hey all
I’ve got a client that is interested in an AGA. we’ve read the promotional lit. about how they are great to cook on and don’t really heat a room up that much. But really, what are they like? Is it unbearable hot on a hot day to be around them? Is it true that once you go AGA you never go back? Do the gas bills go though the roof?
As the one arrragnging for the installation, I’d also be interested in any experience in installation, warenty issues, shipping, dealer issues, et. c.
Bring it on. Give me the good, bad and ugly about these pricey monsters.
Thanks
Frank
Edited 8/16/2002 4:55:37 PM ET by hammerthumb
Replies
they are definitely a centerpiece of a kitchen. I have cooked on one and found it to be quite impressive, but not significantly better (or worse) than a DCS, Wolf, or Viking. They will heat a room.
I believe the gas consumption is about 4x a conventional range.
Jeff...No stove expert here but in my new / old 322 year old house theres a six burner Viking stove that I loved seeing....They any good? Looks awesome? Love gettin' back to gas again.
Thanks.
Be well
Namste'
AndyIt's not who's right, it's who's left ~ http://CLIFFORDRENOVATIONS.COM
Andy,
the Vikings are first class cooking units, all the way. My gripe about the vikings is that cleanup can be a little bit of a chore in two areas: 1) there isn't a good drip pan under the burners that slides out (like the Thermadore ranges), and 2) the range sits on legs that elevate it off the floor... stuff gets underneath.
The burners on the viking are very good, and that's the heart of any gas range. I do wish they would make the interior dimensions of the oven slightly larger, but the oven itself is very nice to cook in.
I don't care what anyone says about the price... if you are a cook, you appreciate what these ranges bring to the table. Yes, they do cost a lot of $$, but if you amortize that over the service life, which is very long relative to typical household kitchen appliances, you come out with a different value equation. My wife and I both cook, she is a graduate of the Cordon Bleu (which incidentally, has a lot of Aga equipment!), and I wouldn't downgrade our kitchen even if you paid me to do it.
Did I tell you we only bought the Viking, wait, only afforded the Viking, because we lucked into a deal from a woman who was allergic to the propane exhaust? Yeah, cleaning it can be difficult. My wife loves the griddle, though. And I like eating what she cooks.Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Dragging this back off topic, the item I've seen recently in the mag (current issue) that bothered me was the architects house in MA with a heated courtyard so he wouldn't have to shovel snow....250,000 BTUs devoted to it. This may be really common (I've never seen it), I'm not disputing his right to do what he wants to with his money, but it bothered me. It also seemed to be kind of counter-architectural; instead of building for the climate he lives in, he's trying to out-muscle normal winter weather.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
kinda like air conditioning?
Adrian, it kinda bothered me too, so I asked him about it. The heated area was a courtyard, enclosed on three sides. There was no place to plow or blow snow to, and he felt that heating the courtyard was the best option. Other points to consider are that he only heats the courtyard when the weather threatens, and the surface only needs to get slightly warmer than freezing. Subtract from the equation the gas that snow removal equipment would use. Before my back went south I'd have said, "What's wrong with a shovel?" But now, I'm not so judgemental. My guess is that the heated slab does in fact use more energy than, say, a Honda snowblower. And I don't think I'd have one at my own house, even if I could afford to.
Not to beg the question, but to broaden it, do we question the energy used by the folks who use say, snowmobiles, speedboats or recreational airplanes? At least a heated courtyard is quiet <G>.
Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Andy
I have to agree. Same with airports that use heated runways..the amount of time its used is for the most part minimal and quiet is a factor for sure. Theres a lot of give and take inthis world and a whole lotta faciors to weigh out. Technology and history proves to be whats right or wrong or inbetween only in the future unfortunatly. I kinda once , maybe twice thought of designing a 2' heated runway mat of low voltage electric to roll up a driveway and front path for the elderly during bad winter months.....Is THAT a bad idea?
Be well
Namaste'
AndyIt's not who's right, it's who's left ~ http://CLIFFORDRENOVATIONS.COM
Having once been diverted from Hartford, where my truck was parked, to JFK because of icy runways, I'm wholly in favor of heating them. FYI, a one-way car rental between JFK and Bradley costs $80.Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Bring me your heated driveways, your Aga cookstoves, your F-250's running to town and back on a tank-and-a-half of gas, your AC and oven fighting it out in the kitchen, and maybe we'll get it warm enough up here in the winter to actually enjoy ice fishing.
Talkeetna, AK
But you'll have to put pontoons on your "Ice" fishin shack
TDo not try this at home!
I am a trained professional!
I don't think any of this will help much, but Aga's and Rayburn's are standard country kitchen items in the UK. No farmhouse, i.e., a real farmhouse with real fields, real cattle and real crops would consider themselves to be anything other but toy or trophy farms unless these monster workhorses are in place. These ranges feature prominently in farm kitchens along with the obligatory stack of Labrador's, Setters, Collie's, Jack Russell's, mongrel's half a dozen cats, and in the spring the occasional orphan lamb, goose or duck, (or all three orphan types together- unbelievably, but true) some wet Wellington boots, sweaty socks, and an old anorak or two, and all hanging either out, or up, to warm and dry out on a cold winters day-- don't forget that chap handed humans also relish warming their hands next to the 2 gallon kettle permanently set on the ring for a quick brew at a moments notice too at break times when it's as parky as hell outside.
A traditional Aga has that feel of indestructible solidity, about 6' to 8' wide depending on the model, and is loaded with anthracite-- a form of coal-- on the first of September, and reloaded twice a day with more of that stuff continuously for the next six or seven months, after which a wee light loading once a day, and some choking down, will do it during the summer. Nowadays, they've gone all trendy and yuppified, and they actually feature--shock horror, gas and oil burners, and they can be turned on and off. What is the world coming to? They--Aga's-- in my childhood memories were a workhorse of the farmhouse kitchen. They warmed the house, warmed the kitchen, cooked the food, heated water for the bath, and in really modern places (sic) heated water for the central heating. I told you that none of this would be any use, but I can tell you that both Aga and Rayburn are reputable brands from, er, that disreputable country, the UK. Slainte, RJ.
Edited 8/16/2002 10:19:51 PM ET by Sgian Dubh
The AGA is quite good at roasting, slow cooking, and cooking dishes that require a long simmer (think crock pot). All kinds of baking...breads, cakes, etc...it's also good at. Actually, it's quite good w breads. Bad points? Not neccessarily bad, but different, until you learn to cook the AGA way. You can't really cook anything on the burners that requires a large output of heat for an extended periord of time...say, boiling a large pot of water for pasta.
The range works on the principle of stored heat. A small flame heats an enormous mass (lots of cast iron), storing that heat for future use. If you dissipate a high percentage of that stored heat quickly (trying to boil a large pot of water on the hob) then it will take quite a long while to restore the stored heat. In the meantime, the temperature of the hobs (burners) and the ovens will drop, sometimes quite quickly. If you're cooking something in the oven when you drain the heat from the hob, you'll have to tack on extra cooking time for the dish in the oven.
What you need to do is start food on the hobs (burners) and finish it in the ovens. The hobs are good for rapid boiling...say, enough water for a couple cups of coffee or tea...or for frying or browning/sauteeing food. For lengthy cooking, you'll get the best performance out of your AGA by using both the hobs and the ovens.
There are no knobs to raise or lower temperatures. You regulate cooking temperatures by moving pots from the boiling hob to the simmering hob, or by moving pots nearer to, or further from the middle of the hot plates. When the hobs aren’t in use, you close their covers to conserve heat. The ovens work in a similar fashion. You move things from one oven to a hotter or cooler oven. The roasting oven is about 400-450 F. The baking oven is 300-350 F. The simmering oven is about 250 F, and the warming oven is about 150 F. All oven temperatures would vary depending on their proximity to the heat box and what you’re doing with the hobs on the top of the range. If you want the roasting oven to stay hot, you avoid using the hobs. On occasions, like holidays, where you’re doing a meal that will place big demands on the range, you can bump up the burner that heats the entire range, but you’ll want to do this a day in advance to store up extra heat. This will throw off your leanred knowledge of traditional cooking temps/times though, and that can screw with your cooking.
No cooking odors emanate from the ovens. AGA ranges are vented to the outside, including the ovens. You have to be careful or you can easily overcook dishes. You won’t have traditional food aromas to remind you to check on things. Due to the varying oven temps, cooking timers aren’t of much use either, you just have to get used to checking things on a regular basis. On the other hand, if a roast gets done long before you need it, you simply move it to the warming oven, where it will keep for hours, remaining juicy and pink on the inside and crisp and brown on the outside. No other range will hold food as perfectly as an AGA.
AGA’s don’t have a broiler, either. If you enjoy grilling or broiling, you’ll need to install a salamander, or have another oven with a broiler unit. Regardless of what the sales brochures or sales people will tell you, you cannot approximate anything like a broiler in a traditional AGA.
Would I want another AGA...maybe. But I wouldn't want to pay for it! I'd accept one if I lived in a place where year-round temperatures were mild, and where I had time to cook in a leisurely fashion. I’d still want a couple of extra gas burners. They do put off heat 24/7. In hot climes some people turn it off and use other means to cook. To me, that's just plain silly.
An AGA isn’t exactly economical to operate. Figure about 300 gallons of propane a year. It's output is something like 3200 BTUs/hr, 24/7. Remember about being tough to boil large amounts of wter on the hob? Think about boiling al large amount of water on a 3200 BTU burner. It' ain't gonna happen. Not fast, anyway. Physical heat output? Again, if I recall, it's compared to about 1000 watts of incandescent lighting. That's ten 100 watt bulbs. To me, that's a fair amount of heat. Relate the 3200 BTUs/hr of heat to needing a little over a quarter-ton of additional air conditioning to offest the heat from the AGA. Extra AC outlets are usually detailed to offset this heat gain in the kitchen.
Alternatives? To get the AGA look without the becoming encumbered (or enlightenened) with the AGA lifestyle, AGA makes a gas powered range that looks very similar to the traditional range. It has several regular gas hobs, and either gas fired or electric ovens with a real broiler. You’ll get the AGA look, but have a range that’s more aligned with traditional cooking methods. If you’re determined to have the traditional AGA range, you can order a two oven model with an attached module called AGA companion, The AGA companion has an electric or gas oven (broiler, too), with gas or electric hobs on top. Attaching the AGA companion (done by AGA, looks just fine) to a traditional range would give you a hybrid range that delivers the best of both worlds. Order them at the same time to ensure the enamel color matches.
I had an AGA for several years. I enjoyed it, but I don't miss it.
With the prices they (AGA) charge they're quite good about installation, service, etc.
All I can add to Mongo's excellent post is:1. You have to actually air condition the AGA itself
2. They get banged up a bit and the finish can chip
As noted they require a different approach to cooking, an adjustment sometimes known by some as AGA-ny.T. Jeffery Clarke
Quidvis Recte Factum Quamvis Humile Praeclarum
(Whatever is built well, no matter how humble, is noble)
"AGA-ny"
Clever! And acccurate.<g> A new word to add to my vocabulatory.
I keep thinking about the weekend house I photographed last summer. Middle of the week, hot weather, owners 100 miles away, and the Aga and the AC were slugging it out for supremecy. I'm not an eco-evangelist; I drive an F250 for no good reason except that I didn't want to sell it when I quit building. My wife drives a medium sized SUV. But the Aga v. AC offended me to no end.
Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Andy
I don't want to sound like any kind of crusader, but here goes.
The AGA story in the magazine in the recent past offended me so deeply that I wanted to cancel the subscription. My wife, a drafter, likes it enough that she talked me out of it and renewed it.
The whole consumption thing for the sake of appearances has got to stop. I know that this kind of thinking is bad for our industry, and if folks quit spending money we will all be in the market for new jobs, but really, a zillion dollar stove that never shuts off?
You reminded me of that sidebar story and had to get it off my chest.
DC
How do you know it's for the sake of appearance? Haven't you ever paid more for something because you liked the way it worked?
But even if the AGA was for the sake of appearance, what's wrong with that? Would you condemn the guy who buys a $700 wool suit because it looks better than the $150 polyester one? Or the guy who buys a pair of nice shoes to wear to church instead of polishing up his work boots every Saturday night? Or the family who picks a tile roof instead of composition shingles because it looks better? A lot of builders would be out of business if we all suddenly decided to go for no frills housing.
Edited 8/18/2002 2:02:16 PM ET by Uncle Dunc
Who says I meant because it is pretty?
I understand that we can't suddenly suggest that everyone live in 10x10 boxes wrapped in 90# felt. What we need to consider is that sometimes the most energy consuming alternative is not always the best.
Edited 8/18/2002 3:35:22 PM ET by DCASSII
You're the one who said "for the sake of appearances." Are you suggesting that anyone who buys and operates an AGA does so just to give the appearance of having more money? Mongo and Sgian Dubh told us the AGA works very differently than a conventional stove. So where do you get the moral authority to decide that AGA owners are showing off rather than buying that differing functionality?
I agree that the most energy consuming alternative is not always the best, but neither is it always or automatically the worst. Different people buy different satisfactions with their energy expenditures, and I very seldom have enough information about someone else's desires and resources to decide if he's making an optimal choice.
Uncle D
Guess I hit a nerve, eh?
I don't claim any moral authority, nor do I see suggesting that folks think about consequences makes me a moral authoritarian.
Looks like I'm the one who hit a nerve.
First you decided the AGA owner in the story bought it for the sake of appearances, based on no evidence that I remember seeing in the story. Then you decided using an AGA in that environment was so evil that it was wrong for FHB to report it. The magazine didn't endorse AGA. In fact, the tone of the story was decidedly cool. But to you, even having it in the magazine was deeply offensive.
"The whole consumption thing for the sake of appearances has got to stop," are not the words of someone who is suggesting that folks think about consequences. They are the words of someone who feels perfectly comfortable deciding whether other peoples' energy use decisions are right or wrong, sensible or senseless, based on little or no evidence of any kind. The words, in short, of a self-anointed moral authoritarian.
DCASSII, I don't have any proof for this, but I do intuitively believe that the old fashioned Aga's used intelligently, judiciously and to their strengths in their home country, i.e., the UK are probably not vastly fuel inefficient. The climate in the UK doesn't feature the extremes of temperatures that quite a few areas in Northern America feature, being generally neither so bitterly cold in the winter, nor blisteringly hot and humid in the summer. Aga ranges perform a lot of ancillary warming functions apart from cooking as I mentioned in my first post, and even keeping orphaned lambs, goslings and ducks alive in the inglenook next to the range are considered important functions to a Welsh, Cumbrian, or Scottish hill sheep farmer. They like their Border Collies, Labradors, and rat killing Jack Russell's-- cats too-- to keep warm also, for many of these animals are usually working partners. And having hot water on tap at the sink is also considered a benefit. There's lots of stored heat in all those fire bricks that can be utilised in different ways. My original post was put up rather tongue in cheek and was meant to elicit a wee smile here and there, but those 'plus points' I listed were quite seriously meant.
How well this venerable, old-fashioned, style of cooker fits into the various North American lifetyles is a question I can't answer. If the plan is to use the thing like a gas or electric cooker, turning it on and off as the owner fancies, then I'd say buying and installing one is a complete waste of time and money because they are designed to run every day, all year. Certainly the Rayburn-- a similar beast-- in my family (farm) home was operated this way.
On the other hand, I totally agree with you that buying fuel inefficient monsters is something to be discouraged. I currently live in the US and drive a Chevy Astro, and it, along with probably 80% to 90% of all vehicles I see driven in North America, qualifies as a fuel inefficient monster, and nobody in the US seems to bat an eye at that particular waste of a finite and valuable resource. Slainte, RJ.
RJFurniture
Edited 8/18/2002 8:20:09 PM ET by Sgian Dubh
RJ
Your farmhouse scenario makes a lot more sense than putting the stove in a 2-worker household where the only livestock is probably a couple dogs or cats.
DC
whenever I read an article about how trendy the Aga is, I admit to feeling the same way. But I am more uncomfortable with editorializing through a PC set of optics. Also, let's not loose sight of the reality that Ford's output of Expeditions and Excursions is an order of magnitude greater than the stoves that Aga builds annually.
JEFFN7
I didn't come here to editorialize thru any pc lenses. I had an opinion on an FH story and voiced it.
I'm one of the less pc folks I know.
Believe me, as a staff, we wrestle with the Aga issue. Like us, our readers love 'em for their beauty and hate 'em for their fuel consumption. In the right climate, as Sgian says, Agas make sense. And personally, I don't care how much someone pays for a stove. They're beautiful, and if you've got the scratch, why not spend it on objects that please your eye? Was it John Ruskin, that old lefty, who said, "Have nothing in your home that you don't know to be useful or believe to be beautiful." What offends me is the fuel consumption (Then there's that F 250 thing -- I'm just one walking contradiction <G>).
Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
It is a hairy issue, just like a lot of the things we install in the places we build.
If we are to quit installing fancy fixtures and using lots of resources to build big places, then we all are going to be on the sidelines. So what can you say?
Like you, I drive a big truck, so I'm no moral authourity on consumption. I do think, though that some thought ought to be given to more than just the immediate consideration.
At least you and I have the decency to feel guilty about our trucks <G>.
Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
The fine and subtle difference between consumption and waste has been the bone of contention in many an environmentalist's argument.
As Andy so correctly pointed out, if you have the money, you are going to spend it, so lets not worry about prices. This is consumption, and thereby the economy moves and all our jobs, etc, etc. Spend 30 million on a Picasso or a postage stamp, and I won't bat an eye.
However, leaving an AGA and an AC to duke it out when nobody is even around is neither useful or beautiful, just plain wasteful. And regardless of how much money you have, resources are scarce and their overuse can hurt the environment--which is why I have an interest, as me and mine (and you and yours) bear the environmental cost. Being a member of society concerned about the cost you impose on others is called "responsibility".
Close enough for government work
Andy, I don't think the F250 is such a big contradiction. Let's say you buy a truck that is always running, 24/7, no matter if someone is driving it or not. That is a more proper AGA/truck analogy. Yeah, your truck uses a lot of fuel, but only when you drive it.
True, and since I only drive 25 miles a day, why, that's only 2.5 gallons of regular <G>.Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Andy--just make sure you pick up at least three hitchhikers a day to spread those gallons around a bit! Not the guy with the twitchy eye though...Close enough for government work
No problem, Roger. They can ride in back.
Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
RJ's got the right idea...when the Aga is used in proper context, it's actually a very nice thing to have in your house.
Sidenote: I could be wrong, but I thought I read years ago that a man designed the Aga for his blind wife. No knobs to turn, just slide the pots/pans from here to there to change the temp.
When I lived with an Aga, it was over in the UK. Cold-ish coastal envorinment. Pretty old house. The Aga was THE heat source in the house. It was needed about 320 days of the year to bring the temp and dampness factors into the confortable range, and with a little modification to the household plumbing, it was needed 365 days of the year for domestic hot water.
Here in the States (and elsewhere, to appease the minority) I think the Aga is pretty much fluff. Not TOTAL fluff, because you really can cook well with one of them. If you are a cook, and if you care to learn how to cook on one, and if you truly relish a well prepared meal versus a Hungry Man TV dinner, an Aga may be a valid tool in your culinary arsenal. If you think a high-end "stove" can't make a difference in the quality of a meal...you're wrong.
That written, I know four people (in the States) who have Agas. In these four cases? "Total fluff", "fluff", "semi-fluff", and "damn fine cook(s)." "Total fluff" tried a few times to cook on her Aga but never made the transition. Her Aga has been turned off for a few years now...it's simply an expensive decoration in her kitchen. At the other end of the spectrum, "Damn fine cook(s)"...you'd be fotunate to eat at this couples' table. Good stuff.
Some drive SUVs and eat microwave dinners. Others cook with an Aga and ride a bike to work. There are extremes and there is middle ground.
???