The perspective of a pro chef, for what it�s worth (long post): Induction vs. Gas SPEED: Advantage to INDUCTION: It heats up faster and doesn�t waste time on conduction to grates. RESPONSIVENESS: Slight advantage to INDUCTION. For mcst cooking, the two are basically a push. Both can be adjusted with near-instant responsiveness. However, induction burners can be set at lower settings, where gas flames would just die out. For example you can melt chocolate on induction without a bain marie. Also, gas cooking transfers heat to the grates, so there is a definite lag in responsiveness especially when lowering the heat (one reason why cooking "off the burner" is sometimes necessary). CONTROL: Basically a push. With gas, you can see the flame. With induction, you see the number. After learning the levels on induction, there�s no difference in this category. VERSATILITY: Advantage to GAS. Gas can be used for wok cooking, roasting peppers, flamb�ing. The induction equivalent requires a flat-bottomed wok, and a butane torch from the hardware store (not the dinky ones at kitchen stores). CLEANUP: Huge advantage to INDUCTION. Cleanup on induction is a breeze. Since the cooktop itself isn�t hot, there�s no cool-down time before wiping, and no caked on/burnt food & liquids. Or just cook on top of newspaper and throw it out afterwards. Cleanup for pots & pans is easier too - No more scorched exteriors to scrub. COOKWARE: Huge advantage to GAS. Gas being low-tech, you can use pots/pans of any material and size. With induction, you need ferrous pots/pans (cast iron or stainless). MAINTENANCE: Advantage to GAS. Gas stoves are generally low-tech, meaning fewer repairs and lower expected cost per repair. I would expect a quality gas range to outlast a quality induction cooktop. Also glass cooktops are at risk of cracking under abuse� There�s not really anything you can "break" with gas. PRICE: Advantage to GAS (assuming an existing gas line). Mid-range induction cooktops run about 50% more than their gas counterparts. ENERGY COST: Slight advantage to Induction. While induction in 90% efficient vs. 50% for gas (plus ambient cooling), natural gas is so cheap in North America right now that you won�t see a noticeable difference in your bills, if at all. Of course that could change down the road� And with the ambient cooling costs incurred with gas, induction still has a slight advantage in this category. SAFETY: Advantage to Induction. No risks associated with open flames, hot grates, or combustion fumes. SELECTION: Advantage to Gas. There�s just a huge selection of gas cooktops out there, in all sizes and ventilation options. There is no downdraft induction cooktop (not that downdraft is really effective anyway). There is currently no 36" induction range/oven combo (Viking makes a 30"). RESALE VALUE: Advantage to Gas. Most people in American are just not informed about induction. They will walk in and assume you have radiant electric, which could be a deal breaker. And even if induction is explained to them, they may still be wary. This forum is a prime example of the mentality out there. Some people are just staunch advocates of gas, and no amount of information can change that view. OVERVIEW: How you weigh these pros and cons will depend on the individual. For me, the clean-up with induction was a major factor, as I'm fed up with scrubbing caked on crud and grease from hot grates every day. Regarding the argument of what pros use... Yes, restaurants use gas. They are cheap, sturdy, easy to repair, and take a lot of abuse (banging & clanging). You can use crap pans, and no staff training is necessary. Most people (including my fellow chefs) have never cooked on induction, and feel no reason to explore it. There is NO TRUE PERFORMANCE ADVANTAGE to gas. Decide what features are important to you and don't listen to all the nutjobs out there!

>>>"I'm sure gas is more economical to operate as we had to run a dedicated 3 phase 240 from the breaker ...Two comments in response: one on the relative "economy" of gas and induction and the other on the "3 phase 240 line from the breaker." On operating cost economy, the difference in cost of for running a gas cooktop versus running an induction cooktop is usually trivial. For starters, the energy cost for running a stove (or cooktop and ovens) is a tiny part of a household energy budget -- 2.8% is the figure (1.8% being the oven) I've seen tossed around by the Department of Energy and others. For an idea of how trivial the difference will be, go to Michael Bluejay's website and use his "Mr. Electricity" calculator. http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/cooking.html Somewhere down the page, he says to figure induction efficiencies by reducing the electric stove cost by 40%. The calculator asks for input of your local rates and how much you use the oven and each burner and how many days per week. When I ran the numbers for my kitchen, figuring in all the cooking I do, I found the cost differential for an induction range was about 70 cents more per month for induction over natural gas cooking appliances. Obviously, YMMV. Somebody in an area with high marginal electric rates --- say, $0.40/kWh --- would see more substantial savings with a gas appliance. Three-phase 240 from the breaker -- are you talking three conductor cable from the breaker or an actual three phase 240v line? From what I recall of the importing-induction threads here (gosh, was it a decade ago, already?), I thought the DeDietrich induction cooktops ran on single phase power. To me, three-phase 240v would be a commercial setup. (Cooktek and Garland make several of big induction appliances including rangetops with six 3500w burners. A "mere" $8k for that rangetop!) Upgrading a residential electrical service to a commercial 240v (or 400v) three-phase service would require a new transformer, a new service line to the house, and a whole-new breaker panel. If you had to go for a commercial hook-up, then that would have been very expensive, indeed! This post was edited by JWVideo on Mon, Dec 29, 14 at 18:45

"If you can find a specification telling how close a combustible wall NEXT to the range can be, then that would be where you could put the 15 inch deep cabinet, lateral-wise. Think of the cabinet as a combustible wall NEXT to the range that just doesn't go all the way to the counter top." In the specifications, the distance for the nearest side wall (right or left) is a minimum of 6". So, if the same rule applies to upper cabinets, I would need to clear 6" up on either side the range. But according to this rule, this would be true of any cabinet of any depth sitting too close to the range, wouldn't it? Why can 12" or 13" deep uppers sit directly next to the appliance, but not 14" or 15"? Since the principle at work in GE's specs is not clear to me, I know I can copy exactly what is on the spec sheet since its there in black and white - but I don't know how to extrapolate from it to see what my closest good alternative is. Edit to add: For the curious, here is a link to the spec sheet.

I found that the size played a bigger role in aesthetics than I thought. In a very large kitchen, a 30 inch range may look underwhelming but you may be able to compensate for that visually to give it more presence. My kitchen has a very long wall. I had initially been leaning towards a 36 in induction cooktop with wall ovens placed elsewhere. Because of the proportions of the room, and some other considerations I went with a 48 inch midnight blue Aga Elise induction to be surrounded by white cabinetry and a blue island. Once the range went in, it still looked too small for the space so I had the cabinets on either side painted in the same navy blue to give it more presence. You are wise to consider the overall proportions of the room. And yes, aesthetics do matter.