Wednesday, January 31, 2007
100 Grand was one of my favorite bars when I was a kid. Back then they were called $100,000 Bars and there was some sort of jingle that went with it that I’ve forgotten (and I know a lot of jingles). The bars when first introduced were one piece, a long log of caramel, crispies and chocolate. Later when the name changed they made it into two pieces, which I fully supported in theory, but didn’t try at the time because of the Nestle boycott (which I followed from 1983 until 1989 or so).
The 100 Grand was a bar I missed (and I have to admit that I had a few fun sized ones during that boycott period because they were around in office candy dishes or brought home as Halloween booty by someone). There’s nothing else like it on the market.
Of course it hasn’t been immune to the Limited Edition craze and has undergone at least two versions, the Dark (yummy) and the Peanut (shrug). What’s especially confusing is that this 100 Grand with Coconut is not a limited edition version of the bar. It appears to be an actual addition to the line. CandyAddict’s commenters spotted them a full year ago, yet there’s no mention of them on Nestle’s website (well, there’s very little mention of the 100 Grand bar on Nestle’s site, period).
I saw this on SugarSavvy.net a few weeks ago. Joanna got a hold of two new items from Nestle, the 100 Grand with Coconut and the Crunch Bar with Coconut. I have to say that I was skeptical about this version, but I had to pick it up when I saw it.
The bar looks the same as always. The difference is inside. Instead of putting the coconut shreds in the milk chocolate coating with the crisped rice, they put it into the caramel center. What this does, however, is ruin the texture of the chewy, stringy caramel. It’s now more solid and a bit grainier. (See the 100 Grand Dark photo for a better view of what the caramel is supposed to look like.) Joanna pegs it when she calls it a version of Brach’s Neapolitan.
The final curiosity of this bar is that it’s bilingual. It’s in both English and Spanish. I don’t know if it’s supposed to be marketed in Hispanic neighborhoods or if it’s for export and they’ve decided to carry it in the States as well.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Things to be thankful for: I apparently rebound from weariness rather quickly! After my declaration that I will not try any other limited edition KitKat bars, I’ve been sucked back in. And by a Pumpkin version no less.
In honor of American Thanksgiving, I had to review them. So I met Santos, of The Scent of Green Bananas at the Farmers Market yesterday for some lunch and a huge and generous mess ‘o candy (like trick or treating for grown ups! - more on that in the coming week). I rushed home afterwards to photograph them so I could give them a try.
First thing to know about these is that they are Japanese. Second thing to know is that they are pumpkin flavored, not pumpkin pie or pumkpin pie spice or pumpkin custard. They’re pumpkin flavored. Ever eat a pumpkin?
They’re milk chocolate covering the normal bland wafers with a pumpkin creme inside. Lest you think that they’re subtle, they smell quite distinctly of pumpkin. In fact, when I opened the bag (not even any of the packets, just the bag that they were in) it smelled like baby food.
It takes a little getting used to, but the pumpkin KitKat has a nice toasted, caramelized flavor. It’s not as sweet as the usual grainy sugar cream, so it offsets the cheap and greasy chocolate quite well. I can’t quite put my finger on it, except to say that the flavor is Pumpkin (or perhaps simply squash). The package is all in Japanese.
There is a long and strange aftertaste to this candy, a pumpkin aftertaste and not something I’ve ever experienced in my life before. I kept walking around the house thinking of baby food. Baby food. Look at the package - there’s a family of pumpkins on there. Daddy pumpkin, Momma pumpkin and of course little baby pumpkin with his two front teeth just growing in. (Does he eat this pumpkin puree KitKat?) I keep thinking ... Babies with faces caked with strained squash. Smelling of squash, a smidge of fabric softener and of course that baby smell.
They are, in fact, strangely addictive. I don’t know how, because any gourd and chocolate has never sounded like a good combo to me, but here I am, eating another. I hesitate to give them a high score, but the fact that I continue to eat them means the have to get at least a 7 out of 10.
Final thought: thank you all for reading and commenting in the past year.
Monday, October 30, 2006
I have only one gum that I consume regularly. It’s plain old Chiclets (peppermint). They’re not that easy to find (and I think made in Colombia now) so when I see the multipack at the 99 Cent Only store I usually grab one.
I then empty out the box on my desk and divide the pieces up into groups of three. I chew three pieces at a time and then spit it out when the sugar is gone. Rinse, repeat. A whole box of 12 pieces might last an hour.
Sugarless gum is great for freshening breath and calming a queasy stomach, but Chicklets are like candy to me. But let’s face it, they’re just white tiles ... sometimes I want something pretty to chew on.
So the 99 Cent Only store didn’t have the Chiclets last time I was in there ... so I bought these gumballs (hey, at 4 for 99 cents, how could I resist?). Made by Wonka, they’re plain old large gumballs with Nerds inside.
They’re big gumballs and have a pleasant rattle when you shake them close to your ear. The Nerds inside are confetti colored and have no relation to the outside color/flavor of the gumball itself. Some gumballs had lots of Nerds in them, with 12 being about average. However, there were two gumballs (I consumed two packages) that had four or less.
The gum itself was ordinary with a light fruity flavor.
Orange: orange - mild and pleasant. The tart bump of the Nerds was nice and combined well with the sugary graininess of the gum.
Purple: grape - it had that bitter initial taste to it, which I suspect is the food coloring. The flavor was floral and fruity though it faded quickly but went well with the Nerds.
Red: cherry - a light cherry flavor and a slight bitter tinge but sweet and pleasant after the flavor was halfway gone.
Green: apple - I’m not sure what flavor this was, it was sweet and fruity and had a slight sour bite which goes nicely with the grainy tartness of the Nerds.
Yellow: lemon - sweet and tangy and probably the most flavorful of all of them, not that it lasted very long.
I’m not going to switch to these. The flavor wasn’t very intense, though the gum was nice and soft and had a good sugar charge to it that was supplemented by the Nerds. If you’re one of those people who likes to eat saltines with your gum for a nice crunch, these might be perfect for you.
Friday, October 20, 2006
Why is the American KitKat packaging so boring? I mean, look at this box that the Malaysian version of KitKat in the limited edition flavor of cappuccino came in. You may not be able to tell, but it’s actually embossed as well (click on the photo for a larger version).
I’m a fiend for coffee, but since I limit myself to two cups a day on weekday and one a day on weekends, I need to get my coffee fix in other ways too. There are very few coffee bars, so I’m always keen to try these limited edition ones. The American KitKat came out with a limited edition coffee flavor last year, which I rather liked.
This limited edition flavor is made by Nestle and comes in two individually wrapped two finger bars. Upon opening the wrapper it smells not like coffee but more like maple and yogurt. These are not bad smells, kind of tangy ... very sweet and with a woodsy essence. But still, the espresso scent of a cappuccino was missing. It tasted sweet, a little grainy but the crunch of the wafers was nice. The tang was a little odd, but not unpleasant. Overall, I’d say this tasted more like a Spanish flan than cappuccino. This is not a bad thing ... I love flan.
If I were presented with this bar again, I don’t think I’d buy it. It misses the chocolate note that I buy chocolate bars for but still a good thing to have at least once.
Note from the package: this candy is certified Halal.
Sunday, October 1, 2006
Following up on decoding the Mars code, here’s the Nestle code, thanks to Reader Dave.
Nestle uses something called the Julian code. The first four digits of the code on the wrapper will give you the date the product was manufactured.
Julian code is rather difficult to read on the fly, but here goes: the first digit represents the last digit of the year. The next three numbers represent the day of the year.
My Baby Ruth bar says:
That means that it was made on the January 25, 2006. (That was an easy one.)
My Nestle Crunch bar says:
Hmm, anything that begins with a 5 sounds kind of bad in October. This one was made on October 21, 2005. Almost a year old.
My 100 Grand bar says:
Again with the 2005 ... but at least the second number “334” is pretty large. That’d be November 30, 2005.
A quick way to calculate the month is to divide the three digit number by 30. If you can’t do that in your head, try dividing by 10 (moving the decimal place once slot) and then by 3. For the last one it gives you the approximation of November ... which is probably all you really wanted to know anyway.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Months and months ago a reader suggested I get familiar with a strange favorite it Australia - musk sticks. Basically they’re pressed candy stick flavored like musk. You know, the perfume. I figured if I’ve eaten violet candies, rosewater ice cream and 10 year old Lifesavers, there’s no reason I shouldn’t try these.
I found them at Mel & Rose’s, which seems to carry a lot of Australian candies. The package doesn’t make them look that appealing, the word musk has those little “smell wafts” coming off of it. The candies themselves are the pressed chalk variety like Pep-O-Mint, not a hard candy like the Butter Rum Lifesavers.
They smell like incense or a soap shop. It’s more like a lightly floral patchouli. So when I took the photo and then put the roll in my desk drawer, it was kind of like a sachet in there.
The little candy is sweet and of course easy to crunch. The flavor has no other notes besides this soapy detergent scent and made me wonder if this is what it’d be like to eat incense cones. There isn’t any listing of ingredients on the package or dietary info, so for all I know, they are meant to be burned.
I have no idea if the Lifesavers version of musk is consistent with the other musk sticks so popular in Australia and New Zealand, but I think my curiosity is satisfied. I suppose if I were trying to cover up strong mouth odors (like smoking or antibiotic side effects) this might be a good candy, but for some reason I think my neck should be perfumed, not my breath.
Note: though these candies are branded Lifesavers, they’re made by licensing agreement by Nestle.
Monday, September 4, 2006
They’ve introduced a new line of baking products with higher cocoa content than their usual products: Nestle Chocolatier. They have chocolate chips in 53% and 62% cocoa solids, baking pieces (chunks in 53% only) and baking bars. Their new website offers some pretty decadent dessert recipes to make full use of the purported smooth chocolate experience the higher quality product is supposed to offer. (There’s even a Molten Chocolate Cake which I suppose you’re free to use any other brand to make.)
The bars and pieces will retail at a slightly higher rate than most of us are used to (I like to buy my chips on sale for, oh, about $1.29 a bag) but they have a viral marketing plan in place where you can get coupons good for free merchandise by getting people to click on their link. Basically, you join up and then put the link on your blog or maybe in a food chat forum.
You (can’t click here) and help me earn some coupons to give the full line a try (and sign up if you want to join the bandwagon to earn your own free item coupons - you get a coupon for every 25 unique clicks). If you don’t want to get into that whole viral marketing thing, I completely respect that, but I wanted everyone to know up front what I was up to.
UPDATE: They shut off new signups yesterday. Apparently they didn’t understand how quickly this stuff spreads and they’re retooling.
UPDATED UPDATE (10/17/2006) - The M80 campaign was pulled completely. I’ll have more later but I would rate this as a “debacle” as viral marketing goes.
Friday, September 1, 2006
There are a lot of candies that are not unique, and there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s good to have choices. But usually there are similar products on the market becaue they’re made by different companies. I ran across these recently: Chewy Mini SweeTarts and Chewy Tart n Tinys. SweeTarts and Tart n Tinys used to be nearly identical products, except for the shape of the little pieces. And that was fine because one was made by Sunline (SweeTarts) and the other was made by Wonka (Tart n Tinys). Then Tart n Tiny’s were glazed in a bright candy shell and they were suddenly a vastly different product and coincidentally now owned by the same company (Nestle).
But here we are again with the same thing?
Chewy Mini SweeTarts are little spherical versions of the larger Chewy SweeTarts which, in turn, are like the original SweeTarts. They come in five flavors: grape (purple), cherry (red), orange (orange), lemon (yellow) and apple (green). There are also Giant Chewy SweeTarts, which have been around since I was a kid.
They have a little glaze on them to keep them from sticking together and their colors are a little mottled, but not unattractively so. The chew is soft but grainy, with a nice cool feeling to it and a quick dissolve. The flavor is about what you’d expect from a SweeTart - a lot of tart at the beginning with a round, chemical flavor and then it finishes sweet and grainy.
Somewhere back in the distant past Tart n Tinys were not colorful - they were plain and chalky, like SweeTarts only pellet shaped. Then someone gave them a shiny color coating. They have little character versions of the candies on the package, but I’ve never paid much attention to them, but I guess that’s what sets them apart from SweeTarts.
The Chewy Tart n Tinys are little chewy pellets of tartness, a bit of flavor and a grainy chew all coated in a thin, crunchy shell. They come in five flavors: grape (blue), cherry (red), orange (orange), lemon (yellow) and apple (green). Sound familiar?
Besides the colorful coating and the difference in the color of the grape flavor, and the slight difference in size (the Tart n Tinys are 11% smaller than the Chewy SweeTarts Minis) they’re the same candy.
SweeTarts come in a handy dispenser tube (but I’ve seen them in the bags before, too), which is kind of fun for sharing and saving for later. There’s a little more in the Tart n Tinys package (1.6 ounces vs 1.75 ounces) but I guess it all comes down to how you want your candy to look. Chewy SweeTarts Minis look kind of like tiny Trix and Chewy Tart n Tinys look like little beads. Chewy Tart n Tinys have fewer calories per ounce, I can only guess this is because the tartness ingredients are higher on the list and perhaps there are more colorings in the Tart n Tinys, which take up mass but have no calories. Both deliver a lot of variety and a consistent product. Why they both exist from the same company is beyond me, but then again they stopped making Wacky Wafers because they said they were too similar to Bottle Caps, and I really miss Wacky Wafers.
In the end, the Chewy Tart n Tinys win out by a very slight margin. I’m not sure why, I think it’s just that I like the look of them better, and when the taste is the same, that’s just about all it comes down to.
Meticulously photographed and documented reviews of candy from around the world. And the occasional other sweet adventures. Open your mouth, expand your mind.