Our NYC Holiday Market is open (!!!) for the weekend. Come on by »
🔕 🔔
Loading…

My Basket ()

All questions

Hand mixer

Can someone recommend a hand mixer that has. SLOW speed? My Black and Decker flings ingredients all over the place!

asked by Molly Fuller over 1 year ago
7 answers 658 views
4798a9c2 4c90 45e5 a5be 81bcb1f69c5c  junechamp
ChefJune

June is a trusted source on General Cooking.

added over 1 year ago

I have an old Cuisinart that works just fine.

23b88974 7a89 4ef5 a567 d442bb75da04  avatar
added over 1 year ago

Cook's Country did an equipment review. I personally have an older KitchenAid 3-speed that works well.

" Handheld Electric Mixers
From Cook's Country | December/January 2015

Add to Favorites
Share:
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on google_plusone_share
Share on pinterest_share
Email
Print

Overview:

While we use stand mixers for heavy-duty tasks like kneading bread, a good handheld mixer helps if you don’t want to lug out the stand mixer every time you need to whip 1/2 cup of cream. Our previous winning model, the Cuisinart Power Advantage 7-Speed, is powerful. But some newer models have innovations like bowl-scraping beaters, timers, or “turbo” and “power boost” options. Others have three simple speeds—low, medium, and high. Still others have a whopping 16 different speeds. So what’s the best handheld mixer on the market?

We chose a lineup of seven mixers priced from roughly $27 to $100, with a range of speeds. We ran them through a series of tests that covered light, medium, and heavy mixing tasks: We timed how long it took them to whip heavy cream, in both 1/2-cup and 1 1/2-cup amounts, and to cream softened butter and sugar. We incorporated flour, oats, and raisins into the creamed mixture to make heavy oatmeal cookie dough. To help assess mixing efficiency, we tinted cooked potatoes with drops of blue and yellow food coloring and timed how long it took the mixers to whir them into a uniform green color.

After weeks of testing, we concluded that the new features were a bust. One model's self-scraping beaters are coated in silicone and designed to clear food away from the sides of the bowl, but they didn’t work. Worse, they splattered whipped cream everywhere. Another model's timer sounds like a great idea, but the design was all wrong; it was hard to see the clock and it automatically resets when you switch off the mixer. The power burst or turbo functions didn’t impress either. Testers repeatedly activated these buttons accidentally on two different mixers, and the extra power proved unnecessary.

So what makes a great basic handheld mixer? Testing confirmed our strong preference for open beaters. A classic beater has four metal tines surrounding a center post. This post is problematic because it traps food; when it jams, you have to stop, detach the beaters, and clear them out. Open beaters have no central post, just the outer metal tines (similar to a whisk), so food moves smoothly in and out as it is mixed—a much more efficient system.

After looking at beaters, we turned to weight. We weren’t searching for lighter mixers, but once we had them in hand, we were charmed. Our two favorite mixers each weigh in at about 2 pounds and testers found them agile, quick, and light. Our old winner, the Cuisinart 7-Speed (2 pounds and 6 ounces), and a new model from another manufacturer (at just under 2 pounds and 12 ounces), felt more cumbersome.

We next examined the array of speed options in our lineup; our mixers offered from three to 16 speeds. Recipes typically reference five speeds: low, medium-low, medium, medium-high, and high. We’ve never found a reason for more; extra speeds only hindered us and left us wondering if medium-high would be a 6 or a 7 on a nine-speed mixer. Furthermore, more speeds don’t equal more power; they simply mean more steps between low and high. The mixer with only three speeds felt sufficiently powerful. When working with the 16-speed mixer, it was hard to tell
 a difference between, say, speed 14 and speed 15, and the result in the bowl was negligible.

We wanted numbers to back up the power levels we could feel, so we tested each mixer’s speeds with a tachometer, which measures revolutions per minute (rpm). The test showed that start
ing power levels varied greatly among machines: The mixer with the slowest speed 1 reached 230 rpm and the mixer with the fastest starting speed hit 757 rpm—a 70 percent difference in power. At their highest speeds the range was smaller, from 1,064 rpm to 1,321 rpm, a 20 percent increase in power.

So how did these differences translate in real world kitchen tests? At the highest setting, all the mixers had sufficient oomph. However, at the lowest speeds, we actually preferred mixers with less power—mixers with too much power at the lowest setting made a mess by throwing ingredients out of the bowl. More power isn’t always better.

Our winner was comfortable to use, with five logical, calibrated speeds that covered all our recipe needs. Our Best Buy is a three-speed model.
less
related content

Equipment Review

Stand Mixers (High-End)

Equipment Review

Stand Mixers (Inexpensive)

Recipe

Large-Batch Lightly Sweetened Whipped Cream

Product Tested
Results Key:
Good ★ ★ ★ Fair ★ ★ Poor ★
Prices are subject to change.
Highly Recommended - Winner
KitchenAid 5-Speed Ultra Power Hand Mixer

This felt like the sports car of the group: light, maneuverable, and efficient. Its five speeds were powerful and well calibrated, nicely covering the range called for in recipes.
Design ★★★
Heavy Mixing ★★★
Light Whipping ★★★
Moderate Mixing ★★★

$69.99
BUY NOW
Amazon
Recommended - Best Buy
Cuisinart PowerSelect 3-Speed Hand Mixer

Comfortable to hold and plenty powerful, this unit had three fast speeds. It made quick work of all the tests but doesn’t have medium-low or medium-high settings; a good simple mixer for basic tasks like whipping cream.
Design ★★
Heavy Mixing ★★★
Light Whipping ★★★
Moderate Mixing ★★★

$26.77
BUY NOW
Amazon
Recommended
Cuisinart Power Advantage 7-Speed Hand Mixer

This unit was powerful, with well-calibrated speeds that covered all the bases with a few to spare. Our previous winner, this mixer was edged out of the top spot in favor of lighter, more pared-down models.
Design ★★
Heavy Mixing ★★★
Light Whipping ★★★
Moderate Mixing ★★

$59.00
BUY NOW
Amazon
Recommended
Bodum Bistro Electric Hand Mixer

This mixer started fast, causing a light flour spray; otherwise, its power levels were sufficient. The power cord faces downward from the mixer’s body, which causes it to catch on the edge of the bowl and collect food while you work.
Design ★
Heavy Mixing ★★★
Light Whipping ★★★
Moderate Mixing ★★★

$72.00
BUY NOW
Amazon
Recommended with Reservations
KitchenAid 9-Speed Hand Mixer

This machine felt light and balanced and the digital controls responded quickly. Testers found themselves wanting a bit more oomph; we had to scroll through too many similar middle speeds to get enough power.
Design ★★★
Heavy Mixing ★★
Light Whipping ★★
Moderate Mixing ★★

$99.99
Not Recommended
Breville Hand Mix Digital

This model’s 16 speeds were unnecessary and often redundant. Its center-posted beaters clogged with dough, its digital controls were slow, and its power boost button was easily hit by mistake. The timer was hard to see.
Design ★
Heavy Mixing ★½
Light Whipping ★★★
Moderate Mixing ★★★

$79.95
Not Recommended
Hamilton Beach SoftScrape 6 Speed Mixer with Case

This mixer was very beater-heavy, which caused testers to move their hands closer to the front of the mixer to maintain balance. That, in turn, accidentally engaged the power boost button. The self-scraping beaters produced no benefit and, in fact, caused excessive whipped cream splatter.
Design ★
Heavy Mixing ★★★
Light Whipping ★
Moderate Mixing ★★★

$32.20"

730e314f caf5 438f 9a9a 998057ffb9ff  20151109 150352
Susan W

Susan W is a trusted source on General Cooking.

added over 1 year ago

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings by saying this, but your manic answering of old questions is going to hide new questions from view. I know you are enthusiastic, but you are answering questions that have been THOROUGHLY answered by caring, thoughtful and knowledgeable people. I'm sure you have a lot to add and you are clearly excited and enthusiastic, but maybe take a moment and see when the question was asked and look to see if it was answered well. Just a suggestion and just MHO.

23b88974 7a89 4ef5 a567 d442bb75da04  avatar
added over 1 year ago

@ Susan, I hadn't considered that -thanks for the feedback and I will stop now and just try to answer new ones in the future! Good points :) I can be rather manic sometimes - it's true!

23b88974 7a89 4ef5 a567 d442bb75da04  avatar
added over 1 year ago

Thank you Susan!

730e314f caf5 438f 9a9a 998057ffb9ff  20151109 150352
Susan W

Susan W is a trusted source on General Cooking.

added over 1 year ago

Lol..I can tell. Plus..not sure how Food52 feels about this, but sometimes links are better than huge cut and pastes. Links take up way less bandwidth. I am going by forums that I have moderated, so could be a non issue here. I always think it's worth my time to read what others have posted. If it has been well covered, I just sit down. :) I know your heart is in the right place.