I've owned this roasting pan for a few years (just not the copper version) and it's really good. The support thing alone changes the way you roast chicken. You can roast a chicken over veggies and the chicken does not get wet and the skin gets nice and crispy while all the fat and juices drip on the underlying stuff. And the pan itself is very sturdy and heavy and well-built, and it looks pretty good.
I don't remember paying that much however (but again I have the stainless steel version not copper).
KlikitiklakCopper is a superior material for heat conduction (only silver is better), so it's utilizing heat energy more efficiently, and the heat spreads more evenly across the cooking surface.
AnzialI would agree for a pan or pot that will be heated over a concentrated heat source (stove) in direct contact with the bottom of the pan, but this kind of roasting pan will probably mostly be used in an oven. In that case, the heat is coming from all around it and it would seem that the conductivity of the pan is not a very important factor for the proper cooking of the food inside it ?
KlikitiklakI think you are absolutely correct for simply roasting however for casseroles the copper heats so evenly I find I get better results and save energy.i have used mauviel for forty yrs and have never burned one recipe due to even heating and lower cook temp .
michael.d.haasAssuming equal thickness, the copper would give you better heat transfer, but you are right in the oven the difference would be basically nothing. That is in fact why they didn't bother making the roasting pan from 2.5mm copper but instead 1.5mm copper (well, 10% of the thickness is steel). 1.5 mm copper is no different than about a 3mm thick aluminum. It's more for looks than anything here.
I don't remember paying that much however (but again I have the stainless steel version not copper).