It certainly gives more area to absorb heat from the fire. I don't see it providing an improvement on non flame heat sources unless the inside is a cleaning nightmare.
"If those fins are pressed into the sides so that you get the reverse pattern inside I can foresee a lot of effort being needed to keep the inside clean."
They are not.
I imagine the inside would be smooth.
But i'd double-check before purchasing.
It won't be popular. Why? Because it will be harder to clean on the outside.
Interesting that they don't show in inside of the pans. If those fins are pressed into the sides so that you get the reverse pattern inside I can foresee a lot of effort being needed to keep the inside clean.
As it happens I have a set of pans from the 50s that have a truncated conical shape that also heat the contents faster than parallel sided pans just as the blurb said (if I remember the blurb that came with them correctly) so this general idea isn't new.
Seems to me their one advantage only happens with gas stoves. A lot of consumers have electric stoves, which wouldn't benefit much from the fins.
In my estimation, the most efficient stove and cookware combination would be induction cooktop under special pots and pans that are multi-ply stainless with aluminum core, plus a seasonable carbon steel inner surface for saute and other fry pans. The sides and lid of the cookware should be insulated, perhaps with glass fiber batting, to vastly reduce heat loss to the ambient air. My induction cooker already heats stainless and carbon steel cookware at least as fast as a gas burner would. With insulated sides, it would be unbeatable.
If you don't have a gas (or open fire) cooking system it seems to be a waste of money.
An outer flared 'halo' base ring - detachable for cleaning - would channel the heat just as well, and probably easier to make.
I'm just wondering if they are suitable for use on an induction cooktop and, if so, whether they have found any improvements of this design over the normal pans.
Personally, I like the way Gadgeteer thinks. Why haven't pans been designed with integrated insulation?
In a sane society we would slowly phase out old pans and such with new more efficient designs and save mega tons of gas. Instead this will be only at max in a small amount of pans as a niche market or something.
Alternatively, make the bottom of the pot concave, ie bowed upwards in the center. The hot air would concentrate in the center pocket underneath the pot.
Or an outer skirt, a complement of above, as mentioned by The Skud
Of course both solutions only really suitable for gas.
Realistically an insulated outer cradle (nest) like a slow cooker or rice cooker using electric coil or gas would be most efficient. But a bit of a pain to clean unless the insulated outer is completely concealed in a smooth washable tub.
@ Koichi Matsui
"It won't be popular. Why? Because it will be harder to clean on the outside."
You clean the outside!
Interesting idea but too pricey. I'm also not sure how hot those metal handles would be over an open fire. For mountaineering I think I would want self heating MREs instead of these bulky pots to clean after every use. If you are going to carry the pans then it seems like I also remember a small enclosed folding stove years ago that pretty well held in the heat and used little fuel tablets.
surprised no one has mentioned the obvious thing - make sure you always put a lid on a pan. It heats one hell of a lot quicker and usually boils even when the gas is turned to simmer - and most pans are sold with lids!
Interesting... If I had a gas stove. It's also quite pricey.
Fretting Freddy the Ferret pressing the Fret
Where was this 100, 200 years ago? I noted an observation by design engineers testing variations on the rocket stove that they found the most important factor in efficient cooking was not heat creation, but heat transfer. I noted that almost every design I saw focused on heat creation. I designed (in my head) a stove with recessed pots. The pots would be constantly surrounded by the heat inside a chamber with only the tops sticking out. This would facilitate maximum heat transfer to the food. Add an insulated cover (glass?) and the heat would be trapped.
I plan on buying the Flare pot if it is not stainless/copper or stainless. I want cast iron/ceramic coating or glass. Those are the only two safe materials.
Haven't they heard of the Kelly Kettle or the Jetboil system?
Similarly, after going camping & not being happy with my cheap, thin, teflon coated frypan, I went out shopping and blew $15 for a pre-seasoned cast iron fry pan. What an excellent pan! It cooks far superior to any of my former pans. Just the fact that it's kind of heavy & massive makes it cook evenly and well. I use it all the time, not just for camping.
Every gas-fired appliance in your home is required to have an exhaust duct to the outdoors, except for the gas-fired stove. It's products of combustion get blown right in your face. Before long the smoke and exhaust makes everything in your home grungy and yellow. Most people who have such stoves deny this, of course. Gas stoves work better than others during a power outage, and offer your best opportunity for self-asphyxiation.
Waste heat will rise, no matter WHAT the source is. Gas, electric, wood, it doesn't matter, so a pan that absorbs some of that waste heat make sense.
To insulate the walls of any pan would require it to be double-walled, that would be a much heavier pan, and more expensive.
An aluminum core would be nice, since aluminum tranfers heat well, but silver would be much better (if we are designing the best pan/pot) as I believe nothing transfers heat better.(however, no food contact to aluminum as it has been linked to Alzheimer's.)
Lids should be made from poor heat conductors to lose less heat. And it would be useful if they had a dishwasher safe inagrated thermometer. (Color change?)
Those fins on these new pots would be more effective if they were not vertical, but spiraled to slow down and absorb more of the waste heat.
(I am assuming, the number of fins is due to a math calculation, and more fins would not help.)
No you wouldn't want MREs, because you still need to carry a pot to melt snow for water. A tablet fuel stove won't produce enough heat, either.
Gas canister systems like jetboil don't work when it gets cold and high enough and there's nothing for a kellykettle to burn above the treeline.
This idea was conceived mountaineering, and mountaineering is the only scenario where these pots display an unassailable advantage - melting snow can take hours each day and forces you to carry way more fuel than you'd otherwise need, particularly annoying when typically you're in a situation where every extra gram counts.
Mountaineers and many hikers are some of the most gear-obsessed early-adopters on the planet, and they would buy these things in a heartbeat at whatever price - but not when they're made of steel and likely way a ton.
Maybe they need to be steel for the thermodynamics to work, but the best marketing strategy for mine would be to make a top-line light-weight mountaineering set for the hard-core. It would allow an inroad for the home cooking versions, too - open minded, wealthy people would get exposed to them while doing their fully supported $60k Everest / $150k seven summits "expeditions", and would likely go on to purchase a set for home, both for the environmental benefit and as a less ostentatious way to announce to dinner guests that they've been to the top of the world than the standard set of prayer flags on the deck and crossed ice-axes above the fireplace.
When using a very inexpensive small 1 litre Ikea 365+ pan, I can boil 700cc of water in less than a minute using my commercial 4x3,5kW induction range. This is waaay faster than my 2x6kW gas burners sitting next to the induction unit. The units come from Angelo Po's Gamma range and they are installed in my domestic kitchen.
The gas burners only shine when using heavy cast iron skillets or pans that you want burning hot. Gas burners heat the pans hotter and heat even the sides.
Induction is really the way to go.