Post #592616 by jokeiii on Tue, Jun 7, 2011 2:15 AM

Craig,

Hate to disagree with you, but here's why I do: An immersion blender is good for two sorts of things, puree-ing soft items and stirring/frothing up liquids.

It simply will not break down ice the way a regular blender does, nor will it handle the same volume of fruit/liquids in the same amount of time. It also will not deal with fibers in the same way. (Think pineapple, tamarind and coconut, for example.)

Can an immersion blender serve as a top-down mixer? I definitely think so. But a top-down mixer doesn't perform the same functions an enclosed blender would. If you look up the Don the Beachcomber recipes, you will note that FAR more call for a blender (by which we mean an enclosed blender) than do a top-down mixer. Yes, an immersion blender works in the tin of a shaker, but that's one drink at a time (two, tops). If you want to make, say, four of something you have to start breaking the process down into batches.

Mind you, I have and regularly use both kinds. I first bought my immersion blender thinking I could dispense with the enclosed blender, but two weeks of futzing around trying to get "enclosed blender results" out of an immersion blender quickly disabused me of that notion. (For the record, not that anyone asked, a food processor cannot replace the enclosed blender, either.)

The immersion blender works better when we're talking about stuff in big pots (soups, sauces, etc.) especially large volumes of hot stuff that has to be "smoothed" because an enclosed blender can only handle these in small batches. Hot liquid, a vortex and a small, enclosed space inevitably lead to mopping the ceiling.

As re. immersion blenders, look up Cook's Illustrated's review of these from last year. (Their favorite is the Kalorik; conveniently also the cheapest @ $20 on Amazon.)