or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Metric or Standard

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 
I spent 15 years cooking in the US before moving to England. In America I cooked in Fahrenheit and measured in cups and ounces.

In England I have to cook in Celsius and measure in kilos and litres! At first it was like relearning how to cook, very frustrating! Tens years later and I'm a Metric Chef; how I ever cooked and measured without metric is one of lifes great mysteries!
What do you prefer?
UNDER PRESSURE AT PEMBROKE
Cooking sous vide at Cambridge's third oldest College
http://thepembrokekitchen.blogspot.com/
Reply
UNDER PRESSURE AT PEMBROKE
Cooking sous vide at Cambridge's third oldest College
http://thepembrokekitchen.blogspot.com/
Reply
post #2 of 11
I like the easy precision of metric. Being an American, however, I prefer the familiar comfort of standard.
Dammi un coltello affilato e vi mostrerò l'arte più belle del mondo.
Reply
Dammi un coltello affilato e vi mostrerò l'arte più belle del mondo.
Reply
post #3 of 11
never quite taken to metric, although i see the benefits. Baking especially, i like lbs and oz. Just feels better. Like Chefray says, its comfortable. Not into cups tho.
"If we're not supposed to eat animals, why are they made of meat?" Jo Brand
Reply
"If we're not supposed to eat animals, why are they made of meat?" Jo Brand
Reply
post #4 of 11
I have a ot of anger in me on htis subject.

I hate the CDN Gov't--not because they intorduced the metrics sytem to Canada, but becasue they're half-azzed about it. True, all food is legally sold by the kg, but stores are allowed to advertise in lbs. Every Cdn ccoking book and magazine uses metric, but in VOLUME not weight. They should be all shot and have their precious metric measureing cups stuffed up their bodily orifices.

I hate, I loathe, I detest EVERY magazine, book, or newspaper cooking editor who refuses to acknowledge the use of scale. The benifits of using a scale are many, and every professional in every country, for centuries, has been using a scale. Yet the media steadfastly refuses to acknowledge it, refuses to talk about it, like it was some kind of taboo, like abortions or gay marriages.

Lot of anger in me about this.....
...."This whole reality thing is really not what I expected it would be"......
Reply
...."This whole reality thing is really not what I expected it would be"......
Reply
post #5 of 11
What foodpump said! There is nothing more frustrating than how backwards our gov't is when it comes to the metric system. I was in grade school (I think grade three or four maybe younger) when metric was introduced and I think at that time they kept the Imperial system around for the generation of people (my parents and grandparents) who spent their lives with that. But.. here we are a good 30+ years later and we still have the bassackwards way of using it.
OK ... where am I going?.. and WHY am I in this handbasket??
Reply
OK ... where am I going?.. and WHY am I in this handbasket??
Reply
post #6 of 11
I prefer the metric, but crazy as it sounds some of my recipes are in both. This stemmed from living in the US and continually developing my recipes here in Canada. Sometimes my assistants find the humour in it..
There is no greater gift for the soul than to take a risk
Reply
There is no greater gift for the soul than to take a risk
Reply
post #7 of 11
A chef once told me that if God wanted metric there would have been 10 apostles.

Metric does make more sense though.
Fluctuat nec mergitur
Reply
Fluctuat nec mergitur
Reply
post #8 of 11
Uh-huh.....

I'll think about that Chef with a smirk on my face every time I do the extensions on my inventory.......
...."This whole reality thing is really not what I expected it would be"......
Reply
...."This whole reality thing is really not what I expected it would be"......
Reply
post #9 of 11
Thread Starter 
When using metric I now weigh liquids instead of measuring volume. A litre of water weighs around a kilo so it's easier just to weigh everything. I think that the fancy electric scales that measure in litres or kilos work the same way.....Some new cookbooks such as Under Pressure by Thomas Keller list recipe ingredients in this way; however, Kellers former book The French Laundry listed ingredients in cups, ounces, teaspoons etc...so it seems that some well known chefs are making the change to metric. I just find it so easy to scale recipes up or down. When I started using metric I began by thinking of standard weights in grams i.e. an 8-ounce portion of steak, fish or chicken is roughly 250 grams in metric (227gr exact), you get four portions per kilo etc..
UNDER PRESSURE AT PEMBROKE
Cooking sous vide at Cambridge's third oldest College
http://thepembrokekitchen.blogspot.com/
Reply
UNDER PRESSURE AT PEMBROKE
Cooking sous vide at Cambridge's third oldest College
http://thepembrokekitchen.blogspot.com/
Reply
post #10 of 11
Logic is the key. If a basic solid weight = basic liquid weight, then cool. But one also has to consider specific gravities of liquids when cooking.

As someone who grew up in Aus post decimal, Imp weight system doesnt carry so much importance, and with great confusion, some recipes dont make a lot of sense. However, remnants of the old system remain, I.e. standards like count per bag usually refers to a per pound count, and a rough KG estimate is about 2:1

But anyway
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
"Nothing quite like the feeling of something newl"
Reply
post #11 of 11
Always used metric, and I always get frustrated when buying american cookbooks :( that only have oz, lbs, etc.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Professional Chefs