Thursday, October 13, 2005
If you were to take out the brand awareness of Jelly Bellies and introduce a product called Sport Beans, I think you’re looking at a surefire flop. However, Jelly Belly seems to know what they’re doing and they’ve recognized that there were folks out there popping jelly beans for energy while exercising, so why not give them the stuff that they’re getting in a sports drink or gel.
Tangerine Jelly Bellies are far and away my favorites however Sport Beans only come in two flavors, Orange and Lemon-Lime. Could have been worse, they could only come in chocolate and buttered popcorn, so I think I lucked out. I was worried that it would taste salty and sweaty like Gatorade, but it didn’t. They tasted like really zesty orange jelly beans with a slight salty cast to them. The electrolytes provided are not nearly at the levels you’d find in a dietary supplement, but at comparable levels according to the chart on the website to GU plus added vitamin C & E. They’re actually more flavorful than regular Jelly Bellies, which I think is a good feature, as the tartness gets the salivary glands going so your mouth isn’t as dry.
The only drawback I see to these is eating them when you’re not working out. After all, they’re salted up, and if you’re someone who should be avoiding sodium these probably aren’t something you should have around. But, having had Gatorade and Powerade before, Sport Beans are far easier to carry around and meter out how much you want. Putting an open packet of Cliff Shots in your pocket or bag is a surefire sticky disaster in the making.
Rating - 8 out of 10
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Name: Almond Joy Cookies
I know they say they’re cookies, but if something is coated in real chocolate and has a creamy filling, it’s probably a candy. I mean, no one calls Twix a cookie.
I tried the York version of these over the summer and absolutely loved them. They fixed everything that’s wrong with the Girl Scout Thin Mints ... York Peppermint Patty cookies have no trans fats and real chocolate. The Almond Joy cookies aren’t quite as revolutionary, but they’re dang tasty.
It starts with a crisp chocolate cookie on the bottom then is slathered in a lighter coconut cream (not as dense as the center of an Almond Joy) that has some crushed almonds mixed in. The whole thing is dipped in real milk chocolate.
It was very coco-nutty tasting, very smooth. Sweet, but with a lot of different textures including a little hit of salt from the cookie.
They’re really pricey for a cookie, but only slightly more expensive than a regular candy bar. The serving size on the package says all four cookies, but I was pretty satisfied with only two of them.
Rating - 8 out of 10
Thursday, October 6, 2005
Name: Almond Roca and Cashew Roca
Almond Roca is cool. It’s the perfect hostess gift when you only have time to dash into the nearest drug store. Everyone likes it, it isn’t expensive, but feels like it is. It comes in a frighteningly pink tin, which is easy to slap a premade gold bow on. People who bring me Almond Roca don’t come off as cheap at all, I consider it a treat. (For the record, I don’t think anyone has ever given me Almond Roca, though I’ve been offered it at other people’s houses, no doubt someone else brought the host it as a gift.)
Almond Roca is a simple little invention - a small log, like a chubby pinky finger of crispy toffee is covered in chocolate and rolled in crushed almonds. (Sorry, it kinda looks like something you’d find in the cat litter but that’s probably why they wrap it in that sassy gold foil.) Cashew Roca is the same thing, only rolled in crushed cashews and wrapped in an even more luxurious cobalt blue foil.
Honestly, I couldn’t tell the difference between the two, the nuts are crushed into such small bits and their proportion to the overall mass of the toffee and chocolate is minute. The almond one has more calories, but besides the swap of nuts on the ingredients, they’re the same but maybe the cashew one is a bit creamier.
The coating is a bit disappointing though, it’s always a bit greasy, sometimes comes off in clumps. It’s not real chocolate, but a pretty good grade mockolate.
Still, it’s dang tasty.
Ratings - 7 out of 10
Wednesday, October 5, 2005
Like many of the other West Coast candy bars (Rocky Road), I think I ignored this one because I didn’t know what it was. After all, if it was good, I would have tried it by now. I’d never seen anyone eating one and certainly never heard it in conversation. Now I’ve heard two different pronunciations of it. One is: You-Know and the other us Ooh! No! I have no idea which is right.
Their website describes the bar like this, “Smooth, Rich Milk Chocolate truffle-like center, covered with Milk Chocolate and ground almonds. Guaranteed to melt in your mouth!”
The bar is huge but very light for its size. It looks pretty and smells chocolatey and less sugary than many other bars. Honestly, I’m not sure if I’d like to invoke that guarantee or not, but it definitely doesn’t melt in my mouth. I bit into it, and found it soft and yielding, but not mushy. It did melt, in the sense that it spread out on my tongue, but it didn’t give itself up, but kind of rolled around in a strange oiliness. The chocolate on the outside is a different matter, just nice and chocolatey.
The flavor of the center is like a fluffy truffle with a bit of grainy salt to it (which is actually a nice way to balance the sweet). As excited as I was to see that it was a fluffy truffle bar when I was photographing it, I was equally disappointed when I read the third ingredient on the label is Hydrogenated Coconut Oil and the bar packs 11 grams of saturated fat (I have no idea how much of that is trans fat). It’s just not a bar I can recommend to those who aren’t already terminally ill. I know, it’s candy and it’s all unhealthy, but let’s face it, there are other candies out there that can be satisfying and not nearly as laden with hydrogenated oils.
I know, you think it’s odd that the candy blogger is talking about health issues, so I should make a few things clear. I’m a fit person for the most part. I keep my weight within norms and I am pretty active. So I can afford some discretionary calories on candy (usually limited to 500 calories per day). But sometimes it’s not just calories that you have to look at. A lot of candies contain trans fats, but usually in smaller amounts. A candy that contains a large percentage of hydrogenated oils just isn’t a good idea for regular indulgence. If it’s just a once or twice a year thing, I’d say you’re in the clear. (Please do not substitute candy blog advice for that of a qualified physician or dietician.)
If they, however, created a new recipe using butterfat, I am so there!
Rating - 4 out of 10.
Tuesday, October 4, 2005
I know that the 5th Avenue is a lesser known bar, but it’s quite similar to the Butterfinger. Though they’re both a peanutbutter crunch center with a chocolate(y) coating, they do have some differences. I’m doing this head-to-head in part to introduce Butterfinger fans to what I think is an exceptional bar. But in order to do that, I had to see them side by side again:
Both are massive bars. The 5th Avenue rings in at exactly 2 ounces and the Butterfinger at 2.1 ounces. The main difference, as far as I can tell between the two is that the Butterfinger coating is not chocolate but a chocolate-like substance where the 5th Avenue has a creamy milk chocolate enrobement.
The 5th Avenue bar of my childhood was not a Hershey product but made by Ludens (yes, the cough drop people). Also made in Pennsylvania, the 5th Avenue bar may not have had the wide distribution of the more well-known Butterfinger. When I first got to college I was forced to eat Butterfingers and developed a taste for them, but now that I’m back in an area that offers both, I’m a 5th Avenue girl. Of course, I seem to have a vague recollection of there being a couple of almonds on top. Does anyone else remember that?
The center is a crispy, crunchy peanutbutter crisp. Kind of like a flaky toffee. It has some peanutbutter between the layers, as far as I can tell. It also has a distinct molasses flavor to it, which brings out the roasted flavors of the nuts.
The Butterfinger bar was also not originally made by its current owner, Nestle. It was invented by the Curtiss Candy Company based in Chicago (a great candy town) that also made the Baby Ruth (also made by Nestle now). It predates the 5th Avenue, and frankly, has a much better name. It’s buttery and resembles a big finger and of course the play on words of being a clumsy person is kind of fun. The Butterfinger was always known as a great candy buy when I was a kid. Because the bar was so huge, you were sure to be satisfied. The center has similar crunch peanutbutter toffee-like layers that seem a bit crumblier (in a good way) than the 5th Avenue. The overwhelming taste in this center is buttery. A good hit of peanuts and a smooth, sweet and salty buttery taste. I’ve always loved the inside of Butterfingers ... it’s the fake chocolate coating that’s always bugged me. It’s waxy, overly sweet and just not milk chocolate.
So, if the fake chocolate doesn’t bother you and you’re looking for flaky, crunch buttery experience, pick up a Butterfinger. If you like your crunchy peanut flakes with real chocolate and a good robust hit of molasses, 5th Avenue is for you.
UPDATE 2/21/2007: I just found out via the comments that 5th Avenue no longer uses real chocolate ... such a shame. It was such a good bar, it’s sad that Hershey’s has now taken away the unique position it had in the market as the only chocolate covered peanut crispy bar. They have, however, introduced the Reese’s Crispy Crunchy bar, which has peanut butter and crushed peanuts in it. Not the same, but at least real chocolate.
Monday, October 3, 2005
Some folks have written or commented that I try other candies and ask why some haven’t been covered here. With only a few exceptions this blog contains candies that are new to me. But I recognize that not only is the world a finite place but that I’m also excluding a lot of fine candies that you may not be familiar with on the blog.
So, I’ll try to catch up with some tried and true candies or just new iterations of old favorites with this new feature: Short & Sweet. Just a brief on the candy and my rating and hopefully a photo.
After the recent introduction of the Nestle Crunch with Caramel and the Hershey’s with Caramel, someone suggested this bar. I hadn’t had one in years, so it was back to the store. The bar is a European style milk chocolate with four creamy caramel filled sections. The chocolate is very sweet and milky and the caramel has a good burn sugar/salty taste to it. Not a true chewy caramel, it’s a good balance for the sweet chocolate.
Rating - 6 out of 10
Name: Mega M&Ms
Just a larger sized morsel of chocolate, the Mega M&M also sports a different range of colored shells. The oddest part about these candies is that the colors reminded me of 1986. I don’t know why, I’m not sure that they were fashionable colors then or not, but they remind me of college. My college colors (they were Green & Gold) aren’t even among these, so it doesn’t even make sense.
Aside from that they’re just big M&Ms. Imagine a Peanut M&M without the peanut and you’ll have a mega. The thing I miss in these megas is the ability to cleave the shell off with my eye teeth. Maybe I just need more practice.
Rating - 8 out of 10
Name: Orange Cream Kisses
These are quite the little cuties and fill a niche that I’ve not really seen before in mass-consumer candies. You know, flavored white chocolate. The only other flavored white chocolate candy I can think of are those pastel misty mints. They smell a bit like aspergum (I’m sorry, I compare a lot of orange flavored things to aspergum, I blame my mother for giving me the dastardly stuff when I was a kid), but have a good approximation of a creamsicle - creamy white chocolate with a hint of orange essence.
I think they’d be fun to eat with cookies or within a mix of other Kisses, but I can’t imagine eating a whole bag of them.
Rating - 6 out of 10
Friday, September 30, 2005
Name: KitKat Coffee
I know Marvo already covered KitKat Coffee this week, but if I don’t review it, I don’t get to eat it. I’d been looking for this bar for a few weeks when I finally saw it at the 7-11 I pass on my way home. There are a few 7-11s that I go to, but this one, on the corner of Santa Monica Blvd. and Virgil seems to stock the best candy. The store is clean and the candy fresh. Though a little pricier than a lot of other places I shop, I’m willing to pay an extra 10 cents for something that I haven’t found elsewhere.
I was so excited by this bar that I bought two, one to eat when I got home and one to review, so by the time I took the photos, I knew that this was a good bar.
Upon opening the bar, the coffee scent is quite powerful and mixed with a sugary sweet smell. Where the Nestle Coffee Crisp bar smells like a creamy coffee concoction with toffee, the KitKat Coffee smells like a fresh brewed cup of black coffee. As with the Nestle KitKat Orange, the coffee flavor is actually in the chocolate (and maybe in the creamy filling of the crisps). It makes me wish that Hershey would release Coffee Kisses.
The bar is very simple and benefits from the addition of the coffee flavoring. It’s pretty amazing how the KitKat can be so good with so many other flavor iterations (Orange, Green Tea, Dark Chocolate, Melon, White Chocolate) but I think that shows that it’s a really well-engineered bar. The blank slate of the crisps and the vaguely vanilla cream can stand on its own or get a boost from another flavor.
I have my doubts that this will be added to the permanent KitKat repertoire (but they did add white chocolate, so who knows) but I’ll enjoy it while it’s around.
Rating - 9 out of 10
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
I know it seems odd that I’ve never had a Rocky Road bar before, but I’ve never been much of a marshmallow fan. To me the best thing about marshmallows is that they’re a dessert you can make on the grill. If marshmallows disappeared from the earth, I’d probably only lament the loss of Rice Krispies treats.
But, I thought it was high time I gave it a try - after all, how did I know I wouldn’t like it? First, the package is just fantabulous. It’s flashy red mylar and the lettering is bold and you can spot it easily from 20 feet. No wonder, it’s a big bar. At 1.8 ounces and the size of a tree limb, it’s a sizeable purchase for 75 cents.
The bar is rather unappealing when pulled out of the package, but really, when you look at most candy analytically it’s unattractive. I first pulled the bar apart for the photo and the sugary smell is just fantastic. It’s like putting your head into a box of Count Chocula.
The marshmallow isn’t overly sweet, but it’s foamy and has a good rubbery pull to it. The chocolate coating though is very sweet and the cashews are rather hard to discern. The mixture of textures is the real treat in this bar, with a real focus on the marshmallow, the light airyness of the bar sets it apart from just about everything out there. I hardly feel like I’ve eaten almost two ounces. It still hasn’t changed my mind about marshmallow in general, but I can see why it’s such an enduring favorite.
Rating - 6 out of 10
Meticulously photographed and documented reviews of candy from around the world. And the occasional other sweet adventures. Open your mouth, expand your mind.