New Trangia Duossal (V2.0) pans now available again.

[SA_SA_SA]

It seems Trangia have reinstated their Duossal pans:

http://trangia.se/en/camping-stoves-series-25/duossal-2-0/

but they still seem to be heavier than their or others single metal pans....

Trangia standard(UL) 1.5L pan: 115g
Trangia Duossal 1.5L pan: 200g
BUT
a Tatonga 1.4litre '25' stainless steel pan weighs 160g.
(https://www.bike24.com/1.php?content=8;product=165133;menu=1300,1350,1380,1382;page=16, and its outer '25' steel 1.6L nesting sibling is 190g https://www.bike24.com/1.php?content=8;product=165166;menu=1300,1350,1380,1382;page=17
)


I wonder if they still have a less rolled lip than: that cost me my dinner with the V1 duossal pans once cos the gripper needs to be held tighter: looks like they might.....
Note tatonga one is OK

[Sweep]

Interesting. Thanks.

Why did they get rid of them in the first place and what's the difference between the two versions?

I bought a new old stock duossal frying pan a year or so ago for the ease of cleaning and like it.

One question - I did as an experiment put it on my domestic gas stove for a short while and it seemed to start to deform/twist a bit.

Soon sorted it and haven't done the same again. But what was that about? Something to do with differential expansion when heated of the two materials that isn't an issue with the weedier more distant flame of the Trangia burner?

[horizon]

Interesting. Thanks.

Why did they get rid of them in the first place and what's the difference between the two versions?

I bought a new old stock duossal frying pan a year or so ago for the ease of cleaning and like it.

One question - I did as an experiment put it on my domestic gas stove for a short while and it seemed to start to deform/twist a bit.

Soon sorted it and haven't done the same again. But what was that about? Something to do with differential expansion when heated of the two materials that isn't an issue with the weedier more distant flame of the Trangia burner?

I read somewhere that they indeed had problems with the two materials bonding together (that might have been actually during production). It looks like they are trying again. They are incredibly sought after as, I suppose, they are the ideal material.

[JakobW]

I've managed to slightly warp my hard anodised frying pan cooking pancakes on the standard trangia burner; I guess anything light enough to carry easily is going to be susceptible to heat deformation. Given how people rave about the old duossal pans I'm half tempted to upgrade one of my pans and try it out...

[Sweep]

I've managed to slightly warp my hard anodised frying pan cooking pancakes on the standard trangia burner; I guess anything light enough to carry easily is going to be susceptible to heat deformation. Given how people rave about the old duossal pans I'm half tempted to upgrade one of my pans and try it out...

I would. In my opinion shiny steel is the best internal material for a frying pan. It can always be cleaned with a bit of soaking and scrubbing. All so called non stick finishes are a problem.

[horizon]

All so called non stick finishes are a problem.

+1 It amazes me that people still use these even at home never mind during the rigours of camping.

But despite their incredible history and devoted following it seems that Trangia is still struggling to find the perfect material.

[Sweep]

All so called non stick finishes are a problem.

+1 It amazes me that people still use these even at home never mind during the rigours of camping.

But despite their incredible history and devoted following it seems that Trangia is still struggling to find the perfect material.

+1 to your plus one horizon

My favourite domestic frying pan is a thing i bought from that curious shop/coffee bar tchibo. Just steel. Stuff doesn't stick zs i use an appropriate tho still minimal amount of oil and move stuff around. Cleaning it with a wire pad is simplicity itself after minimal soaking.

My gran used to run a pub. I well remember her telling how proud a cleaning woman of hers was at having, after much frantic scrubbing, removing the caked on black from the inside of a pan. It was the space-age non stick

[SA_SA_SA]

Interesting. Thanks.
Why did they get rid of them in the first place
and
what's the difference between the two versions?

1) I presume they felt the HA aluminium pans were a good enough alternative, presumably some of their customers differed..

2) It seems the new Duossal V2.0 might have a thicker stainless steel layer:
https://classiccampstoves.com/threads/trangia-duossal-vs-hard-anodized.21194/page-2which is interesting cos I presumed that would make it heavier given the alu layer seems quite thick? surely for lightness one layer should be very thin?

[horizon]

I presume they felt the HA aluminium pans were a good enough alternative, presumably some of their customers differed..

2) It seems the new Duossal V2.0 might have a thicker stainless steel layer:
https://classiccampstoves.com/threads/trangia-duossal-vs-hard-anodized.21194/page-2which is interesting cos I presumed that would make it heavier given the alu layer seems quite thick? surely for lightness one layer should be very thin?

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there was a technical difficulty with the joining of the two materials but unfortunately I cannot find the link. They've obviously revisited it and that might explain the heavier weight. In theory Duossal must be the best idea, giving the advantages of both SS and alu but in practice it's difficult to make, heavier and more expensive - but still the best!

[SA_SA_SA]

Couldn't they just dip an SS pot in molten aluminium or spray it with aluminium etc etc to get a thin heat spreading alu coating on outside?

[horizon]

Couldn't they just dip an SS pot in molten aluminium or spray it with aluminium etc etc to get a thin heat spreading alu coating on outside?

Well we don't actually know how they are made - time for a trip to Sweden?

[SA_SA_SA]

If one took the approach that the inner stainless steel layer provided the structural strength, then perhaps one could optimise the aluminium outer to be only on the base where the direct flame heat is? This would also allow a proper rolled lip for secure grip by the pot gripper (see OP for why...)

[slowster]

Aluminium is used because it is a good heat conductor. To fulfil that function there needs to be enough of it ('thermal mass') to absorb the heat energy from the stove and disperse that energy as uniformly as possible around the bottom and sides of the pan, whence it can be quickly conducted through the thin layer of stainless steel to the food/liquid being heated.

If you cook something in the oven on - or inside - aluminium foil, you will find that you can touch and hold the foil almost immediately after removing the food from the oven, providing the other side of the foil which you touch is not in direct contact with the surface of the food or the baking tray. Although the foil is extremely hot while in the oven, because it is so thin it can neither hold nor conduct much heat energy along the foil (as opposed to through the foil where the foil is sandwiched between a baking tray and the food being cooked).

If thicker stainless steel is used instead for a cooking pan - even with a thin coating of aluminium - it is a poor heat conductor and consequentially heat will not be well dispersed around the pan. Instead the part of the pan directly over the stove will get too hot and food at the bottom of the pan will catch and burn (although it would be fine for just boiling water).

It's the same with copper cookware: the good stuff is made from substantial thicknesses of copper, e.g. 2.5mm, and is very expensive. Cheap cookware with a thin layer of copper is a waste of money because the copper does not improve the performance of the pan but is still subject to the limitations of copper cookware generally (e.g. it should not be placed in a dishwasher, and requires regular polishing if the shiny copper appearance is to be preserved).

[Gattonero]

All so called non stick finishes are a problem.

+1 It amazes me that people still use these even at home never mind during the rigours of camping.

But despite their incredible history and devoted following it seems that Trangia is still struggling to find the perfect material.

IMO they may have a problem due to a large pool of customers, and they're doing right in offering the option of different materials.
Their non-stick coating is fairly fragile, I've found the Evernew ones been a bit more robust (haven't had any problems yet) while the Trangia non-stick can peel off when overheated.
For my typical use, the Trangia H.A. finish is a good compromise, it's fairly tough and the food doesn't stick too much. Still the frypan can warp if not used properly (i.e. if put on cold ground right after been removed from the stove) but this is the price to pay for a lightweight option. Haven't managed to make dents in mine, the alluminium seems fairly hard.
If I was touring around the world I'll probably use a Duossall, I've one of the NOS frypans and even if used only twice, it certainly feels very robust and eggs cook very well in it.

[SA_SA_SA]

....

I am puzzled why they thickened the Stainless steel layer in the V2 Duossal then.....

If I invert my previous post and presume the outer UL aluminium provides the pan structure:
does the stainless layer need to come up to the lip: of not perhaps the lip could be properly rolled? Does anyone have the V2 duossal pan and does the lip result in a less secure grip (as my V1.0 duossal did ) compared to all aluminium pans?