Replacement cooker hood filter reducing airflow

[ericmark]

In passing (since you mention them) I really don' understand why "air fryers" are called "air fryers", or why there is so much interest/excitement related to them - they are surely just small fan ovens, nothing more, nothing less, aren't they?

It seems down to the way it directs the heat, the shape of the pan is critical to directing the air around the unit. But using a silicon rubber thing to make them easy to clean, gets rid of all the advantages, and makes it just like a small fan oven, and it is no longer an air fryer.

 

[JohnW2]

It seems down to the way it directs the heat, the shape of the pan is critical to directing the air around the unit. But using a silicon rubber thing to make them easy to clean, gets rid of all the advantages, and makes it just like a small fan oven, and it is no longer an air fryer.

Possibly, but I'm very far from convinced that there is a material difference between the air circulation in an "air fryer" and a fan oven, particularly in the case of those many "air fryers" that have a food container within them which has solid walls.

 

[aveatry]

Possibly, but I'm very far from convinced that there is a material difference between the air circulation in an "air fryer" and a fan oven, particularly in the case of those many "air fryers" that have a food container within them which has solid walls.

The difference is that an air fryer can feed 1 person and an oven can feed 4 in one go. Air fryers are great for people who live alone and do not know how to cook

 

[JohnW2]

The difference is that an air fryer can feed 1 person and an oven can feed 4 in one go. Air fryers are great for people who live alone and do not know how to cook

That's exactly what I've been saying - that "air fryers" are simply small fan ovens

... and I certainly don't think that what happens in an "air fryer" really corresponds with what most people would (at least, if they thought about it!) consider to be 'frying'. To my mind, 'frying' is what happens when food is cooked by being in contact with very hot fat/oil, whereas it is hot air which does the cooking in an "air fryer".

 

[Why Not Indeed]

They were invented by a Dutchman for cooking chips which are called 'frituur' [something like that] and he called it a 'fritair', which is presumably a neat pun in Dutch. For marketing purposes this was changed to 'air fryer'.

To my mind, 'frying' is what happens when food is cooked by being in contact with very hot fat/oil

Try making some chips in an air fryer without oil and tell me how satisfactory you think the end result is.

whereas it is hot air which does the cooking in an "air fryer".

Same as a fan oven. Why not call a fan over an air oven? The fan isn't in contact with the food. Etc.

At the end of the day, common names for things don't always appeal to one's own sense of logic. Nobody is being defrauded by the name "air fryer" and it's a lot more concise than "countertop compact fan oven".

To try and keep this vaguely on topic, my air fryer seems to do a good job of containing cooking fumes.
I made the effort to "plumb in" our recirculating cooker hood recently and this makes a massive difference to indoor air quality. If only I could convince the Mrs to actually turn the bloody thing on every time.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

The difference is that an air fryer can feed 1 person and an oven can feed 4 in one go. Air fryers are great for people who live alone and do not know how to cook

I was persuaded to buy one, a few years ago, by a friend who suggested 'they were great', so I bought a cheapie to try. I found it OK for just cooking a small amount of food, but I stopped using it, because the basket was near impossible to properly clean. A couple of years ago, we bought some liners to try with it, but never did, until this thread.

For speed, Avril began making the Sunday roast potatoes in the chip pan, but doing that, made a bit of a mess of the fat, so extra effort needed, to strain the fat. Last Sunday, I suggested trying the air fryer, with it's new silicon liners. It took a full hour, to brown the roasties, so may not get used again.

 

[JohnW2]

Try making some chips in an air fryer without oil and tell me how satisfactory you think the end result is.

Not quite as satisfactory as with a tiny coating of oil, but not uneatable. Same with 'roasted vegetables' cooked in a conventional or fan oven - oil is not essential, but produces a more satisfactory result. However, as I've said, unlike 'real' frying (shallow or deep) it is primarily the hot air within an oven (whether 'blown' or not) that does the cooking, even if there is a tiny amount of oil present, whereas with 'true frying' it is actually the hot oil/fat in contact with the food which primarily does the cooking.

Same as a fan oven. Why not call a fan over an air oven?

They might well have coined that term, but clearly didn't. In fact, they tend to be called "convection ovens" these days, which id pretty close to "air oven".

At the end of the day, common names for things don't always appeal to one's own sense of logic.

Indeed - as I wrote, despite our use of things like "roast beef", "roast vegetables" and "nut roasts", it's really all 'baking', since very little true roasting is done these days. It's all very inconsistent, since we also have ('correct') 'baked apples', 'tray bakes' etc

Nobody is being defrauded by the name "air fryer" and it's a lot more concise than "countertop compact fan oven".

I'm not sure that "defrauded" is the right word, but an awful lot of people seem to think that what they are doing is, in some way, more like true frying when they do it in one of the small ap;liances than when they do exactly the same thing in a 'full-sized' oven - so maybe confused or misled, rather than 'defrauded'.

To try and keep this vaguely on topic, my air fryer seems to do a good job of containing cooking fumes.

They do. They presumably have to be relatively air-tight in order to make them reasonably efficient?

I made the effort to "plumb in" our recirculating cooker hood recently and this makes a massive difference to indoor air quality. If only I could convince the Mrs to actually turn the bloody thing on every time.

I'm sure that's true, but there can be downside. Most of our cooking is done on a gas (LPG) Aga,, which has a flue in continuity with the oven cavities. As a result, it's far from unknown for oversight on our part to result in food items being 'burnt to a cinder', without the slightest 'giveaway smell', since all the smells and smokes had, literally, 'gone up the chimney' - as was this recent case with some croissants ....

 

[EFLImpudence]

Just the first site that came up when asked "How do air fryers work?"

How Does an Air Fryer Work?

Air fryer recipes are sweeping the nation, but what is an air fryer and how does it work? Here's the lowdown.

www.tasteofhome.com

"This rapid circulation makes the food crisp—much like deep-frying, but without the oil."

So- IF that is true (is it?) would not the name 'air-fryer' be acceptable and accurate?

 

[JohnW2]

"This rapid circulation makes the food crisp—much like deep-frying, but without the oil."

I'm far from convinced that that is particularly true but, even if it is ....

So- IF that is true (is it?) would not the name 'air-fryer' be acceptable and accurate?

... I would say 'no', since even if it did produce results similar results to frying, I would still not regard it as frying.

If I start with a 'sawn' piece of timber, I can end up with essentially identical results by 'smoothing' it with either a plane or, say, a belt sander. However, although that is true in terms of the results, I don't think anyone would dream of calling a plane a sander, or vice versa, since the names relate to 'what they do' ('how they do it'), not the results obtained.

 

[EFLImpudence]

... I would say 'no', since even if it did produce results similar results to frying, I would still not regard it as frying.

Ok, fair enough if that's what you think.
I suppose, strictly speaking, I must agree although the general population is not as fussy.

If I start with a 'sawn' piece of timber, I can end up with essentially identical results by 'smoothing' it with either a plane or, say, a belt sander. However, although that is true in terms of the results, I don't think anyone would dream of calling a plane a sander, or vice versa, since the names relate to 'what they do' ('how they do it'), not the results obtained.

Ok, but I'm not sure 'what they do' is always the same as 'how they do it' and separate from 'the results obtained'.

A boiler doesn't but it's not a kettle which does.

 

[JohnW2]

Ok, fair enough if that's what you think. I suppose, strictly speaking, I must agree although the general population is not as fussy.

I've never suggested that I am at all 'fussy' - it doesn't really matter to me. I have merely made an observation about what I find an 'interesting' (and not particularly logical) modern use of words. It's really you who sometimes 'fusses' or complains about language having evolved in such a way that current 'common usage' is not, strictly speaking, 'correct'.

Ok, but I'm not sure 'what they do' is always the same as 'how they do it' and separate from 'the results obtained'. A boiler doesn't but it's not a kettle which does.

Yep, inconsistencies (and inaccuracies) all over the place. "Kettle" doesn't imply anything about what they do, or how they do it (in fact, it's just a name for a type of container). However, it wouldn't have surprised me if you complained about a "boiler" which didn't boil anything.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I've never suggested that I am at all 'fussy' - it doesn't really matter to me.

Except for 'lamp' and 'continuity' and...

I have merely made an observation about what I find an 'interesting' (and not particularly logical) modern use of words. It's really you who sometimes 'fusses' or complains about language having evolved in such a way that current 'common usage' is not, strictly speaking, 'correct'.

Yes, I know. That's why I reluctantly thought I had to agree with you.

Yep, inconsistencies (and inaccuracies) all over the place. "Kettle" doesn't imply anything about what they do, or how they do it (in fact, it's just a name for a type of container). However, it wouldn't have surprised me if you complained about a "boiler" which didn't boil anything.

What do you think I was doing - if not complaining about boiler?

 

[JohnW2]

Except for 'lamp' and 'continuity' and...

Those are a couple of things which 'irritate' me a little, but I fully accept that such use of word is not going to go away - so, whilst I may 'observe', or voice my personal 'irritation', I don't really complain - since there would be no point.

Yes, I know. That's why I reluctantly thought I had to agree with you.

No one is forcing you to agree with me - so, if you are 'reluctant', you really don't need to.

What do you think I was doing - if not complaining about boiler?

I suppose I thought that you were merely 'observing' (just as I have been doing), rather than 'complaining'.

Are you happy for MCBs etc. to be called "fuses", on the basis of what they achieve?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Oh, FFS. What is wrong with you?

 

[JohnW2]

Oh, FFS. What is wrong with you?

Nothing I am aware of. In return, I have to ask what is your problem?

I accept language as it is, and how it has evolved into what is 'current common usage'. I sometimes comment on it, if I find it strange, illogical or whatever (sometimes even 'misleading' and/or 'counterproductive', and I indicate what aspects of modern language tend to irritate me. However, once something has become common usage, I don't describe it as 'incorrect' or 'complain' and certainly have no wish nor expectation that it should be changed or corrected. I certainly don't believe that the only 'correct' language is that which was 'accepted' when I was first learning it.

You appear to differ from me in most of those respects, which is your prerogative, and fine. Life would be very boring if everyone thought the same and agreed with everyone else!