English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

16 answers

1 thick cut replaces 3 or 4 thin cut... overall, the surface area of 4 thin cut chips is greater, therefore absorbs more fat

2007-07-18 03:57:45 · answer #1 · answered by SeabourneFerriesLtd 7 · 4 0

There's more surface area on the smaller fries.

Imagine a large chip with sides 2x2x10. It has a volume of 40 and surface area of 88 (ends 2x2=4 2 of and sides 2x10=20 4 of)
Four chips of size 1x1x10 also have a volume of 40, but each has a surface of 42 (ends 1x1=1 2 of and sides 1x10=10 4 of) and therefore a total surface area of 168.

As the oil sticks to the surface and not soaked into the inside of the chip the ones with the highest surface area will have the highest oil.

2007-07-18 04:45:24 · answer #2 · answered by Bob H 3 · 0 0

It's the surface area to volume ratio. The thick cut fries have less surface area compared with their volume than the thin cut fries. You can think of it as a lot more potato that is protected from the oil in the thick cut fries.

2007-07-18 03:58:36 · answer #3 · answered by ecolink 7 · 0 0

They (thick fries) absorb less oil. One thick fry could be cut into 4 smaller ones. The outer surface area is the same, but you've exposed the same area on the inside, so twice as much oil will be absorbed for the same amount of potato.

1 thick fry would aborb more oil than 1 thin fry, but you'd eat more thin fries to make up for it...

2007-07-18 03:58:02 · answer #4 · answered by mark 7 · 0 0

Oil absorption is a function of the available water in the item being fried. When placed into the fryer, the medium causes water in the item to boil out. When the pressure of the fat is greater than the escaping steam pressure, the oil will begin to infiltrate the food item.

Since thin fries are smaller and contain less water, it is more likely that they will be overcooked and being to absorb the oil.

2007-07-18 04:09:42 · answer #5 · answered by JLynes 5 · 0 0

its not so much about the surface area. Its the surface area per volume. Large fries have a large volume been 'served' by small area. small fries have a large surface serving a small volume.

think of it like a box. A 1x1x1 box has a volume of 1m^3 and a surface area of 6m^2

A box of 2x2x2 has a volume of 8 but a surface of 24

for the small box 6m^2 serves 1m^3
24m^2 serves 8m^3 so each 1m^3 in the big box has only 3m^2 with which to absorb oil

2007-07-18 04:11:52 · answer #6 · answered by Mr Man 2 · 0 0

Surely, weight for weight, the thin ones have more surface area than the thick and would hence absorb more oil

2007-07-18 08:48:31 · answer #7 · answered by galyamike 5 · 0 0

There is more surface area on the small ones. Thick or this you still eat roughly the same amount. The thinner the chip the more surface there is available to be coated in fat.

2007-07-18 03:57:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

They have less surface area than the small ones, not bigger. That's why they don't absorb so much.

2007-07-18 06:52:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's about surface area per unit mass. Thick cut have a lower surface area per unit mass.

2007-07-18 03:58:21 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers