Kenwood cooking chef - alternative to Thermomix?

[vivacity]

I found this just now and I'd like to know what you think of it: http://www.johnlewis.com/230875564/Product.aspx?SearchTerm=kenwood+cooking+chef.

Here it is in action: http://thecollectivereview.com/kenwood-cooking-chef/the-worlds-easiest-chicken-bhuna-recipe.html

[Cornish Cream]

I believe this weighs about 25kg. I would have trouble lifting it.It's not compact and you would need a lot of kitchen worktop to use it and storage for the attachments.

[Cornish Cream]

Sorry got the weight wrong - it's 13.6kg.That's still bloody heavy!!

[achookwoman]

Had a good look at the kenwood,  thanks.   A few points,
     Difficult to put ingredients into bowl
     While it is cooking the chicken in the oil,  the steamy oil is going to stick to the upper part of the machine and will need cleaning
      The onions were chopped in a separate container on the top of machine,  another appliance to clean
      Weight?
      Why is it sitting on a chopping board?
      Cost?

Think i will stick with the TMX

[earth mumma]

Hi Vivacity.  Please don't qoute me here as this is only heresay.  I have heard that this machine will cost over $2000, that it takes a long time to cook, has no varoma and once again loads of attchments to have to store and look after.  It must be huge to have a 6lt capacity, I wonder how it would go doing small amounts of food?  It does look impressive though - all that lovely shiny metal.   

[maddy]

Hmmm.....it's very large and clumsy looking IMO.
Like chookie said, it's a small space to add in extra ingredients, and the plastic steam guard looks rather flimsy.
It couldn't make sorbets like the TMX.
I think TMX is more compact with sturdier accessories.
Good attempt to try and replicate, but no where near 

[obbie]

with over 20 attachments to buy, and a blender as another attachment. I think the thermomix is better.

Sound like alot of cleaning too.

Robyn

[judydawn]

Great looking machine, nice demo, just shows you how much easier the TMX is to use though. Notice how slowly he added the food to the bowl, no room to move there.  I think I would at least lift the mixer and pop everything into the bowl that way. Look how much preparation he had done before the demo started, obviously all by hand. Only plus would be that it wouldn't turn the food to mush as easily as ours but once we get to know our machine, we don't end up with mush anyway.  Apart from now being able to cook in the bowl, it is just like all the other mixmasters which have all the attachments which need washing and the very reason I didn't use them. How did he cook the rice?  It will obviously appeal to those who have not seen the TMX in action.  Thanks vivacity, would never have know it existed if you hadn't posted it.

[cookie1]

I found this very interesting. It is the sort of thing I would have bought if I wasn't aware of the Thermomimx.  It looks lovely.  But as said earlier there would be lots of washing up. I have a kenwood that hasn't been out of the cupboard since I've had the TMX. It's hiding in there with all it's attachements. I can't really bear to say goodbye to it. Perhaps DD will take it.

[vivacity]

It costs just under 1000 GBP and about 1100 Euros in Germany. Yes, it is lovely and shiny and I like the way you can see the food as it's cooking. I miss that with the TMX. I don't know if I'm correct but I think with the Kenwood it takes less work to "convert" recipes. But I agree with some of the other forum members, it seems to be more difficult to add food while the machine is stirring and the TMX doesn't need as many attachments. Some of you mentioned the weight and I suppose it's a personal decision but I quite like the look of the machine. Apart from that, if you already have a Kenwood chef then you can use the attachments you already have on the new machine.

Anyway, I'm just going to wait and see which teething problems arise with the machine. It's going to be interesting in future, there is definitely going to be more competition on the market for TMX and I think this is excellent.

[baf65]

an interesting competitor to the TM
I think if you didnt have a TM you might consider the Kenwood as your alternative, you probably wouldnt take into account having to use all the different bits to do the same job in 1 or 2 steps in the TM....but you might prefer to have a proper 'mixer' which I think is one advantage of the Kenwood over the TM

[Thermomixer]

  Different & larger capacity appeals for many things, but you need all those other bits to blend and probably not as well as the TMX.

I had seen them before and thought that they looked interesting, but at that price?

[meganjane]

It looks lovely, but cumbersome. Doesn't weigh either... I just prefer the compact design of the TMX. I used to have a Kenwood, but prefer the KitchenAid I have now.

[salval]

Has anyone else heard much about the new Kenwood Cooking Chef?

Apparently it does "everything" the TMX does, for less $$.

The reason I'm askng is only because with making the decision to become a TMX consultant ('cause I'm so in love) I'd just like to have some info up my sleeve if anyone at my demos wants to good-naturedly "argue" the pros & cons of the two

Thanks

[achookwoman]

salval,  don't know anything about it ,  but would ask,   does it heat at a range of settings?
                                                                               does it reverse?
                                                                                does it provide for a steamer?