I own a relatively new Farberware 6-quart oval slow cooker and a '50s Nesco roaster of similar size and shape. I searched on line for information about whether a roaster could be substituted for a slow cooker.
I did find claims that roasters can function as slow cookers, but advice on optimum temperature settings was all over the map. Not a big deal, as I'm sure I could figure out the sweet spot for a very low simmer.
So far so good, but one thing has me wondering. The Nesco's lid is aluminum and has a couple of small vent holes, whereas slow cookers tend to have heavy glass lids with no vents. Should the Nesco's vents be a point of significant concern?
I like using the Nesco because the porcelain enameled insert is lightweight and far less clumsy than the heavy ceramic ones found on slow cookers. The Nesco is nicer to look at, its insert takes up less space in the dishwasher and tends to respond better to machine washing than the ceramic type.
What are your thoughts? Are the tiny vent holes or any other characteristics of a roaster reason enough to reach for the slow cooker instead?
I did find claims that roasters can function as slow cookers, but advice on optimum temperature settings was all over the map. Not a big deal, as I'm sure I could figure out the sweet spot for a very low simmer.
So far so good, but one thing has me wondering. The Nesco's lid is aluminum and has a couple of small vent holes, whereas slow cookers tend to have heavy glass lids with no vents. Should the Nesco's vents be a point of significant concern?
I like using the Nesco because the porcelain enameled insert is lightweight and far less clumsy than the heavy ceramic ones found on slow cookers. The Nesco is nicer to look at, its insert takes up less space in the dishwasher and tends to respond better to machine washing than the ceramic type.
What are your thoughts? Are the tiny vent holes or any other characteristics of a roaster reason enough to reach for the slow cooker instead?