Build Your Own Arcade Controls Forum

Main => Everything Else => Topic started by: havic626 on March 27, 2008, 07:36:32 am

Title: Your stance on burners?
Post by: havic626 on March 27, 2008, 07:36:32 am
what is your guys' stance on mame burners?  greedy sons of @$#@ or people out to do a service out of the good of there own hearts?
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: saint on March 27, 2008, 08:53:40 am
Debate away, but no links or hints on where to find them please. Morality is everyone's own decision to make, but distributing ROMs is not legal.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: mpm32 on March 27, 2008, 08:55:19 am
On my new Jenn-Air dual fuel 2 oven stove I have a 16,000 btu burner.  Boy can that sucker boil water.  It also has a simmer burner that will go so low you can hold your hand over it.  So I like having a nice range of burner power on my stove.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 27, 2008, 09:18:52 am
I always liked burning magnesium on the bunson burners in Chem lab.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: ChadTower on March 27, 2008, 09:38:05 am

I have no problem with people burning mame cabs.  Seems like a waste of good parts but I guess you can always build another.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 27, 2008, 09:44:56 am
what is your guys' stance on mame burners?  greedy sons of @$#@ or people out to do a service out of the good of there own hearts?

So, what exactly did these people do to deserve burning?

List of "Mame'ers" (http://www.411.com/search/FindPerson?extra_listing=mixed&form_mode=opt_b&post_back=1&firstname_begins_with=1&firstname=&name=mame&street=&city_zip=&state_id=&localtime=survey)

Unless a really good reason is given, I'll have to go with burners are ---uvulas---.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: ChadTower on March 27, 2008, 09:52:12 am

Do Mame'ers float?
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: RetroACTIVE on March 27, 2008, 09:57:08 am
sterno is cool
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: mpm32 on March 27, 2008, 10:15:04 am
Seriously, I just got this stove.  What a great thing to have when cooking for Easter.  We wanted to put in dual wall ovens but did not want to get rid of the pantry.  If you're looking for a new range, take a look a these.

Like I said before, the burners are great.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: CCM on March 27, 2008, 10:18:47 am
I just bought a new dual-layer DVD burner....
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: saint on March 27, 2008, 10:20:14 am
Seriously, I just got this stove.  What a great thing to have when cooking for Easter.  We wanted to put in dual wall ovens but did not want to get rid of the pantry.  If you're looking for a new range, take a look a these.

Like I said before, the burners are great.

How much? I need a new stove (electric, not gas unfortunately)
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 27, 2008, 10:30:49 am
How much? I need a new stove (electric, not gas unfortunately)

Saint, I got this one at Christmas:
Frigidaire 30" electric stove (http://www.lowes.com/lowes/lkn?action=productDetail&productId=24968-2251-GLEF384GB&lpage=none)

It is a very versatile stove. I don't even have pans big enough for the large element setting. ;D
In store, it was only $649 then, with an additional mail-in gift card rebate that brought it down around $600.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: ChadTower on March 27, 2008, 10:38:18 am

That looks pretty much the same as the Kenmore we recently got and we're pretty happy with it.  Can't remember what we paid.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: mpm32 on March 27, 2008, 10:48:17 am
Well,  HD had it for $1,650 but they couldn't deliver it by Easter.  I went to Sears and they had it for delivery by easter but they wanted almost $1,800.  When I said that HD had it for $1,600, he gave it to me for $1,500.  :)

Our previous stove was an RCA gas oven and stove.  That's right RCA, at one point my TV and stove could talk to each other.  Bought it in 1996 when we moved into the house.  I had a 100lb propane tank installed so that I could cook on gas.  Downside is that the oven was gas too oh, and it was a cheap piece of crap but, it did last.

I like to cook and cooking on an electric range just doesn't cut it.  But for an oven, nothing beats the temp stability of electric.

So when I took out the old range to install the RCA I used the 220 line for my new dryer.  When the new Jenn Air came, I had to install a new 220v line.  I know how to do this so it was no big deal.

The pros of this range are the dual-fuel, the two ovens - this is really great because most of the time I'm using the oven it to just heat up some food and the smaller top oven is great for this, less time to heat up.  Also the 5 gas burners on the top are great and speaking of grate, the grate on top spans the whole cooktop and that's nice for sliding the pans around.

That's my story on today's  "How the range turns"
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: SavannahLion on March 27, 2008, 11:00:36 am
That's right RCA, at one point my TV and stove could talk to each other.

Big whoop, my vacuum and VCR are Panasonics. I've been trying to get my Vacuum and my VCR to mate for years. Instead, I caught my VCR sleeping with my DVD deck and now my vacuum needs to go to therapy.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 27, 2008, 11:30:35 am
The technology used in electric burners on ranges is pretty impressive now. The coils on mine reach temperature very fast.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: mpm32 on March 27, 2008, 12:03:14 pm
It's not the quickness in reaching the temp it's how quick you can adjust the temp.  On a gas range, when you lower the temp the temp gets lowered immediately. With an electric, it takes a while for the temp to come down or back up for that matter.

It's all a matter of preference and what works for you but, you won't see any electric ranges in any restaurants.

Not that I'm a top chef, I just like to pretend.  ;)
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: billf on March 27, 2008, 12:22:08 pm
Saint, here's the electric range we bought for our new house about a year and half ago:
30" Frigidaire Electric Range (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7280373&type=product&id=1118839347168)

This is the first electric range we've ever had; previously it was always gas.  We like it because its easy to clean the smooth cook top.  You get used to the cooking on it very fast.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 27, 2008, 01:04:36 pm
Saint, here's the electric range we bought for our new house about a year and half ago:
30" Frigidaire Electric Range (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7280373&type=product&id=1118839347168)

This is the first electric range we've ever had; previously it was always gas.  We like it because its easy to clean the smooth cook top.  You get used to the cooking on it very fast.

...my burner is better than yours. ;D
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: billf on March 27, 2008, 01:30:01 pm
Saint, here's the electric range we bought for our new house about a year and half ago:
30" Frigidaire Electric Range (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7280373&type=product&id=1118839347168)

This is the first electric range we've ever had; previously it was always gas.  We like it because its easy to clean the smooth cook top.  You get used to the cooking on it very fast.

...my burner is better than yours. ;D

It better be for $200 more.   ;D

Those expandable burners do look cool - that could definitely come in handy.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: lanman31337 on March 27, 2008, 03:09:24 pm
When we bought our house we splurged and bought a 400 dollar gas range.  I absolutely love it.  It's made by GE, has a turbo burner for boiling water and getting things up to temperature very very quick, and the oven is roomy.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shmokes on March 27, 2008, 04:53:50 pm
Interesting.  So if I installed a big propane tank in a house that didn't have a gas line, how long would I be able to cook on the stove before I had to refill the tank?  Assume I don't get any other gas appliances.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: Cakemeister on March 27, 2008, 05:49:04 pm
I think four burners are enough. 99% of the time all we're doing is boiling water, scrambling eggs, etc.

These guys with the six-burner stoves and the subzero refrigerators just want to show how big their "kitchen-peen0r" is.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: dstone on March 27, 2008, 08:19:09 pm
The house we bought has a pretty sweet kitchen. Subzero refer and a 4-burner Viking range with convection oven. The lady that owned the house loved to cook. I stumbled across the same appliances while helping my cousin pick some for their new house; talk about sticker shock!  :o  Even if they were half their price I would still have a hard time justifying the cost. But I must say, they're the nicest kitchen appliances I have ever used.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shmokes on March 27, 2008, 10:17:47 pm
My wife had a professor who loved to cook and when he moved into his house he pulled his oven and range and put in Viking stuff.  Really nice.  I've no idea what it costs, but I can see why people like it.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: mpm32 on March 28, 2008, 08:43:14 am
It's the same as the difference between homemade spinner and a tempest spinner, both will get the job done but you may get more enjoyment and accuracy out of the tempest spinner.


The propane tank I had installed runs my stove and my pool heater.  I think we have it filled maybe 3x a year.  If you're running just a stove, it will probably last all year on one fill-up.

I think the install and all of that is very cheap or even free because they make their money on the sale of the gas.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: SirPeale on March 28, 2008, 02:34:05 pm
To answer the OP question, there are burners that will burn for either the price media plus materials, or you can supply your own discs.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 28, 2008, 03:41:11 pm
To answer the OP question, there are burners that will burn for either the price media plus materials, or you can supply your own discs.

Leave it to the Mods to go ranting off topic!

What a troll... ;D ;D
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: mpm32 on March 28, 2008, 04:01:24 pm
Wait, there was an OP?
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: whammoed on March 28, 2008, 04:42:05 pm
Wait, there was an OP?

Peale's down with OPP





***Original Poster's Point***
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: HaRuMaN on March 28, 2008, 05:01:57 pm
That's not what OPP means...   ;D  :o
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: Jdurg on March 28, 2008, 07:52:57 pm
When I moved into my house, there was a new electric range top in the kitchen and a new convection oven.  I LOVE the convection oven.  I can no longer cook in a regular oven.  Still, I would love to have a gas range top.  There's nothing like firing up a gas burner and having instant heat in your pan or griddle.  Then, being able to turn it off and having the temp inside the pan drop immediately.  If I could choose, I would go with a gas burner in a heartbeat.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: Spaz Monkey on March 28, 2008, 10:54:35 pm
My whole house is electric.  What I wouldn't give to have a gas stove/oven.  I'm on some funky city power circut with like 12 other houses and a four way stoplight.  We have a power outage that hits us like once a year that only affects us and the darn light.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 29, 2008, 05:43:52 am
That's not what OPP means...   ;D  :o

I was too young then to know, and I still don't know what OPP is.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: ark_ader on March 30, 2008, 02:42:01 am
I went fishing without my hat on.

Got 1st and 2nd degree all on my noggin.

And I was only outdoors for 2 hours.    :dizzy:

Typical.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: HaRuMaN on March 30, 2008, 09:13:30 am
That's not what OPP means...   ;D  :o

I was too young then to know, and I still don't know what OPP is.

OPP = Other People's ---Bad words, bad words, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when saint censors you?---
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: havic626 on March 30, 2008, 10:23:42 pm
seems everyone avoided the question totally.............or are you all guilty of selling (slangin-street term =])roms at rediculous prices.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shmokes on March 31, 2008, 02:01:29 am
My whole house is electric.  What I wouldn't give to have a gas stove/oven. 

That's why this whole, propane tank thing has me thinking.  My brother had a big propane tank, but that's cos he lived in a neighborhood on the outskirts of town that didn't have gas run out there.  I've always just kinda hoped that whenever I bought a house that it would have gas, but that the lack of gas wouldn't necessarily be a deal breaker.  But I hadn't really made the connection that even if you don't have a natural gas line, you can always just have a big tank installed and have it filled once a year.  It takes up a little bit of space in the yard, but beyond that it's hardly more inconvenient than if the city was pumping in the gas.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: DaOld Man on March 31, 2008, 02:19:32 am
Speaking of burning..
Has anyone seen where that guy was working with radio waves, trying to find a cure for cancer, but accidently discovered that using the waves, he could ignite salt water, which would burn at 1500 F?
This could power your car, or even run a steam turbine to generate electricity.
He said he would sell it to the oil companies to finance his cancer research.
That guy may be in the gun sights of both the oil companies AND the cancer drug companies.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shmokes on March 31, 2008, 02:26:55 am
Xiaou2?  Is that you?
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: shardian on March 31, 2008, 08:17:58 am
Speaking of burning..
Has anyone seen where that guy was working with radio waves, trying to find a cure for cancer, but accidently discovered that using the waves, he could ignite salt water, which would burn at 1500 F?
This could power your car, or even run a steam turbine to generate electricity.
He said he would sell it to the oil companies to finance his cancer research.
That guy may be in the gun sights of both the oil companies AND the cancer drug companies.

It was an interesting read. Water Electrolysis is nothing new though. There are craploads of vids on youtube of 16 year old kids creating water electrolysis in a mountain dew bottle.

It means nothing because the energy to do this will always be greater than the energy output. Unless the guy invents cold fusion, he won't see a dime from anybody.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: ChadTower on March 31, 2008, 02:55:43 pm
That's not what OPP means...   ;D  :o

Isn't OPP when the point of the joke soars freely over your head?   :)
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: SavannahLion on March 31, 2008, 03:21:03 pm
Speaking of burning..
Has anyone seen where that guy was working with radio waves, trying to find a cure for cancer, but accidently discovered that using the waves, he could ignite salt water, which would burn at 1500 F?

Yeah, I've heard of it. I also heard numbers vary from 1500 F to as high as 3000 F.

My reservations about it lie with just how much energy needs to be put in to generate the radio waves needed to cause the reaction in the salt water vs. how much energy one gets back from the process. I have to admit it's interesting stuff though.
Title: Re: Your stance on burners?
Post by: Jdurg on March 31, 2008, 04:57:39 pm
Speaking of burning..
Has anyone seen where that guy was working with radio waves, trying to find a cure for cancer, but accidently discovered that using the waves, he could ignite salt water, which would burn at 1500 F?
This could power your car, or even run a steam turbine to generate electricity.
He said he would sell it to the oil companies to finance his cancer research.
That guy may be in the gun sights of both the oil companies AND the cancer drug companies.

I recall reading about that too, but I also recall that when the scientific community got in touch with him, he either couldn't reproduce the results, or when he did the energy cost going into it was FAAAAAAAAAAAAR greater than what came out.