Porcelain enamels are often perceived as being a premium-priced coating system because of the high temperature of processing and the long-term durability. This study was undertaken to compare the cost of enameling and painting similar articles. Metal preparation (degreasing), rinsing and drying, curing or firing, process maintenance (hanger cleaning), and personnel needed to manage the systems were included. Recent changes and improvements in the enamel operations at Maytag Cleveland Cooking Products, such as "no-transfer" operations that eliminate the hand movement of parts from the application line to the furnace line and more-efficient processing equipment, have made enameling a good choice for appliance and cooking products producers. The no-transfer operation allows the powdered enamel to be fired on the application line hooks. The hooks are subsequently sandblasted or thermally shocked to remove the fired-on enamel when an excess of enamel is accumulated on the hooks. This would be analogous to the pyrolysis of organic coating hanging hooks to remove accumulated paint. A summary of the cost components (energy for cleaning and curing or firing, labor, and scrap costs) indicates that a no-transfer enameling system was within 1 cent/ft 2 of the cost of a paint coating for energy demand. A typical parts transfer system for porcelain enamel was about 6 cents/ft 2 higher than a paint system, regarding energy. Regarding a range of paint types (low cost, general purpose, and high temperature) curing at 500, 750, and 1000°F, no differences in total costs were shown. Overall costs for porcelain enameling with a no-transfer system was $0.0234 more than the lowest-cost paint system and $0.0198 more than the highest-value paint system. The typical transfer system was $0.0346 more expensive than the lowest-cost paint system and $0.031 more than the highest-value paint system.