you impute for the uneven heating.

We have two pots that are over 9 inches in diameter and have slightly curved, bowl-shaped, bottoms; the only contact either of these pots makes with the surface of our induction cooktop is through three small feet on each of the pots, which hold the pot about one-quarter of an inch above the cooktop surface; the combined total contact area of each pot's three feet is less than one-quarter inch (the equivalent of a single 1/2" x 1/2" square). The primary cooking appliances in our home for the past dozen years have been induction.

We have owned and frequently used those three-point pots throughout the past twelve years. Both of the three-point pots work very well on our current four-burner all-induction cooktop, and heat very evenly. They worked well on the induction burners of the predecessor four-burner cooktop (two of the burners of that one were ribbon radiants, and two induction), also.

That is why I am confident in debunking claims that pots must sit flat on an induction cooktop to work at all or that non-flat pots cannot heat evenly on an induction cooktop.

p111og writes: "The users' manuals do warn against using warped or non-flat pans."

They do indeed. The user manual of our current induction cooktop (LG model LCE80345) even has an illustration of a ruler placed edgewise across an inverted pot to instruct how to check for flatness. That whole section of the user's manual is a bunch of pure hokey, probably copied from some other manufacturer's user manual for a thermal glass-top cooking appliance in order to save on the costs of hiring a technical writer.

(Because non-radiant thermal cooktops generally transmit heat across surfaces more efficiently when there is surface to surface physical contact, the flatness argument makes sense when the energy transfer from cooktop to pot is in the form of heat; in an induction cooktop, the energy transfer is in the form of an oscillating magnetic field, and air does not serve as an insulator against transmission of magnetic fields.)

p111og continues: "As far as I can find out, the problem with pans with an outer ridge or other non-flatness, isn't that they won't heat. My cooktop will recognize and heat even my big double griddle/grill with the very deep ridges. The problem is the build up of hot air underneath. There's a potential for burns as one lifts the pan."

We own and frequently use a late 1930s or early 1940s cast iron Griswold No. 9 skillet that in cutaway would show a flattened capital M profile. That is, the skillet rests on the cooking surface entirely on its outer rim. and the slightly dished working portion of the skillet is held ever so slightly (perhaps 1/16") above the cooktop surface, and not in contact with it. There is therefore a void under the skillet that is completely contained by the outer rim; the skillet's rim sits very snugly against the cooktop all the way around, but I am certain that it does not make a hermetic seal with the top of the cooktop. We never, ever, ever have seen any evidence whatsoever of significant hot air escape, and certainly nothing capable of causing burns, when we lift the skillet from the cooktop.

Moreover, any air trapped under the skillet (or under any pot that would have a sealed void between it an the surface) would be heated only by the underside of the pot above it. Because heat always flows from warmer regions to cooler regions across heat conductors, the air underneath the pot never could get hotter than the underside of the pot that is heating the air. Therefore, if the concern is that the heat on the underside of a pot will stress the Ceran cooktop and cause it to break, that concern should be much greater with a flat-bottom pot that makes full contact with the Ceran surface than it would be with a non-flat pot that provides a semi-insulating air cushion between the hot pot and the Ceran.

(Note: there could be a problem with putting a wet pot onto any glass-top or Ceran surface, or putting a dry pot onto a wet glass-top or Ceran surface, and heating the pot. Water trapped between the pot and the cooktop surface will turn to steam as the pot heats, and could do so quite explosively; but that is a different discussion.)

The first range I posted is Rangemaster, and it has the greatest chance of eventually coming here because they sell an almost identical AGA legacy ceramic cooktop range in the US, but not an induction version.

If induction continues to catch on here, hopefully we'll see greater choice. It's a big investment for companies, and I'm sure Diva failing wasn't encouraging for them.

Herring Maven, I believe you about the accuracy, and these issues are only repeated word of mouth. They don't actually record them in the manuals. I have always presumed they were weasel words. Yes, of course, the air (which does seem pretty well trapped, though not hermetic maybe) beneath my big griddle, can only get to the heat of the pan, but I can get my pans pretty darned hot. I've burned myself on the air reaching into a 350 degree oven to stir quickly. I can imagine if I got my grill up to 400 degrees and were trying to lift it hot with only potholders, rather than gloves, a burn could happen. It's not like lifting a saucepan or skillet with a handle. The handles are in the same plane as the grill and right at the surface level of the glass. I can imagine something spilling or other fluster reaction and wanting to move the grill in a hurry, etc. My impression (not anybody says so) is that if you did break the glass that way (would trapped moisture do it in this instance?) or get burnt that way that they decline to be held responsible because they told you not to.

The three ball feet is exactly what Demeyere use for their induction wok, and what the Gaggenau wok ring does. I'm sure your pans work on the same principle. What kind of pans are they? I've never seen any like that except for the D wok. The excitation goes up the feet into the sides and spreads both directions from there, instead of all having to spread up from the bottom. The bottom of the bowl is close enough to heat on its own, as well. This isn't the kind of thing they describe when they warn you not to. It's unusual. If it works, good for you. :)

I do believe Zartemis about the warping leading to unevenness. I've noticed a significant difference in heating in shaped pots I have between the surface that's actually in contact with the glass and the surface that's still close enough to be affected by the induction, but raised a bit. Unlike in the radiant heat case, it's not because of contact for thermal transmission, it's proximity to the inductors and the strength of the magnetic field.

"You implied that it's the big mean lawyers and regulators who are keeping European toys off American markets, "

marcolo - this IS NOT what I'm implying at all. I am saying that UL and litigation threats ADD TIME to a foreign appliance arriving on the market in the USA - that's all.

p111og writes: "The three ball feet is exactly what Demeyere use for their induction wok, and what the Gaggenau wok ring does. I'm sure your pans work on the same principle. What kind of pans are they? I've never seen any like that except for the D wok. The excitation goes up the feet into the sides and spreads both directions from there, instead of all having to spread up from the bottom. The bottom of the bowl is close enough to heat on its own, as well."

Our two pots with the three feet each are Nambutetsu (cast iron of a type made exclusively in the region near Morioka, Japan that formerly was ruled by the Nambu clan); ours were made by Iwachu. The feet are not ball-shaped, but are more or less triangular. The magnetic field of the induction cooktop interacts with the bowl-shaped pot directly; no significant portion of the magnetic field gets transmitted through the feet. I am sure that the pots would heat as evenly if the feet were made of wood or some other nonmagnetic material as they do with the cast iron feet.

The link below shows a pot identical to one of the two pots to which I alluded. (We purchased ours in Japan, but the product is the same.) Nambutetsu -- from any of the many casters -- is, and has been for 400 years, the best cast iron cookware in the world. There are many small artisan casters of Nambutetsu (Iwachu, however, is more industrial in size), and several of the artisan makers are officially designated by the government of Japan as "living national treasures."

Here is a link that might be useful: So-called tempura pot from Iwachu

p111og writes: "The three ball feet is exactly what Demeyere use for their induction wok, and what the Gaggenau wok ring does. I'm sure your pans work on the same principle. What kind of pans are they? I've never seen any like that except for the D wok. The excitation goes up the feet into the sides and spreads both directions from there, instead of all having to spread up from the bottom. The bottom of the bowl is close enough to heat on its own, as well."

Our two pots with the three feet each are Nambutetsu (cast iron of a type made exclusively in the region near Morioka, Japan that formerly was ruled by the Nambu clan); ours were made by Iwachu. The feet are not ball-shaped, but are more or less triangular. The magnetic field of the induction cooktop interacts with the bowl-shaped pot directly; no significant portion of the magnetic field gets transmitted through the feet. I am sure that the pots would heat as evenly if the feet were made of wood or some other nonmagnetic material as they do with the cast iron feet.

The link below shows a pot identical to one of the two pots to which I alluded. (We purchased ours in Japan, but the product is the same.) Nambutetsu -- from any of the many casters -- is, and has been for 400 years, the best cast iron cookware in the world. There are many small artisan casters of Nambutetsu (Iwachu, however, is more industrial in size), and several of the artisan makers are officially designated by the government of Japan as "living national treasures."

Here is a link that might be useful: So-called tempura pot from Iwachu

Herring Maven, that's very cool! Thanks for the link too.

I've been very tired. I meant that the Demeyere had the ball feet. :)

This is from Thermador:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/8/2693038/thermidor-freedom-auto-sensing-induction-cooktop-hands-on-video

Here is a link that might be useful: Thermador auto-sensing induction cooktop

*bump*

Has anyone installed a full surface induction unit yet? Can you write and tell us about it?

Would love to get some first-hand feedback on the Freedom Induction. I'm already behind schedule for ordering my appliances and am seriously considering this one. Is it really great? I mean REALLY great?

ellessebee :"Is it really great? I mean REALLY great?"

It is a gimmick. Guaranteed, ten years from now, full surface induction will have all of the cachet of 8-track tapes and Pet Rocks. Do you have a gas range now? Do you ever wish that you had a burner in between the burners that you already have? Do you have resistive electric (coil, glasstop, or ribbon radiant) surface cooking now? Have you ever really longed for the ability to move one of the burner surfaces two inches to the right and one inch to the rear?

I can remember when cars that could double as boats (that is, low-powered motorboats with wheels that were absolutely terrible as road vehicles) were the inevitable wave of the future, when we all assumed that business commuters in the future would use personal jetpacks on their backs and just whisk above rush-hour traffic. You don't hear much about amphibious cars or personal jetpacks any more; in a few years, you will get equally funny looks when you reminisce about the "promise" of the wonderful world of full-surface induction.

Italian made ILVE products like the 30" induction range are sold in the US with a CE certification and no UL cert.

"ILVE products are certified to CE and CSA standards allowing them free entry to all Member Countries within the European Union and other major world markets like USA. Presently ILVE distributes its products in more than 40 countries worldwide."

Zoneless is the configuration for $20k Electrolux commercial hobs and is not a fab-- it's called progress.

This is an example where UL certification is not holding products from the US market. There is no duty on Kitchen appliance imports from the UK, for example. CE certified AEG zoneless cooktops can ship with no VAT for about $1k plus $150 Fedex. Any electrician can hook these up to a standard 220 line.

More stuff to break. Very cool, but I really don't see the advantage. A bunch of ~4 inch coils aren't going to couple into a randomly placed pan as well as a single coil with a pan centered.