Self-rising flour VS flour

First, self-raising flour is simply flour with leavening agents added. If a recipe calls for one cup of self-raising flour you can use one cup of all-purpose flour, 1 1/2 tsp baking powder, 1/2 tsp salt.

Conversely, if a recipe contains all-purpose flour, baking powder and salt you may be able to use self-raising flour. For example, if the recipe calls for 2 cups of all-purpose flour, 4 tsp of baking powder and 1 1/2 tsp salt (I'm just making these up; they probably would never be found in the ratio in a real recipe). If I change the 2 cups of all-purpose flour to 2 cups of self-raising flour there is probably 3 tsp of baking powder and 1 tsp of salt. I would therefore reduce the baking powder to 1 tsp (4

- 3) and add no additional salt.

As to why your cookies "SUCKED" we'd have to see the entire recipe and what subsititutions you made.

On a guess, if you reduced/eliminated the baking soda but didn't change the salt you are going to get different results. Were your cookies too salty?

Additionally, substituting baking powder (what is usually in self-raising flour) for baking soda is not that straight forward. I believe, if the recipe calls for 1 tsp of baking soda you need to include 4 tsp of baking powder.

For example, if your recipe calls for 3 tsp of baking soda then you will need 3/4 tsp of baking powder. Since a cup of self-raising flour has 1 1/2 tsp of baking powder and you need to reduce that to 3/4 tsp (half), you can only use 1/2 cup of self-raising flour. What if you need 2 cups of all-purpose flour? You cannot substitute it with self-raising flour.

Bottom line, if you are going to be doing substitution then you will need to know a little math and a little chemistry.

What my problem is, not knowing how much baking soda (or baking powder) is in self-rising flour per proportion, so I can't tell how much of the baking soda or baking powder to add, if any. My girlfriend's premise was, you could eliminate the need for baking soda and salt by using self-rising flour, which she had on hand. I was questioning the veracity of that premise. From your response, I take it that it's not straightforward as that, therefore the simple answer is "no": you can't just substitute self-rising flour and simply eliminate the need for salt and baking soda. Am I understanding you correctly? If the substitution is NOT that straightforward, then the most straightforward solution for an inexperienced baker would be to follow the recipe as written.

As for why the cookies sucked, well, they were simply bland. They definitely were not salty, and they weren't crispy, which is really what I'm aiming for. You know how when you buy cookies in a store, they're crispy? That's the texture I'm aiming for. Keep in mind that I altered the recipe by eliminating the baking soda and salt under the misconception that self-rising flour was the clear substitute. I was immediately suspicious of the recipe to begin with. I had had a recipe someone else gave me some years ago, and it was pinned to a board in the kitchen. But the recipe was lost during the Katrina cleanup of the house. That recipe was WORK (which is why I used it maybe only five times), while this new recipe wasn't. I didn't have confidence in it, and I didn't have confidence in my girlfriend's substitution ideas.

Alric Knebel

Generally speaking, the crispiness of a cookie depends on the fat you use. Butter tends to make crispy cokes and hydrogenated shortening make softer cookies, all other things being equal. Since the melting point of butter is lower, the cookies also tend to spread more in the oven and are thinner than those made with shortening. Also, baking cookies fully will make them more crispy and underbaking them will make them more soft.

Adding water makes little sense to me, especially at the end of the mixing process. Water added early, especially before the flour is coated with fat, will help make the cookie tougher because it develops the gluten in the flour. A tough cookie may be seen as being crisper depending on your point of view. Egg whites tend to make things dryer and that may be interpreted at being "crispy." Egg yolks tend to make baked good more cake-like. Most cookies have little or no liquid in them. I think the water is a good sign of a faulty recipe.

The reason that peanut butter cookies have baking soda in the formula is that they also call for brown sugar. Brown sugar has molasses in it. Molasses is acidic. The baking soda reacts with the molasses and produces CO2. It also neutralizes the acid and that increases browning and increases gluten formation. You can not leave out the baking soda if it is specified in a recipe that also calls for self-rising flour or plain flour with baking POWDER. You can not simply substitute baking powder for baking soda.

You can use self-rising flour and then compensate for any deficiency in the baking power that the recipe specifies. You would still have to add the baking soda. Unless you use self-rising flour frequently, I don't see the point it buying it. You are stuck with a fixed amount of baking power and salt - ingredients that you may not want (for dredging meat, making most pastry dough, etc.) in every recipe that calls for flour. You are also stuck with the type of baking powder that the mill included in the mix. You still have to stock baking powder, so why bother?

Here is the recipe that I use for peanut butter cookies. They turn out crisp. Don't make any substitutions.

-----------------------------------

1/2 cup peanut butter 1/2 cup butter, softened 1/2 cup granulated sugar 1/2 cup brown sugar 1 large egg 1/2 teaspoon vanilla 1 1/4 cups all-purpose flour (not self-rising) 1/2 teaspoon baking soda 1/4 teaspoon salt

Cream the butter and peanut butter for about 1 minute in an electric mixer. Scrape the bowl and add the sugar, brown sugar, vanilla, and egg. Beat on high speed for an additional minute. Combine the dry ingredients. With the mixer on low speed, gradually add the dry ingredients. Increase the speed to medium and beat for about 1 minute.

Form 1 inch balls and place 2 inches apart on a baking sheet. Press flat with the tines of a fork in a criss-cross pattern, dipping the fork into sugar between cookies to prevent sticking.

Bake in a pre-heated, 375F oven for 10 - 12 minutes. Cool on a wire rack. Makes about 3 dozen

Thanks for taking the time and writing that. That was some pretty detailed stuff. My God, man, you sounded almost like a chemist.

Alric Knebel

I hope it help. As for being a chemist, it has been YEARS since I studied chemistry. There are a couple of people here who have forgotten more than I ever knew about baking science.

I made some very crispy PB cookies once entirely by accident. No change to the recipe. Just that, when it called for "softened" butter (real butter) I warmed it too long and wouun up with completely melted butter - liquid! I used it anyway. The cookies spread out wide and thin on the pan. It took less baking time, and theye didn't burn or get overly brown, weren't too dry. Looked and tasted just fine.

I just made a batch of these, and I have to tell you, they are the bestdamned peanut butter cookies I've ever had! Far better than bakery, and yes, they are crisp. Without being dense or tough, too...

I used my unbleached white Spelt flour, and insulated baking sheets, so they worked better at 400F, for 10-12 minutes. Spelt is just a bitch to get to brown, but I can eat it!

Thanks for the recipe - it's a keeper!

Dave

Peanut butter cookies are my favorite. I make a triple batch of them, spacing them very close together on a parchment lined baking sheet. I do the fork thing, and then put them in the freezer for a few hours or overnight. I put the frozen, unbaked cookies into zip-lock bags and bake them off a few at a time. I generally just put them in a cold oven set to

375F and add about 5-7 minutes to the baking time. If the oven is already hot from making dinner, I put them in the hot oven and just watch them. My microwave/convection oven takes about 5-7 minutes to heat to 375F, so you will have to experiment for the proper baking time in your oven if you want to do this. You may need to pre-heat. I keep chocolate chip, oatmeal, and tea cookies (sugar cookies) in the freezer also and bake them as needed. It is better than having three dozen cookies on the counter calling my name all night.

Yeah, I hear you there! We had some help, and I'm taking a dozen to a friend this morning, but there aren't more then 5 or 6 left, otherwise. I really like the idea of naking them up and freezing the "blanks".

I was particularly pleased with how these worked, because my usual attempts at a simple cookie (other than shortbreads) end up a puddle of butter and sugar. Part of the problem is surely the Spelt flour I use, but that didn't affect the peanut butters...

Do your sugar cookies bake up similarly? I fondly remember the Tea Cakes of a dear old Southern lady (my first baby sitter, far too long ago!). She made them with brown sugar, as I recall, rolled thin and cut. Those and a light, crisp sugar cookie would be real delights!

Dave

My tea cakes are soft and cake-like. Generally I like crisp cookies, but these are a nice change and remind me of the ones my mother made years ago. I also freeze them raw and bake as needed.

1 cup butter, softened 1 teaspoon vanilla 3/4 cup sugar 2 large eggs, beaten 2 cups all-purpose flour 1 teaspoon cream of tartar 1/2 teaspoon baking soda 1/4 teaspoon nutmeg 1/4 teaspoon salt sugar for sprinkling

Cream butter and vanilla on high speed for about two minutes. Gradually add sugar and continue beating for about two minutes. Add eggs and continue beating for about 1 minute. Scrape bowl. Combine dry ingredients. With the mixer on low, gradually add the dry ingredients and mix for about 1 minute.

Drop by teaspoonfuls on a greased baking sheet (or one lined with parchment) about 3 inches apart. Bake at 400F for 6 to 8 minutes. Sprinkle with sugar while still hot.

Makes about 4 dozen

(I usually substitute two teaspoons of baking powder for the baking soda + cream of tarter.)

[previous message snipped]

You are understanding me correctly. Baking is more like chemistry. You have to have the right ratios.

When I started baking things, I found I had to follow the recipe exactly or it turned out badly. Now I know enough about what can be substituted and I can alter a recipe. I still re-write the recipe before I measure out the ingredients.

The substitution is not always straightforward. I would suspect that is why the cookies did not turn out well. A good recipe does not have to be a lot of work to be good. Sometimes the simple recipes can be quite good.

If you search the web for crispy cookie recipes I'm sure you will find plenty of they. If you are looking for something simple, try Martha Stewart's Holiday Cookie magazine. Her company puts out a cookie/treat issue of the magazine every October/November in anticipation of Christmas cookie baking. They are usually pretty easy to make and not bad.

I found a recipe that might work, but I again made the wrong substitution. If I had thought about it, I would have caught it. The recipe called for BUTTER and I used what I had on hand without thinking, and I used MARGARINE. It was pointed out to me that the butter was used in place of Crisco shortening, and the margarine didn't have enough fat in it. Yes, of course, and had I truly noticed when I was doing it, I wouldn't have made that substitution. Butter clearly has a different texture. So we went out and bought a can of butter-flavored shortening, and I'm looking forward to trying it with that recipe. That last batch

-- with the margarine -- was so soft and spread out so far, the crisscrossing on the top of the cookies was completely lost. But they were crispy. They were just visually and texturally not interesting.

The recipe, by the way, called for chilling the mixture, to make the dough stiffer. I'm assuming if I used this shortening in place of butter, I won't have to chill it. I'll chill it anyway, since it won't hurt anything, but I'm thinking it won't be necessary. True? Anyway, I'm going to try it tonight. I laughed to my girlfriend as I scrapped the last batch into the garbage can, that I feel like a mad scientist trying to map the genome for some obsessive, world-saving plan.

Alric Knebel

Also, I copied the recipe you posted, and I hadn't tried it yet because of all of the what seems to be carefully timed mixing. But I copied it in Word and formatted it nicely for easy reading and I'm going to try it. I see elsewhere in this thread where you said you liked crispy cookies, so I'm thinking we're on the same page. When I buy cookies at the store, the crispiness in those cookies is what I like. I don't care for these soft "gormet" cookies.

How are you at pastries?

-- Alric

I think I am a good home baker. My pastries are good, but I'm not a professional pasty chef. I tend to stick to the basics and try to do them well.

Hers were medium brown and crisp, a lot like the peanut butter cookies, in texture. I'll try your's, and compare to memory!

Thanks,

Dave

Are you thinking about the type of sugar cookie that is rolled and cut? Those can be somewhat brown on the bottom, and crisp.

Yes, they were rolled thin, maybe1/8" to 3/16", and cut to shapes. They'd brown up throughout, but the dough was fairly dark, as well. Pretty sure the old recipe used mainly brown sugar.

Dave

Can't help you with that. I have a recipe for traditional rolled sugar cookies, but not one with brown sugar. The recipe that I posted was for a soft, delicate drop cookie, not a rolled cookie. Still, it is one of those simple comfort foods that goes well with a cup of tea or glass of milk.

IT WORKED! THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. I feel like an explorer who finally reached India. You seemed so sure of the results of your recipe that I decided to use it instead. Besides your sworn testimony, your recipe had the same proportion of ingredients as the other one I had used before (the one that failed), but yours had one or two things else in it that just seemed better (like vanilla), and was similar to the vague memory I had of the recipe from a couple of years back. It didn't require chilling the dough, as the other failed recipe did. As soon as I saw during the mixing that the dough was self-cleaning the side of the bowl, I knew this was close to the recipe I had used a couple of years back. I wasn't able to follow your mixing instructions exactly, because I discovered at the last minute that my girlfriend's kids had borrowed our mixer and hadn't returned it. So I just blended it myself until I was satisfied with how it looked.

Anyway, my search is over.

I did make one mistake during the mixing which seemed to bear no consequence. By the time your instructions said to blend the "dry ingredients," I had accidentally already added the baking soda to the mix with the brown sugar and so on, and it as already in the bowl with the peanut butter, butter, and egg. They turned out perfect anyway, so whatever difference it made must have been minor. Would they have been maybe CRISPIER if I had mixed it exactly according to your instructions? Did whatever chemical reaction from the baking soda begin too early by mixing it with the softer ingredients prematurely?

Alric Knebel