Fork, Knife, Spoon, Finger - What stirs it up the best?

January 10, 2007 9:33 AM

What is the most efficient kitchen device for stirring a powder into a glass/cup of liquid?

Sadly, I don't have enough knowledge of fluid dynamics to answer this question on my own. However, every time I stir sugar into my coffee or mix up a glass of Tang, this question nags at me.

Given that I have access to a normal kitchen and am only stirring a single glass or mug of liquid, what should I use? I have attempted to un-scientifically answer this myself by using a butterknife (closest to a paddle?), spoon (does the curve help mix?), fork (tines work like a whisk?), and even a cocktail shaker, but can't figure it out. I've considered powered solutions like handmixers and blenders, but worry that any speed gained there would be lost to a longer set up and clean up time.

I know that any advantage one device has over another is likely academic, but on mornings when I'm feeling more OCD than usual, I really, really want to be sure I'm being as efficient as possible. Help!

posted by robocop is bleeding to food & drink (42 comments total)

I like the fork. The teaspoon's only advantage is that it can be used to both scoop and stir without switching implements.
posted by IronLizard at 9:35 AM on January 10, 2007

I have often pondered same.

I have come to the conclusion that manual stirrers have little or no difference on the 'stirred-ness' of the mix.

Instead of worrying about the mixing tool (because I will be just reaching into the silverware drawer and pulling out whatever I can grab), I focus on the liquid and powder iteself.

If I place all of the liquid into the cup first, I get bad results in terms of 'blobs of unmixed powder floaties'.

If I place the powder into the cup first, I get 'scrub cup madly to get it clean' as there is unmixed powder 'cement' at the bottom of the cup.

The solution is to put the powder between the liquid. Place about 1/4 of the liquid into the cup, then the powder, stir a little, then add the rest of the liquid, then stir again.

Near perfect everytime.
posted by Monkey0nCrack at 9:42 AM on January 10, 2007

You could use a tiny little whisk. I think the smaller one is only 4.75".
posted by mckenney at 9:43 AM on January 10, 2007

use a fork. pour a small amount of liquid in first, so as to evenly distribute moisture through the powder, paste style, without so much liquid in the cup/glass to allow the powder to float or clump. Once you've got an evenly saturated paste, you can dilute that with more water, coffee, whatever, and get a very evenly distributed mixture with no lumps.

(learning to make southern style gravy is handy sometimes...)
posted by stenseng at 9:44 AM on January 10, 2007

or what MonkeyOnCrack said.
posted by stenseng at 9:45 AM on January 10, 2007

Give chopsticks a try. The sticks allow for the greatest amount of movement in the cup/glass area and add air into the liquid which will assist with the incorporation of the dry ingredient. Since the sticks are slender by nature you don't get much splashing action and less mess. You won't necessarily stir as much as you will "flick" your wrist to do the mixing.
posted by bkeene12 at 9:49 AM on January 10, 2007

Interesting...this used to bug me too. I don't have any hard scientific facts, but wouldn't the temperature of the liquid also bring some variable to what you want to use?Are you just looking for an all around "good stirrer thingamabob?"

Lots of good points above. I agree the tines of a fork would make it a better stirrer, but the disadvantage is you'd need another utensil as a scoop and you mentioned you don't like prolonging set up and clean up times. Any other implement shaped expressly for making stirring easy like a mini whisk might also mean extended wash time.

I'd say focus on the order you put in liquid and powder (as mentioned above) rather than the equipment. That's what I do. But as far as equipment, if you really want a utensil for stirring I'd go with the suggestion of Robert Hess of drinkboy.com. He recommends having a bar spoon on hand. As he says, it "doubles as both a measuring spoon and stir rod." It scoops and has a long handle and is made for stirring maneuvers. If it's good enough for cocktails, it's gotta be good enough for your coffee or Tang.
posted by kkokkodalk at 9:51 AM on January 10, 2007

I use a chopstick.
posted by mattbucher at 9:51 AM on January 10, 2007

Give it a quick hit with the frother. Personally, I use a spoon.
posted by Roger Dodger at 9:52 AM on January 10, 2007

A spoon, pushed to and fro (forewards and backwards), not in a circle. At least according to the now-defunct series of videos from this post.
posted by hydrophonic at 9:53 AM on January 10, 2007

Are you people living in caves? Stick blender. (Disclosure: I blend my powders with a fork. Trying to live life to maximum efficiency is a sucker's game. What is this, Walden Two?)
posted by nanojath at 9:58 AM on January 10, 2007

Yep, stick/hand blender. Clean up is a quick rinse of the business end under the tap. Excellent also for frozen concentrate.
posted by Mitheral at 10:04 AM on January 10, 2007

In the theme of weird kitchen gadgets, you might want to try a smaller version of this. The problem I have with stirring sugar and such into a liquid is it settling to the bottom. Forks/spoons and such don't really agitate the bottom as much as the liquid. Something that will get the undissolved particles up in the liquid will probably make things faster.

Note, I'm a comp sci major, I don't deal with atoms and such that often... only bits.
posted by cschneid at 10:04 AM on January 10, 2007

An ultrasonic processor will make short work of all your dissolution needs.
posted by oats at 10:10 AM on January 10, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

A stick blender sounds like your best bet for mixing a powder-based drink, like Tang or hot chocolate, that needs to be fully dissolved to be properly enjoyed. But for stirring sugar into a cup of coffee, using anything more complicated than a spoon seems like overkill to me.
posted by phatkitten at 10:17 AM on January 10, 2007

Thirding chopsticks.
posted by contessa at 10:23 AM on January 10, 2007

I use a pen, usually.
posted by thinkpiece at 10:23 AM on January 10, 2007

The stick blender has been considered but found wanting. What advantage it gives in speed-of-mixing it loses in length-of-setup/clean up. Even if I just wash the business end in the sink, I still have to unpack and pack it away in the cupboard. Further, the stick blender I own does not always fit easily into the cup I wish to mix things in.

Thanks for the pointers on adding the powder - that will help my morning ritual muchly!

So which is "science-factually" best when it comes to unpowered kitchn devices? A knife because it is broad and flat, a spoon because it is concave and wide, or a fork because it has tines? Given everything else being equal, which stirs the best?
posted by robocop is bleeding at 10:27 AM on January 10, 2007

I find chopsticks work best for thin things like mixed drinks, but I use a fork for more viscous stuff, like eggs.
posted by Greg Nog at 10:32 AM on January 10, 2007

I just realized that I didn't answer the question. I'd say one of these is best scientifically, but try not to swallow it!

Although after mixing baby formula for quite some time now, the shaking method seems to work best, cause the baby formula is always better-mixed than any hot cocoa I ever made for myself.
posted by Monkey0nCrack at 10:43 AM on January 10, 2007

When I was doing the protien powder thing I finally used a smallish, stiff wisk, spun it between my palms like to light a fire. Worked so well I stopped pondering this question.
posted by pointilist at 10:45 AM on January 10, 2007

Hold a silicone pot-holder over the top of it and just shake the daylights out of it!
posted by hermitosis at 10:56 AM on January 10, 2007

I'd say, between a spoon, fork, and knife, I'd go with the spoon, because the curved shape will help pick up the powder that has accumulated in the 'corners' of the cup/mug. Also, it's the best choice clean-up-wise, because it can be used for scooping, so only one item needs to be washed. The whisk-like quality of a fork would be only as effective as the length of the tines, I think.

If you DO want a small electric drink blender, I received a Bodum Frother like this one as a gift, and it's pretty small and easy to clean. It does, however, cause the liquid to come up the sides of the glass, so I wouldn't use it with anything more than 2/3s full.
For hot chocolate, I use a tiny whisk - it's the perfect tool for the viscous liquid in an almost-full mug.
Also, I avoid MonkeyOnCrack's sequencing problem by adding the dry, mixing it up with a little of the wet to create a gooey substance, then add the rest of the liquid to that.
posted by Sprout the Vulgarian at 10:56 AM on January 10, 2007

P.S. Anecdotally, every time I've tried a knife for stirring, I've been disappointed.
posted by Sprout the Vulgarian at 10:58 AM on January 10, 2007

I think for basic adding-sugar-to-coffee type tasks, you are WAY over thinking this. A spoon, and three or four stirs, done! Yes, a knife with its paddle shape might save you one stir (or 1/2 second), but you needed the spoon to get the sugar, and are therefore losing the half second gained in having to clean another tool.

From a mental exercise, I think we're all just speculating. So I'll vote for spoon - with its bowl shape, I think it moves more liquid than knife or fork.

However, for certain applications, there's something to be said for right tool for the job. Example; pancakes. I use Bisquick, and find that if I use a spoon to mix the powder, egg and milk, it takes several minutes (and I'll still have lumps). But if I use a whisk, I'm done in in under a minute, no lumps.

This all brought to you by the guy who still hasn't used his hand blender!
posted by ObscureReferenceMan at 11:01 AM on January 10, 2007

Try this little mixer. It's small, cheap, cordless and can just be rinsed off and dropped back in the drawer when you're done. We've got a couple of them kicking around and let me tell you, if it can get baby formula to mix evenly in seconds (and it does!) it can mix anything.
posted by Mamapotomus at 11:11 AM on January 10, 2007

Use a Nalgene bottle, seal it up, and shake the piss out of it.

Probably works better for Tang than it does for coffee.
posted by Kwantsar at 11:17 AM on January 10, 2007

This whisk was designed for cocktails. I use mine for stirring Benefiber into my morning coffee, because I am old.
posted by Sara Anne at 11:37 AM on January 10, 2007

It really depends on the powder. In the case of Carnation Instant Chocolate Breakfast, a salad fork works best, because it busts up those pesky encapsulated powder balls that form when the milk hits it. (Sugar & Tang wouldn't have this issue.) I recommend adding the powder to the glass first, then the milk. Then stir. Then add more powder, because you put too much milk in and it's not crunchy enough. And then when you're half way done, swirl the mik around so that it picks up the stuff still stuck on the sides and the bottom. then it's extra powerful chocolate goodness. Yeah, man, I think about this a lot. Salad fork, definitely.
posted by Area Control at 11:43 AM on January 10, 2007

Spring whisks are awesome. Their shape is excellent for scraping up any powder that settles to the bottom.
posted by idiotfactory at 11:53 AM on January 10, 2007

I fourth(?) the chopsticks. Usually, I just use one to stir the honey into my tea or the like. For something more viscous, or to froth milk, I'll use the pair. Yeah, a whisk would be better for frothing-type jobs, but nothing is easier to hand-wash than a chopstick or two.

To dissolve or suspend powders, I usually go with a slurry method. Say for hot chocolate: Add the powder to the mug, then a little hot milk (or water). Stir to the consistency of mud with one chopstick. Then add more liquid while stirring more gently. Voila! No lumps, not mud in the corners, perfectly blended.
posted by janell at 12:18 PM on January 10, 2007

Use a small whisk, but instead of stirring, hold the handle between your hands (palms together) and rub them back and forth. You can get some serious velocity and mixing with this. This works especially well if you make a slurry as there's less splashing.
posted by jefftang at 12:45 PM on January 10, 2007

Well, what kind of efficiency are you looking for?
If you're blending a small amount of powder, make a slurry first. I make cocoa by dumping out the package, and then stirring in just a bit of water, mixing, and repeating until the consistency is smooth. Once you've got a paste-like consistency, you can add as much hot water as you want and it'll mix without going through odd gyrations.

You can do this with a coffee stirrer or spoon, no whisk needed.

If you're incorporating a large amount of powder into liquids, like for protein shakes, powdered medicines or puddings, get a shaker cup. The lid has angled plastic blades inside that effective mash up globby little bits of powder. Not for hot stuff, though. If you do this with hot liquid, the agitation will build up pressure inside the container and then POP goes the lid and you've scalded someone.
posted by boo_radley at 1:13 PM on January 10, 2007

Assuming efficient == speedy, thorough and easy to clean up...

Battery-powered mini-blender, one that can be cleaned immediately by running it in or under water. Powered blenders can mix power into liquids in a few seconds where a manual stirrer can't in a minute (like energy drink powders). Worked great for mixing formula in baby bottles, and that's a time when you need effective, quick mixing with easy cleanup.

Blenders are just as fast, but take too long to clean. Hand-powered whisks are nearly as good over time, but slow, and hard to clean. Anything manual that's easier to clean gets less effective or more time-consuming at the same time.
posted by davejay at 1:42 PM on January 10, 2007

For stirring sugar in coffee I don't use any tools. I use a Braun Gold plated permanent filter.

First I pour some sugar from a sugar container into my cup. Then I put the filter over the cup and fill it with the water grinds mixture. As I wait for it to drain, I lift it slightly above the cup and give the early coffee/granulated-sugar mixture a few swirls by moving the cup in a circular direction. No utensil involved that needs to be cleaned.

The same technique can be used if pouring coffee from a carafe.
posted by MonkeySaltedNuts at 3:05 PM on January 10, 2007

Aaargh this is driving me mad, my google/you tube-fu has failed to find the video, but there is one of those crazy Japanese videos (like the t-shirt folding one) that covers this.

They show in clear water what happens when you stir - the issue is not what you stir with, but how you stir. Going round and round creates an inverted whirlpool at the bottom of the cup, and most powder sits in there never moving. What they do is move the spoon side to side in the middle of the cup (imagine the spoon is a pen and you are crossing out a word). This gets all the powder moving.

They show a really thick powder soup being done both ways, and there is almost no powder left behind after drinking using the second method. Be warned though, I cut down my sugar after this - once I stirred efficiently it was too sweet!

Will find the link if possible and post it.
posted by csg77 at 3:22 PM on January 10, 2007

Well if you want scientifically, when making up powdered drugs or food extracts in the lab we always added a small amount of the liquid first to the full amount of powder and make a slurry. Then add the rest of the liquid and vortex to mix. Anything else gives lumps (which then means sonication and that machine is damn annoying).

The best stirrer is a solid metal spatula, solidity and stiffness are important for mixing up the slurry most efficiently. Spatulas (which have flat sides) work better than glass stirring rods (which are round) because you can use them to scrape stuff off the bottom and out of the corners better. The best ones are a bit thick across, so more rectangular than flat, because this gives ridigity. I've never used chopsticks for stirring in the kitchen but they sound ideal.

None of this is scientifically proven in any way, although I bet you could find a study if you looked hard (there was one published last year in a medical journal about spoons disappearing from the tearoom), but is the result of a fair bit of trial and error and is accepted lab practise, for me at least.
posted by shelleycat at 3:46 PM on January 10, 2007

The key to good dissolution/suspension is uniformity. You don't want local areas of high concentration and low concentration. Concentration gradients are bad for quick dissolution. So, you want something that moves the liquid around a lot, inducing lots of turbulence in the liquid. Smooth vortex stirring is not what you want.

So let's consider your options:

Smooth cylinders (glass rods, chopsticks, pens, etc...): smooth surfaces have very low turbulence effects, single stick has poor enegry transfer to solution. The result of circular stirring is a single low-energy vortex which doesn't really help dissolution too much. This is what magnetic stir-bars are used for: low-energy stiring.

Rough shapes (spatulas, knives, etc...): lack of smooth surfaces produces small vortexes at egdes which increase energy transfer to the liquid. Better stirring, but single tine still promotes single swirling vortexes.

Multiple "tines" (forks, whisks): multiple tines, especially not in a line really cause turbulence in the solution, promoting good mixing. There's a reason whisks are the cook's favourite mixing tool.

Also, consider technique: a regular swirling, stirring action tends to put most of the mixing energy into getting the liquid to rotate in the container en masse---the low-energy vortex state. In contrast, rapid "cuts" back and forth across the centre of the container cause the liquid to smoosh against the container sides, promoting mixing.

So, rapid strokes back-and forth (I use figure-8's) with a fork, or better a small whisk gives really good mixing. Tada! We've just reinvented classic whisk technique!

Advanced class techniques:

Heat works wonders to make things dissolve. Warm your liquid a bit and dissolution happens much faster. Rule of thumb: 2x as fast for every extra 10C.

shellycat mentions making a slurry of a small amount of liquid with your powder (typically 1:1). This works great, and is the preferred way to mix cocoa with milk to make hot chocolate, for instance. Normally cocoa powder hates milk, but if you mix it 1:1 before you add the rest of the milk, it mixes easily. This trick works even better if you use an emulsion, like butter or egg yolks, in place of watery liquids. This is why you make a roux instead of just adding flour to water to make sauces, for example.

The simplest, quickest and best thing to come along in the last 50 years for mixing is the hand blender. It really does make this a whole lot quicker and easier.

Finally, ultrasonics do work a treat for getting recalictrant solids to dissolve, both by heating and by providing lots of high frequency random energy. Energy tends to dissipate rapidly through the solution though, so it only works for really small volumes. Works great for a test-tube in the lab, not so great for a sauce pot.
posted by bonehead at 4:31 PM on January 10, 2007

Smooth cylinders (glass rods, chopsticks, pens, etc...):

The chopsticks I have lying around here are rectangular on the eating end, often in an uneven way which would increased the vortexes and eddies you mention. I was imagining using two held slightly apart and swishing side to side.

I used to have a few different sized small whisks but found them useless for mixing packet soup or milo. They're too flimsy and don't get into the corners, and are also totally useless for making the initial slurry. Also you have to whisk really hard to get any velocity into the liquid and you can't get the elbow into it when whisking a cup. This is why we like the chunky spatulas in the lab actually, they get the liquid moving faster with less effort than something smaller.

We should all also keep in mind that when using anything ultrasonic you need to wear earmuffs.
posted by shelleycat at 5:36 PM on January 10, 2007

I used to have a few different sized small whisks but found them useless for mixing packet soup or milo.

Balloon whisks, sure. They're meant to be used on bowls rather than cups and for lighter liquids anyway. Spring whisks, like the one idiotfactory links to above, are what you want for digging the fond out of the corner of a pan, or soup powder out of the corner of a mug.

...when using anything ultrasonic you need to wear earmuffs.

Really? We never bother. Just close the hood and let the soil samples extract.
posted by bonehead at 6:11 PM on January 10, 2007

Finally, my high school Chemistry teacher taught me something useful! Whichever instrument you use, always mix the powder in the bottom of the pitcher in an inch or two of HOT water, thus making the H2O molecules to start to pull apart (think what happens to water when it starts to boil). This allows the water to best absorb all of the powder molecules (as well as make them equally distributed). When you add the rest of your liquid (hot or cold), it will naturally start the stirring process as the concentrate is absorbed, and all you need to do is help it along. Takes little more than a long handled spoon to accomplish this.
posted by messylissa at 6:13 PM on January 10, 2007

Just close the hood ...

Which would be why. Ours are bench top.
posted by shelleycat at 6:25 PM on January 10, 2007