Since the DCS was mentioned with the dual stack burners I can say multiple times I have made brown rice for 2 servings and keep it on simmer on my DCS for up to 1/2 hour. No further cooking or sticking. I have done the same with mashed potatoes. I love having dual stacked simmer on all of the burners of the DCS range. Not comparing it to the culinarian, it wasn't available 2 1/2 yrs ago. At the time I bought it I wanted a Wolf but it right in the middle of the major burner problem Wolf had.

foodonastump... Test results you asked for.

Capital Culinarian 23k btu burner...Simmer plate temp after 15 mins 244.7 degrees

Bluestar..... 8k btu simmer plate temp after 15 mins 206.5 degrees

Part of our testing today included cooking rice which we filmed. We cooked

Jasmine Rice (1 cup rice to 2 cups of water)
Basmati Rice (1 cup rice to 2 cups of water)
Long Grain Rice (1 cup rice to 2 cups of water)
Brown Rice (1 cup rice to 2 1/2 cups of water)

All rice came out fine with no burning at all. While we did not have any problems today I have spoken to the factory and backed that conversation up with an email which included a link for this thread.

Should any of Eurostoves past, current or future customers have a particular problem with simmering on the Culinarian, please send me an email with name and address details and we will send you a simmer plate at no cost to you in an effort to alleviate a simmer problem you might be having.

It should be noted that simmering temps actually relate to the temp of the food not the pan. We did another test where we boiled 1 gallon of water then let it simmer for 5 hours if i recall correctly and the water sat at 157 degrees well within the accepted range for simmering.

I should note that while I'm experiencing simmer clicking on the burners, and a couple of them seem to simmer hotter than the others, we cooked rice three times this weekend (brown, basmati, and calrose) and had no issues with burning.

We used Calphalon Commercial hard anodized pots and the rice came out perfectly every time, even on one of the burners that seems to have a hotter simmer.

Trevor - Thanks for the quick and forthcoming response, esp. considering you'd have probably preferred opposite results.

IMO out of top end, low end and heat distribution, the low end simmer would be my least concern on a gas range since there are several ways around it as long as it's within reason. America's Test Kitchen offers as simple a solution as roll up a ring of aluminum foil and place it on the grate in order to raise the pot. Hey, whatever works. But anyway, since many of these brands advertise their low simmer, I think this is useful information. Thanks again!

Just as a matter of interest the Wolf all gas simmer was 221.4 degrees

I uploaded a video today to show the results of our rice cooking yesterday, for right now its on "You Tube" we will add it to the website for everyone to see later today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBUYj9yHy78

Foodonastump... I expected the test results to be what they were with Bluestar having a lower temperature on the simmer plate, having said that I hope we have proved you can simmer on the Culinarian. We are running more tests today.

" * deeageaux (My Page) on
Sat, Mar 12, 11 at 18:07
To paraphrase an old Mexican saying--- Those that do not know God will kneel to any idol. lol"

Yes I suppose your saying is true. lol
Burners with 16-17.5---> 22-23 K BTU are generally in the same neighborhood in the scheme of things.
You need to look at a real wok burner if you want to see an appreciable difference. 100K+ some as high as 250K.

a fire breathing dragon-

Here is a link that might be useful: Wok Hei

"It should be noted that simmering temps actually relate to the temp of the food not the pan. We did another test where we boiled 1 gallon of water then let it simmer for 5 hours if i recall correctly and the water sat at 157 degrees well within the accepted range for simmering."

I am assuming the 157 is the cullinarian?---So about a difference of 87 degrees between the simmer plate and the gallon of hot water.

I lost the "simmer race" to Mojavean's Bluestar. I simmered 8 cups (half gallon)for several hours and the water was 119 degrees F (alto I chose a temp setting of
1 instead of 0, on the Elux Induction)

From Memory (dangerous), I think Mojavean did 112 F ,so we adds about 87 F to that and we come up with 199F hot plate temp, pretty close to your "206F" so this matches the data that Mojavean was able to obtain with his simmer burner.

I think you have more than proven that the "Cull can Simmer" but for the "Doubtin' Thomasses" here, I hope Mr Kalsi does take you up on your suggestion for a smaller burner, maybe optional---if for nothing else just to keep the "Flack Down'

Thanks for an honest and informative post, (I keep telling other "sales/service types" here on GW to read your post----They might learn something----Ya Thinks????

Gary

Thanks trevor. it didn't look like the flames shot over the 6.5" pan either.

trevor's rice video

Trevor: Thanks for a posting the actual results of a "Real World" test which tend to bear out the concerns of several folks on the forum. My following remarks are meant to be constructive and in no way "Throwing bricks at you or Mr. Kalsi".

The Eurostove web site claims for the Culinarian include "Low Simmer 138". The Capitol website states "True Simmer of 145". Your latest test shows the Culinarian low simmer to actually be 244.7.

I disagree with your statement "It should be noted that simmering temps actually relate to the temp of the food not the pan." That would be entirely dependent on the size of the pan, thickness of the pan's bottom and sides and the amount of food in the pan. A heavy, thick stock pot with a gallon of water would yield a lower temp than a 4", thin bottom pan with 2 Oz of liquid . I would think and expect if the Culinarian is advertised to simmer at say 150 then that would be the maximum temperature a pan or simmer plate would get.

How important is this difference in the advertised capability of the Culinarian and its actual capability in daily cooking - I would think not much. Would it keep me from purchasing a Culinarian - absolutely not. However, and I am not an engineer, there is a very simple and inexpensive solution that would solve all of the actual and perceived problems with the Culinarian simmer.

Simply have a "Bonnet", or whatever the top of the burner is called, manufactured with ALL of the holes in the outer two rings filled or not drilled leaving only the inner ring of holes open and then match the burners orifice/jet to match the reduced number/area of the "Bonnets" holes to yield a 5K to 7K burner. I have never seen a Culinarian burner and I am assuming the orifice/jet is removable.

If this were done Capitol and/or Eurostove could offer a Culinarian customer one "Bonnet" and orifice/jet at no cost or very little cost. Any additional "Simmer Kits" could be sold at a reasonable cost to those what need/want more than one simmer burner. Making a "True" simmer burner is not rocket science or expensive.

Again, my comments are not meant to be malicious in any way and are provided to help improve the product.

Burners with 16-17.5---> 22-23 K BTU are generally in the same neighborhood in the scheme of things

Nonsense.

A sealed burner is about 28% efficient. The Culinarian 23K open burner is 52% efficient.

Not same neighborhood. Not same city.

If I could safely and within reasonable cost ventilate a 200k wok burner inside my house I would get one.

I grill outside. I don't want to do all my cooking outside.

Trevor,

Will you throw a bag (1lb)of chocolate chips on a burner to melt them and keep melted for about 30 min?

My wife makes a lot of chocolate dipped treats and melts a lot of chocolate. I have seen this test with all the other manufacturers just not capital. The dual ring sealed burners and the BS smaller burners have no issue with this. Since the CC burns hotter I'm not sure how this will turn out.

Also, sorry, when I originally started this post, I was just trying to get some real world experience input on the CC and not start a witch hunt. Thanks for your participation in the thread.

Tony,
You keep referring to the smaller burner wasting less gas but I honestly think that the amount of gas (if any) you would save is negligible.

I will admit that when I got the new burners, I left the old small burner I had on there for my smallest pans. This was more due to the diameter of heat rather than simmer. After reading this thread, I had a couple of chances to make rice and simmer some sauces and found that the properly adjusted new 23k burners maintained a lower simmer than the small burner. Next weekend, I plan on replacing that burner and orifice to the 23k as a result. Now, if they had a small burner that had the center plate and better positioned ignitor like the new 23k burners, I suspect my results would have been slightly different. As it stands however, the new 23k burners maintained a low enough simmer that it doesn't matter to me.

Frankly, I find that the the 23k burners when turned down about half way cover the bottom of my smallest pan (about 5") just fine with very little side heating. That's certainly more heat output than the small burner on high.

Finally, I'd just like to remind everyone that about 2-3 years ago this forum was filled with discussions comparing Wolf with BS. The key points were BS are open burners but Wolf has "more versatile" burners because they were the same all around. As with any other product "feature", it's only a feature if the consumer in question wants it. I think Capital has done a great job with their burner fix and the current 23k burners are almost as hot as a restaurant range and the simmer is lower than I was able to get on the small burner on my BS without clicking. In my book, that's pretty much perfect.

Thanks amcook. I only mentioned the waste of gas/space once. After seeing videos, i agree that the flame doesn't spill out over a smaller pan to much.

after trevor's temperature test its obvious the the CC burns 36 degrees hotter than a small BS burner, on the lowest setting. All I'm after is to make sure this range can do everything i would ever need it to do, as advertised.

or maybe 36 degrees doesn't matter since it doesn't burn paper.

" * Posted by deeageaux (My Page) on
Tue, Mar 15, 11 at 2:53

Burners with 16-17.5---> 22-23 K BTU are generally in the same neighborhood in the scheme of things

Nonsense.

A sealed burner is about 28% efficient. The Culinarian 23K open burner is 52% efficient.

Not same neighborhood. Not same city."

The burner rating is expressed in BTUs(shortened from BTUs/hour), and reflects the output of the burner. It is a unit of heat.
Generally, a BTU is defined as amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one 1 pound (0.454 kg) of liquid water by 1 degree F (0.556 degree C) at a constant pressure of one atmosphere.

Efficiency relates to percent of combustion to obtain that heat.
A 16K burner puts out 16K and a 23K puts out 23K assuming the ratings are accurate. If Culinarian has a higher efficiency then it requires less gas to produce a BTU.

In considering what heat actually makes it to your food, you would further consider
cooking vessel-heat conductivity,shape,thickness, how much is going around the pan?
cooking platform-height, shape, heat conductivity
shape/configuration of burner
personal cooking style
food you are cooking, shape size, fluids
fuel pressure

At any rate 16-23k BTUs is roughly 10 percent of what you can get with a real wok burner. They are limited by being residential ranges.

Ice man..... Can you tell me where you see the temp ratings on the website, these are the temps when the Culinarian had 8k and 15k burners.

TonySak.... I will do that test for you but I would say it is the wrong way to melt chocolate, chocolate should be double boiled. I would be very surprised if the Bluestar or wolf could hold chocolate for 30 mins without standing and stirring constantly. where as double boiled would sit for hours with no burning or stirring

At the end of the day this like all other ranges is not a perfect range, perfection is unobtainable for so many different people. Again like all other ranges this is a hunk of metal, YOU the consumer has to adapt your style of cooking what do I mean by that

1) If you want to melt chocolate do it with a double boiler.
2) If you want to simmer a very small amount of sauce in a 4" pan use a simmer plate
3) If you have a 3" coffee pot use a plate.
4) If you want 30lb of turkey... cook two 15lbs turkey at the same time.

And so on.

Trevor, though I hold you in high regard I am going to have to raise the bullshizzle flag on this one. I think I can do every single one of those things on my Bluestar without any problem except for the coffee pot thing. You see, I just don't have a 3" coffee pot. Although there is some disagreement in official circles as to exactly how big my coffee pot is:

I think my coffee pot is too large to qualify for the test. However, I can probably test everything else out except for maybe the 30lb Turkey.

Although I am sure I could fit one of those into my Bluestar, around here once a Turkey reaches 30 pounds it automatically wins the Republican Primary for our California Assembly slot and becomes ineligible for dinner.

Well, ya lucky Mojavean, The "Turkeys" that are in high positions in our state Govt as well as our State & US Senators & Now Minority Spokes person all are considerable over 30 lbs and they are all hens, If you think a 30Lb turkey "leaves a Mess"---just look at what these Bigger Things did to
"Fowl Us UP" !!!!!

Too bad the Republicans chose to run turkeys too for the
Senate, and Govenor!

I was really hoping , in my life time I would see Boxer go Down!!! I guess it's not to be! Well at least she came in handy Larning Chairman Mao, Castro, as well as Russian and
North Vietman & North Korea How to be Left.

Been following her since I was a young kid, and she to the Left of all of those!!!

To get back "On Point"!!!!!

hmmmmm, they have those Shrimp Boils or whatever ya calls them. Lets circle up all our Wolves, Cullies, BlueStars, what have ya and Let's Do a "Real Turkey Boil"!!!!!
Throw the turkeys in from both parties, and the cr--
that has "Risen to the top" along with it!

Gary

mojavean.... Not sure I said the bluestar could not do all the things listed above, if that is what came across I apologize for that.

The point I was trying to make was IF someone finds the CC won't do something, there is away around a problem. I have yet to come across any thing the CC can not do, but time will tell. Maybe the chocolate will burner to the base of the pan for tonight's video who knows.

North Korea? Chairman Mao? Gary, I think you need to check your induction cooktop for gas leaks!

Trevor, you said you would be surprised if a Bluestar could hold a pound of chocolate for 30 minutes. Since I can not only hold, but can probably devour a pound of chocolate in 30 minutes without the help of any range, I see no reason why my Bluestar cannot hold a pound for thirty minutes. In any case, when I get home I think I will run a test to see if I can do it. If nothing else, it might help you convince Kalsi to put a damned simmer burner on those ranges of his. Jeez, he's charging enough for them; it ought to at least be an option.

Lastly, I do hope you will realize that I hold Eurostoves, its owner, and the Capital Culinarian Range in the highest regard possible and I am only snooty about my Bluestar because I have confirmation-bias and it's happy hour in Fresno.

This forum needs a like button so i can like Mojavean's last comments.

I know about double boilers. If you do it, make sure you compare it to BS smaller burner.

mojavean.. I have absolutely no problem with anything you say at all, after reading your posts for years now i too hold you in high regard.

The reason I said that I doubt even a bluestar will hold chocolate for 30 mins is that everyone says tells me it's hard to melt chocolate without burning it, but having never melted chocolate before i haven no idea what will happen.

Chocolate melting can be a difficult subject. Look up conching and tempering chocolate sometime. And be sure to raise the Bluestar grate to it's highest position.

Now, my question for Trevor and Amcook, concerning the Culinarian, why not install the new (non-clicking-better-lower simmer flame 23K burner) but just the lower half and use the older 8K burner top and brass orifice? I am guessing the flow of the gas in the lower half of the burner is designed the same.. if so, you should now be able to set the flames on low to be smaller and still have fewer flames and a lower simmer.

Chocolate should be melted in a double boiler. That is standard practice for any pastry chef. I don't care if you are trying to melt chocolate with a Culinarian, Bluestar, Wolf or a hotpoint.

Results are in .......Wolf vs BS vs CC melting chocolate useing the smallest burner on the lowest setting from beginning to end.

Method
1 x lbs Chocolate
1 x 7 1/2" fissler saucepan
Stirred once at 15 mins
End time 30 mins

The result... ALL ranges melted chocolate without burning of any kind to the base of the pan or chocolate.

As for the double broiling pan as you would expect no issues what so ever, took a little longer to melt but no burning.

Alexr...never tried it but sounds like it might work, I heard of a customer who told me he used the new burner with the 8k btu orifice and filled in the two outer set of holes with exhaust gunk, then blackened with something.

Eurostoves or Capital would NEVER recommend this and it would of course involve possible warranty issues down the road.

We made a video of the above test which will be posted on the Culinarian website tomorrow for future customers reference.

Again no problem with the Culinarian simmer abilities.

BTW... I am sick of eating rice and chocolate, anyone want me to simmer a nice juicy steak :) .......lol

Trevor: The Low Simmer 138 degree temperature I quoted was from the Eurostove's Home Page http://www.eurostoves.com/ That temperature may have been for the Culinarian when it was originally produced with the 15K and 8K burners, but how do I as a consumer know that?

The True Simmer of 145 degree is from the 36" self cleaning range product info sheet on the Capitol Web Site: http://capital-cooking.com/product/382

I still say this simmer debate may be just an academic discussion that has very little impact on most Culinarian users, but it has sparked a heated discussion of what the real capabilities of the Culinarian are.

Can you work around this using things like a simmer plate -sure, but the info on both the Eurostove's and Capitol's web sites imply the Culinarian has a true simmer capability of 138 degrees or 145 degrees without any work a rounds including using a simmer plate.

138 or 145 is a long way from 244.7.

I for one appreciate your willingness to engage in conversations like this - Thanks.

I just put about 1/8 tsp of water in a 1/4 tsp metal measuring spoon and held a cigarette lighter under it. 18 seconds to boil.

Does this mean my lighter boils water faster than any range discussed around here? Of course not. It means that any quote like this is meaningless marketing propaganda unless the test variables are spelled out so that we can make true comparisons.

I don't for a second doubt that a CC can hold water at 138 deg, even though Trevor's simmer plate got to 244.7. Just a matter of the pot, what's in it and how much.

I doubt that we're going to see Consumer Reports do side-by-sides of CC, BS, DCS, Wolf, etc. anytime soon, so Trevor's experimental data is probably the best apples to apples we can hope for. I say we should thank him for that.

p.s. Let's not lose sight of the fact that at sea level "true simmer" is in the 195 to 211 deg F range. Anything below that is "truly not yet at simmer" and anything above is "truly boiling."

"I just put about 1/8 tsp of water in a 1/4 tsp metal measuring spoon and held a cigarette lighter under it. 18 seconds to boil."

There appears to be a lot of that going on out here in Fresno judging by the number of shopping carts out on the corners.

wekick,
Although your definition of BTU/h is accurate, I believe standard practice in the industry is to measure input gas volume and convert to BTU (about 1000 BTU per cubic foot). I do not believe a manufacturer is required to use an efficiency factor since that can vary due to numerous factors. AFAIK, no manufacturer actually uses a water temperature rise test to measure BTU/h output.

alexr,
I had the same thought but the new burners have ignitors that are very tightly fitted. That plus the fact that the small burners are all early/first production run burners which are actually slightly different than the current burner assemblies makes it unlikely it will fit. There is a risk if the fit is not perfect for there to be gas leakage from between the top and bottom halves of the burner assembly. I may attempt to adjust the ignitor on my small burner to see if I can get it closer to the ignition port. If so, then I'll be able to tune that to a lower level.

Thanks Trevor! See those results weren't so bad. I just wanted to find out what was fact and what was fiction (if any) compared to other units. I can't wait to get one.

Capital should give you a cut of gross sales just for putting up with us.

I would like to see how well the CC can cook a pancake when the batter is poured directly on the open burner. Can you do this test and compare the CC the BS and a traditional toaster oven?

TonySak.... Not sure what you mean by "poured directly on the open burner"

IceMan.... I will have the numbers on the Eurostoves home page removed as soon as possible, I never thought to look on that page, and I agree they are misleading in light of Capitals decision to change the burners.

The "real capabilities of the Culinarian" have now been established, the Culinarian can simmer, as of right now it has passed all tests without the use of a simmer plate, my point about using a simmer plate is, a customer has an option to use one if necessary, would I use one for rice, melting chocolate and such no i would just do it on the burner.

when the numbers for the simmer burner were done by the factory and myself they related to internal water temp "138 or 145".. "244.7." is the plate temp plate temp, two completely different temperature ratings.

I always enjoy these discussion and running tests, discussion like these push manufacturers and retailers to achieve, it also allows people who read the GW to have a much higher level of knowledge so they can help the sales person out in the appliance stores they visit......lol

I was kidding :)

oh duh... sorry, to eager to test i guess...lol

So much for the rice.

This, for many here, is the most important test:

The Culinarian cooks grits to perfection.

amcook, So you are saying BTU rating is strictly a calculated value? I wonder where efficiencies come from? I'm sure anyone who claims high effeciency will utilize that to make their calculations. It would be interesting to see INDEPENDENT, scientific data vs any manufacturer's calculations and tests that can be manipulated to place their product in the best light. I have heard some cast aspersions on the Culinarian's numbers in particular, but there really is no way of knowing how accurate and claims of BTUs and efficiency are on any burners. I think all of it is smoke and mirrors.

In my case it is irrelevant to my argument because we are comparing God to idols, and the difference is huge.

Wekick, I think efficiency with a gas stove is a moot point. A burner mixes oxygen with gas and an igniter lights that on fire. You got blue flame, thats about as efficient as you can get. Some stoves direct the btu's to the bottom center of the pan, some direct the flame to and around the sides.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize that directing the flame directly upwards and towards the bottom of the pan is probably more efficient than directing the flame towards the side of the pan.
From the standpoint of which stove turns the most potential btu's from the gas into an actual flame, they are pretty much all the same.

Ribs1,
There are many factors as listed in my post above that affect the way heat gets to a pan besides the BTU rating. Directing heat to the middle of the pan may be "efficient" but may not best for cooking in all situations. You could have one heck of a hot spot on a large cast iron frying pan, not so much on a copper pan though. In directing heat, you want to consider the size and composition of your pan if you are cooking with high heat. If you are saying that a sealed burner sends all the heat around the pot/pan, that would be more of an issue with a very small pan. I make caramel/candy frequently in a pan(the oldest Revere ware with the most copper) that is 7 inches in diameter on sealed burners and have no trouble with the sides getting hot. You can tell this right away. I have noticed it on a 1 qt pan though and use the smallest burner for that. Simmering is also a time when you want to disperse heat and not concentrate it to the center of the pan, hence a simmer plate.
It's just interesting that so much is made over calculations and theory. I have cooked on sealed and unsealed burners and really was surprised how well the sealed burners performed after reading so many comments about them.

This is a very interesting thread. I'm going to check the temp. of my Culinarian on simmer.

OK so I put 1/2" water in an 11" ss pan. I let it sit on simmer for 30 min. The water temp. ranged from 158 - 162 degrees. This was with the new burners.

Trevor: I am absolutely outraged at the way my new CC sitting in the mothballed livingroom cannot hold a simmer underneath the 3 lb steak my vegetarian child has left on its open burner. I'm pretty sure you need to test why a trussed machine cannot hold a flame compared with your cooking school's.... Please report back when you have been richly rewarded. Thank you. ;)

A sealed burner is about 28% efficient. The Culinarian 23K open burner is 52% efficient.

deeageaux - Just wondering where you got those figures? In Trevor's boil test between Culinarian and Dacor he took a gallon (8.34 lbs) of water from 74 to 212. Unless my math is wrong...

If 100% efficient that would take 1151 BTUs.

CC - 9:48
.163333 hours * 23000BTU/hr = 3756.67 BTUs
1151/3756.67 = 30.06% efficient

Dacor - 16:08
.268889 hours * 18000BTU/hr = 4840 BTUs
1151/4840 = 23.78

That would make the CC 26% more efficient. That's certainly not negligible, but nowhere near the 86% you're claiming.

p.s. Just for kicks I replicated the experiment as closely as I could at home on my lowly 2500W (8536 BTU) ceramic electric. 8.34 lbs as measured with a Salter digital scale, temps measured with a Thermapen, 10" diameter anodized aluminum stock pot, from a cold start on my cooktop.

Frigidaire - 12:51
0.214167 hours * 8536 BTU/hr = 1828 BTUs
1151/1828 = 62.96% efficient

I was at the Architectural Digest Design show yesterday and asked about the simmer and "rice effect". The rep from Alma said the burners could be easily adjusted to 145 degrees and not burn parchment paper for 20 min.
I am considering the cc as well and my family LOVES rice. Big deal for me.

I just got the new burners and wanted to test how they would perform on simmer. With the old burners, I had to adjust my timing a bit, but rice worked fine once I shortened the boil and lengthened the steaming time.

With the new burners, I did this: heat a 5" saucier to boiling (100C, measured). Then turned the burner down to simmer. At 3 minutes from boil, it had cooled to 93C and was bubbling intermittently. At 6 minutes from boil, it had cooled to 91C with no bubbles.

I'll cook rice tonight, but I can't imagine any problem given how quickly the temperature dropped.

Glad I logged back in to GW!

I've been absent from these boards for a long time. I received a Culinarian in November but due to construction I didn't move into my kitchen until the end of February. I didn't want to worry until I had lived with the burners for a while, but I've been unable to get anything close to low heat or simmer... plus I had much more urgent issues to deal with after gutting the entire first floor of our house. Now I'm ready to tackle the Culinarian issues.

Looks like the "new" new burners must be the answer... time to call Trevor.

Like many of you are saying, if I could have a "dream" rangetop on my 30" range, it would be 3 of these big burners that also would simmer well, plus 1 burner with a smaller flame pattern. I find that the flames spread too wide when I use small pans. Sometimes you want a bunch of heat but are using a small pan. I find that's really difficult and I am not comfortable with flames leaping all around the outside of a small pan.

zillapgh, that is the same point I made on another thread. Thanks for expressing it so well.

Just want you all to know that I did contact Trevor and I'll be getting the updated burners. I am so excited for the upgrade! We are huge basmati rice eaters here and we like it on the dry side.

I love this forum - I always find someone with the exact question here, and I am really glad I ordered everything from Eurostoves. They behave much more like what we're supposed to find in "local" businesses than any of our "local" appliance places.

I have the new burners and I've cooked rice twice now.

I've done so in an enameled dutch oven with a tight lid, and using this recipe (cooking the same medium grain sushi rice):

http://justhungry.com/2003/11/japanese_basics_1.html

And I have to tell you I have cooked the rice just a bit too much both times.

I think it might have to do with the recipe.

This is meant to be dry, sticky, true Japanese-style rice. Not much moisture in the pain after the 10 minute simmer.

I'm not sure if it has to do with the pot. Would a stainless pot do better?

Next time, I'm going to try sitting the pot on top of a double burner grate stack and try adjusting the heat.

I suppose I could also adjust up the amount of water in the recipe, but I'm more hesitant to do that (this is a really perfect recipe, with just the right kind of sushi stickiness to it).

Will report back.