Is the heat from peppers cumulative in a dish?

For example, are ten Hatch peppers in a stew way hotter than, say, two Hatch peppers in a stew? I couldn’t seem to find a definitive answer to this.

Yes. It’s more capsaicin in the same amount of volume.

For some definition of “hot,” which Hatch’s aren’t. :smiley:

Easy experiment: Dish up two bowls of stew. In one bowl, add 3 drops of Dave’s Insanity Sauce. In the other bowl, add 3 tablespoons of same.

Doesn’t that count as attempted murder?

I don’t think you can die from underseasoned food.

How about from boredom?
Back to the topic, isn’t capsaicin not soluble in water?

Is Chefguy asking this sort of like Surgeonguy asking what all these different sharp knives and scissors do?

It is not. Some solubility in vegetable oils and alcohol. Margaritas all around!

Some varieties of Hatches are definitely much hotter than others. Nothing is habanero level, but they are much bigger than habs, so what they lack in Scoville units, they make up for in mass. That said, even the hotter side of the Hatches (Sandia chiles) get to only around 10K Scoville. (Some websites list as high as 30K Scoville, but that seems a bit high. Jalapenos are around 5-10K; serranos around 10-20K. Once again, also consider size.) ETA: The Barker X-tra hots (Hatch Chiles) are listed at 15K-30K Scoville. I think the most usual ones are the Big Jims at around 3K Scoville.

But, yes, it is cumulative.

I’m sure there is some saturation level where adding more doesn’t matter. But I’d be surprised if concentration was all that matters in a dish. Whether our perception of “hotness” is linear is another question.

There are different types of Hatch, as you mentioned. I’ve had Hatch chilis that were blistering hot, but were labeled as Big Jims. But it’s a matter of tolerance, of course.

I think I had a brain fart when I posted this question. Stands to reason that a hot pepper in a 5 quart pot of stew will have less of an effect than a hot pepper in a pint of same.

A more interesting scenario of your OP @Chefguy is the cumulative results from multiple, differing levels of heat from different chile in the same dish!

While it’s certainly additive, I normally find that if I’m using something relatively hot (say a few scotch bonnets), the final dish isn’t noticeably hotter from the addition of other, milder peppers. I’m sure it is, but the effect is just not noticable.

Of course, a can of smoked anchos (for the smokiness), thin sliced jalapenos (for color and crunch as a topping), weren’t going to make the slow cooked pork with beer and lime very hot in the first place, which is why the finely diced scotch bonnets were in there in the first place.

I thought what the OP was talking about was the phenomenon of some hot dishes giving you a burst of spice and then fading, or when it builds and builds as you eat.
Even when using the same amount and type of chillis you can get that effect.

e.g. when I use half a dozen birds-eye chilli in a thai papaya salad you get a spicy mouthful but the heat fades very quickly. The same amount in a pork stir-fry leads to a more lingering heat that does indeed build and build as you eat. Most likely this is to do with the amount of capsaicin released by the different methods used and the face that the stir-fry has more oily stuff to carry the capsaicin and coat the mouth.

And of course it works the other way, too: You can start with one of the insane super-peppers, and dilute it down to whatever heat level you like. Which is how you get so many mass-market American products labeled “Ghost pepper!”, but which are less spicy than BBQ-flavored potato chips.

In fact, this is how the Scoville scale for hotness was originally defined: That’s how much you have to dilute something to make the spiciness unperceptible.