6 Lies Food Processors Tell

Food Processors


Here in the test kitchen, we demand a food processor which can handle lots of chopping, slicing, and
Shredding when providing professional quality results, and we believe home cooks deserve the same. It
Had better have the ability to not just puree a dip and whip up creamy mayonnaise but also cut down right into a pie
Crust in minutes, grind beef into hamburger, and knead heavy pizza dough. And of course we need our
Food processor to be easy to use and quick to clean, or why would we ever bother hauling it out?

(We also tested two professional-style food
processors with suggested retail prices of more than $400.00; see our review of High-End Professional-
We put each model through 21 tests, measuring their performance on a range of
We considered everything from the feel of
The pulse button and the weight and shape of the workbowl to the capacity of the feed tube and how
Often we'd have to handle sharp, pokey blades. In terms of blades, some models were equipped with
Just the basics--a chopping blade and a shredding/slicing disk--while others arrived with sizable boxes

dressing.

While food processors are designed to do a variety of jobs, we most often call upon them for chopping.
So we ran several chopping tests and weighted those results heaviest in our final ratings: prepping
Mirepoix (a combination of diced carrot, celery, and onion used as a foundation for many sauces, soups,

into fresh hamburger meat. We wanted to achieve uniform pieces of food at whatever size we desired,
However, the reality was often a disappointment.
crisply cut mirepoix, in some cases we ended up with a crushed, juiced, or pulverized mixture that was
strewn with bigger chunks. Among the biggest factors in chopping performance was the length of time
The machine ran once we'd pushed the pulse button--short, powerful, jerky pulsing is crucial to assist
Toss ingredients around the bowl and into the very action.
only as long as we were still pushing the button (a fraction of a second in our top models), giving us
Excellent control; the worst kept running for nearly 2 seconds, processing the food too much--and, at
The exact same time, often letting bigger pieces ride the spinning blades without getting chopped. The other
Important element for even chopping was the distance of the blades from the bottom and sides of the

Making certain chunks of food didn't escape the blades.


large quantities. A well-designed machine takes seconds to produce piles of carrot shreds for a salad,
We shredded

Potatoes, considering not only the quality of the processed food but also how much was wasted,
whether trapped in the machine or pretrimmed so the food would fit inside feed tubes. The best models
The worst left jagged chunks stuck atop the cutting disk or made us trim up
to a third of the food off to make it fit.
Blade quality mattered, too: As we sliced potatoes and tomatoes, dull blades bruised and hacked up the
food, splattering the workbowl with juices. The top-performing machines had sharp, efficient blades
That made clean, dry cuts--you could barely tell the tomato or potato had been through the processor
until you fanned out the slices like a deck of cards.
A few models had special slicing features, but all were not equally successful. For instance, a slicethickness
adjustment lever on the front of KitchenAid models lacks numerical markings, so we had to
Use trial and error to attain slices with a specific thickness. We preferred slice adjustments like the one
on the Breville, which lets you simply dial up a precise setting by millimeters.
Mixing It Up
Efficient mixing is a key feature, whether you're making a quick pie crust, kneading a sticky dough, or
emulsifying mayonnaise. We tried all three tasks with each machine, and we assessed the speed and
thoroughness of the mixing action by processing a cup of plain yogurt with drops of yellow and blue
food coloring, timing how long it took for the yogurt to turn green. The worst machine ran for over a
Minute while still leaving distinct streaks of color, while better models managed to create a smooth,
even green hue in 25 seconds or less.
When it came to pushing the boundaries of the machines' upper limits, double batches of heavy pizza
dough were a real challenge for a few models. The 11-cup KitchenAid food processor shut itself down
repeatedly as we processed the dough. Another few struggled: A light flashed on the Breville's control
panel, indicating distress, and the Cuisinart Elemental 11-cup model left ropy clumps of unmixed flour,
which we had to finish kneading by hand. The manual of the Hamilton Beach processor said it was not
Meant for dough; when we gave it a try anyway, it made a great deal of noise (as it did throughout testing) and
Jumped around the counter, but the dough actually emerged in good shape. (We wouldn't recommend
Processing dough in this model routinely since it could burn out the motor over time.) Another, by Black
+ Decker, advised us not to process more than 3 1/2 cups of dough but did just fine with 4 cups. (Again,
We wouldn't recommend going through the upper limit for normal home use since it risks damaging the
machine's motor.) The top performers, including our front-runner, yielded silky, bouncy dough with little
apparent strain.
Mayonnaise was another failure point for many machines. Our recipe yields about 1 cup, so whenever
A miniature bowl was included with the food processor, we used it for this small job. Still, half the models that
lacked mini bowls (including our winner) were nonetheless able to emulsify the mayonnaise. Once
Again, the failures seem to result from excessive space between the blades and the bottom of the
bowl, which caused the blades to spin uselessly over unmixed oil and egg.
To test how well the machines processed chunky food into a smooth puree, we blended 28-ounce cans
of whole tomatoes. While most handled this task acceptably well, it made us wonder how much liquid
the workbowls could handle without leaking. We filled each with water to their maximum volume and
ran them on high. A few erupted in overflowing waves, while a few more sent forth a steady trickle of
liquid. Our favorite never spilled a drop, despite lacking a rubber gasket in the lid. These gaskets, which
Are intended to seal the workbowl from leaks, weren't always effective. Instead, they mostly made lids
hard to slide on or off smoothly.
Wash ’n’ Go
Cleanup was the last factor we considered. Complicated nooks and crannies inside the lid and on the
pusher and feed tubes of the KitchenAid 11-cup model trapped food and were a chore to clean and dry.
The same could be said for multipart shafts that held blades inside workbowls on other models. Our
Favorite machines had smooth, simple surfaces that were a snap to clean and dry, so they were ready
for the next job. Our favorite models' workbowls are all dishwasher-safe (blades should be hand-washed
to keep them sharp).
In the long run, nothing beat our old favorite, the Cuisinart Custom 14 Food Processor ($161.99). It may not
Be the least expensive food processor available, but it proves its worth in its sturdiness and performance, and
it outshone fancier models costing up to three times as much. It comes with just three basic blades, for
chopping, slicing, and shredding. After all of our testing, we decided that these are all you really need for
Most jobs (though it's worth noting that Cuisinart provides many different additional blades for this machine
On its website), and fewer blades equals less stuff to store. With a plain, heavy base; just two simple,
Lever-style bars to operate; a responsive pulsing action that makes chopping efficient; sharp blades set
Near the base and bottom of the workbowl that don't miss a thing; and a pared-down design that is
Easy to clean, handle, and store, our old winner takes the top prize again.