Category Archives: Burger King

Burger King’s A.1. Hearty Mozzarella Cheeseburger … a flame grilled fast food problem

A1_Hearty_Mozzarella_detailSome new fast food offerings are easy to identify as bad choices simply by their name.
FoodFacts.com puts the new Burger King A.1. Hearty Mozzarella Cheeseburger squarely in that category. There’s very little way to imagine that this could be remotely passable as a “less bad” fast food option.

It gets worse when you read the description on their website: “Features two ¼ lb. savory flame-grilled beef patties, topped with thick-cut smoked bacon, melted Mozzarella cheese, fresh chopped lettuce, crisp cut onions, and featuring savory A.1.®Thick & Hearty sauce, all on a warm, toasted, brioche-style bun.” Bacon, mozzarella, A1 sauce, brioche style bun. FoodFacts.com could easily be reading: controversial ingredients, extra fat and calories, controversial ingredients, controversial ingredients.

Let’s find out what’s in there:

Nutrition Facts:
Calories:                      800
Fat:                               48 grams
Saturated Fat:            21 grams
Sodium:                      1420 mg.

That’s a lot of calories, fat, saturated fat and sodium for one burger. We didn’t even get to the fries yet – which will most certainly push the sodium content of this meal well over the daily recommended intake. It’s pretty bad.

What do the ingredients look like?

BRIOCHE-STYLE BUN: Unbleached Enriched Flour (Wheat Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamin Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid), Water, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Yeast, Dried Honey Blend (Cane Refinery Syrup and Honey), Soybean Oil, Contains 2% or less of each of the following: Salt, Wheat Gluten, Dextrose, Monocalcium Phosphate, Calcium Sulfate, Natural Flavors, Monoglycerides, Ascorbic Acid, Enzymes, Sunflower Oil, Vegetable Proteins, Wheat Maltodextrins, Calcium Phosphate, Wheat Dextrose, Corn Starch, Soy Lecithin, Soy Flour, Calcium propionate (to retard spoilage). HAMBURGER PATTIES : 100% USDA inspected Ground Beef (Fire-Grilled), THICK SLICED BACON: Cured with Water, Salt, Sugar, Sodium Phosphate, Sodium Erythorbate, Sodium Nitrite. MOZZARELLA CHEESE SLICED (PROCESSED): Cultured Milk, Skim Milk, Water, Cream, Whey, Sodium Citrate, Salt, Sorbic Acid (Preservative), Natural Flavor, Enzymes, Soy Lecithin, A.1.® STEAK SAUCE: Tomato Puree (Water, Tomato Paste), High Fructose Corn Syrup, Vinegar, Corn Syrup, Salt, Raisin Paste, Orange Puree, Spice, Xanthan Gum, Dried Onions, Dried Garlic, Caramel Color., Lettuce, Onion

While FoodFats.com can understand that this new burger might sound good to some, we’re really unhappy with the nutrition facts and the ingredient list certainly leaves something to be desired.

It’s summertime. Get out and fire up a grill. Choose some healthy toppings for your burger. Change it up with turkey or chicken. You’ll be doing your body a healthy favor. We’re also positive it will taste a lot better, too.

http://www.bk.com/menu-item/1-hearty-mozzarella-cheeseburger

Some things are better left behind … Burger King revives Chicken Fries

Tenant_burgerKing2We never understand why fast food seems bent on destroying perfectly healthy lean protein. With very few exceptions, there really aren’t any healthy chicken options on fast food menus. They generally all have far too many ingredients, many of which are controversial and bleak nutrition facts. It doesn’t make much sense.

Sometimes it’s even worse. Sometimes once a fast food chain has retired an unhealthy chicken option, they bring it back years later telling us consumers were begging them to do so. Someone, somewhere was obviously imploring Burger King to bring back Chicken Fries.
And here they are.

Just in case you missed them the first time around, FoodFacts.com wants to familiarize you with the sad facts behind the fries.

For the record, you get 9 pieces in an order of Chicken Fries. Nutrition facts here do not include any of the dipping sauces you can choose from (BBQ, Honey Mustard, Ranch, Zesty, Buffalo and Sweet & Sour). These are for the fries only:

Calories:                     290
Fat:                              17 grams
Saturated Fat:           3 grams
Sodium:                     780 mg

That’s a lot of fat for nine thin Chicken Fries. It’s also too much salt. How does that happen to chicken, anyway? Take a look:

Ingredients: UNCOOKED CHICKEN BREAST STRIP FRITTERS WITH RIB MEAT: Chicken Breast with Rib Meat, Water, Seasoning (Salt, Modified Corn Starch, Flavoring), Modified Potato Starch, Sodium Phosphates: BREADED WITH: Bleached Wheat Flour, Modified Wheat Starch, Rice Flour, Salt, Spices, Dextrose, Paprika, Monosodium Glutamate, Dehydrated Garlic, Dehydrated Onion, Soybean Oil, Maltodextrin, Natural Flavor, Extractives of Paprika. BATTERED WITH: Water, Bleached Wheat Flour, Corn Starch, Modified Wheat Starch, Maltodextrin, Potato Starch, Modified Corn Starch, Methylcellulose, Mono and Diglycerides, Leavening (Sodium Aluminum Phosphate, Sodium Bicarbonate), PREDUSTED WITH: Bleached Wheat Flour, Modified Corn Starch, Dextrose, Monosodium Glutamate, Salt, Maltodextrin, Corn Starch, Sugar, Soybean Oil, Paprika, Spice, Onion Powder, Extractives of Paprika, Garlic Powder, Turmeric, Natural Flavors. Breading set in Vegetable Oil.
Burger King might consider changing the name of Chicken Fries to MSG Fries. They certainly qualify.

Fast food menu items like Chicken Fries illustrate how processing destroys the benefits of lean protein like chicken. To be honest, we don’t care who was begging Burger King to bring Chicken Fries back. They were best left behind for good.

http://www.bk.com/menu-item/chicken-fries

http://www.bk.com/pdfs/nutrition.pdf

Burger King introduces Eau de Grease in Japan

imagesJapanese men will soon have the option of smelling just like a Burger King Whopper — but for a very limited time and for a very specific purpose.

In recent years Japan, has had a major social shift, seemingly dividing men and women into two types: herbivore men and carnivore women. Now for one day and one day only, Burger King Japan will give the herbivore men of Japan a chance to attract a carnivore woman—by selling them a limited edition scent perfume with their hamburgers that has the smoky sexy smells of BK’s whopper….yes, “Flame Grilled” Cologne.

For those who don’t already know, a few years ago the term, Herbivore men or grass eaters was popularized as a word for roughly 1/3 of the Japanese male population who shun marriage or getting a girlfriend. They are frugal, well-groomed, effeminate and soft-spoken. In their wake came the carnivore women or meat-eaters—ambitious women who are finally taking charge in their business and private lives. They are the women who are not afraid to make the first move or go after the herbivore man.

So naturally, if you are a guy wanting to attract a carnivore women—what better way than smelling like a juicy grilled hamburger?

The fast food chain claims that their limited edition “Flame Grilled” fragrance cologne smells just like their famous Whopper, a quarter-pound beef patty sandwiched between two sesame buns along with condiments and vegetables. It might not be as fierce as Tom Ford’s overpowering cologne line or as powerful as Axe Body Spray, but Burger King’s new cologne has a wonderfully unique stink of its own. The scent will go on sale on April 1st.

And no, it’s not an April Fool’s joke, even though it does sound like one.
In the end, whether Burger King’s new scent smells as heavenly as a juicy burger fresh off the grill, or as like greasy meat prepared at a fast-food restaurant–that may be highly subjective and ultimately very few people will know. Unless you’re one of the lucky ones who managed to get your hands on a bottle. You have to buy the set for 5000 yen (roughly $55) which Burger King will reportedly only have 1, 000 available on a first-come, first serve basis. The set comes with an actual flame-grilled Whopper and the cologne on the side. And just in case, you were wondering—the cologne is not edible. (Also, herbivore men–are not necessarily vegetarians either. They are more complex than previously imagined.)

Burger King Japan expects the cologne to sell out; they are probably correct. People may wonder why anyone would go for such an odd product in the first-place, but it also has to do with Japan’s love of limited editions.

FoodFacts.com wishes that we knew how to get our hands on this very unique limited edition to see if the scent of flame grilling is actually something that can be bottled. Just for the record, we don’t think of this as an attractive aroma on any level and we’re not quite sure how anyone would. The fragrance of greasy burgers doesn’t strike us as particularly “manly,” but we could be wrong. Fragrance is a very personal thing and maybe some men believe that eau de grease makes women swoon. Guess we’ll find out when we know whether or not Burger King sells out in April!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jadelstein/2015/03/25/burger-kings-flame-grilled-beef-scented-cologne-perfect-for-japanese-men-seeking-carnivore-women/2/

Burger King Spicy Big Fish Sandwich … a new twist on an old item

SpicyBigFish_hero_detailFast food consumers who are looking for a lighter, healthier option have chosen the fish sandwich on the menu believing they were making better choices. FoodFacts.com has already tried to educate those consumers about their misinformation regarding chicken sandwiches. Since Burger King has just introduced the Spicy Big Fish Sandwich, it’s time to take a look at what’s going on with fish.

While we don’t have the ingredient list for the Spicy Big Fish Sandwich, we can take a look at the nutrition facts.

Calories:                           470
Fat:                                    24 grams
Saturated Fat:                   4 grams
Cholesterol:                     30 grams
Sodium:                           1230 mg

Perhaps Burger King should consider renaming this sandwich. We do think that the Burger King Salty Big Fish Sandwich might be much more descriptive.

It isn’t quite a burger, we’ll agree with that, but it’s certainly not what consumers are expecting when ordering a fish sandwich. If you ordered the regular Big Fish Sandwich and didn’t include the tartar sauce you’d be down to 370 calories, 9 grams of fat, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams trans fat, 15 grams of cholesterol and 1020 mg of sodium. Of course, the tartar sauce is where all the problems are for the regular Big Fish. Once included, the tartar sauce makes the original sandwich worse than the Spicy Big Fish. So we think it’s a safe assumption that the “creamy spicy sauce” is where all the problems lie with this one.

Consumers automatically relate fish sandwiches with improved nutrition facts. And again, the Spicy Big Fish Sandwich isn’t a burger. It’s just not great either.

Sorry Burger King. We’re not a fan.

http://www.bk.com/menu-item/spicy-big-fish-sandwich

Starbucks introduces the new Double-Smoked Bacon, Cheddar and Egg Sandwich

double smoked baconStarbucks continues on its mission of increasing the quantity and variety of its food offerings. Now they’ve introduced another new breakfast sandwich – the Double-Bacon, Cheddar and Egg Sandwich.

Although this sounds quite like a standard bacon, egg and cheese sandwich, it definitely offers a twist. This sandwich is served on what Starbucks is calling a croissant roll — that is a croissant that resembles a bun. Oh, and the bacon is double-smoked.

So is this new offering something you want to pick up for breakfast? Let’s take a look.

Here are the nutrition facts for the sandwich:

Calories:                          540
Fat:                                   32 grams
Saturated Fat:                18 grams
Trans Fat:                       1 gram
Cholesterol:                   220 mg.
Sodium:                          940 mg.

There’s definitely another way that this breakfast sandwich is differentiating itself. It may as well be a burger. The Double-Smoked Bacon, Cheddar and Egg sandwich is really a more upscale take on Burger King’s Bacon, Egg, and Cheese Croissan’wich. Believe it or not, Burger King does a better job with nutrition facts. The Croissan’wich offers fewer calories, less fat, less saturated fat, no trans fat and less cholesterol. Even though its ingredient list is awful, the Croissan’wich fits into that magic “under 400 calorie” breakfast category.

What about the ingredient list for the Double-Smoked Bacon, Egg and Cheese sandwich:

Croissant roll (unenriched wheat flour, butter [cream, natural flavor], water, milk, sugar, yeast, sea salt, eggs), fried egg patty (egg whites, egg yolks, milk, food starch-modified, salt, citric acid), smoked bacon (cured with: water, salt, sugar, sodium phosphate, natural flavor [water, natural flavors], sodium diacetate, sodium erythorbate, sodium nitrite), sharp cheddar cheese (pasteurized milk, cheese culture, salt, enzymes, color added).

The ingredients here aren’t great, but FoodFacts.com has certainly seen worse. The fact is that the nutrition facts tell the story for this sandwich. And it isn’t a compelling story.

We’re not buying this one. Starbucks is going to have to do better.

http://www.starbucks.com/menu/food/hot-breakfast/double-smoked-bacon-cheddar-and-egg-sandwich?foodZone=9999

Because a Whopper just wasn’t enough …

4CheeseWhopper-DetailBurger King has introduced the Four Cheese Whopper. For anyone who’s wondering about this new extra cheesy Whopper, what we can tell you right now is that it doesn’t actually contain four cheeses. Instead, consumers will find a three cheese blend, American Cheese and cheddar sauce between the bun.

So if the term “four cheese” conjures up images of asiago, havarti, white cheddar and fontina in your mind, this sandwich will certainly fall short of your expectations. FoodFacts.com finds the terms three cheese blend and cheddar sauce highly suspect. But without the presence of an ingredient list, can you blame us?

What we do have right now are the nutrition facts. And here they are, in all their not-so-glorious detail:

Calories:                     850
Fat:                             57 grams
Saturated Fat:           21 grams
Cholesterol:              115 mg
Sodium:                    1160 mg

How does the Four Cheese Whopper stack up against a regular Whopper with Cheese?

We’re sure you’ve assumed that it’s worse. And you’re right — it is. 120 additional calories, 13 more grams of fat and 30 additional mg of cholesterol. It does contain slightly less sodium than the Whopper with Cheese.

While we don’t have access to the ingredients, we can tell you that the ingredients in the Whopper with Cheese certainly leave a lot to be desired. It features 120 ingredients and only one type of cheese. Ingredients like high fructose corn syrup, sorbitol, sodium benzoate and propylene glycol are featured in the ingredient list. And there’s artificial color in the cheese. So we’re assuming that the ingredient list for the Four Cheese Whopper (essentially a Whopper with extra cheese) will feature a similar ingredient list. And that three cheese blend and that cheddar sauce — we’re fairly certain that those will contain controversial ingredients as well.

In short, we didn’t like the Whopper with Cheese. Now we can multiply that by four.

http://www.bk.com/menu-item/four-cheese-whopper

Welcome back the Yumbo!

BK_Yumbo_detailMost of you are probably thinking to yourself, “Welcome back the what????”

In order to answer your question, we’ll have to go back to Burger King in 1968. That was the year that the Yumbo was first introduced. The sandwich was very popular and enjoyed a six-year run before it was retired in 1974.

While FoodFacts.com isn’t quite sure where it’s unusual name came from, we are sure that the Yumbo isn’t typical Burger King fare. It’s simply a hot ham and cheese hoagie with lettuce and mayonnaise. Which, according to various internet commentary, has some fast food fans puzzled. It’s not a burger. It’s not a chicken sandwich. So what’s it doing on the Burger King menu?

Well, according to Burger King, people have been asking what happened to the sandwich. Seems it’s a favorite childhood memory for many customers. And Burger King is making an effort to bring back some those memories.

Burger King made an all out effort to do just that with the Yumbo. It overhauled its Facebook page and made it appear as though the posts were from 1974. It even invited visitors to call the Yumbo at 844-BK-YUMBO. That toll-free line connected callers to the “Yumbo Social Hotline,” and asked callers to like or comment on the sandwich on its page.

It doesn’t appear that folks who don’t remember the Yumbo are embracing it quite as enthusiastically as those who fell in love with it 40 years ago. Comments include the sentiment that the Yumbo took very little effort for Burger King and that you really need to be in the third grade to think that this is anything special.

O.k. it isn’t a Whopper. But it is certainly a simpler menu offering for Burger King which may be refreshing for some. While we don’t have an ingredient list for the sandwich, here are the nutrition facts:
Calories:               490
Fat:                       24 grams
Cholesterol:         65 mg
Sodium:               1770 mg

So what should we make of this? Let’s put it this way — it really might as well be a burger. As a matter of fact, the Yumbo is pretty much the equivalent as the Burger King Double Cheeseburger. It has 40 more calories and about the same amount of fat. The Yumbo has less cholesterol. But it also contains A LOT more sodium.

Maybe it’s just us, but we don’t expect a hot ham and cheese sandwich to carry the same nutrition facts as a fast food burger. Guess we should have remembered that the Yumbo is a fast food hot ham and cheese sandwich and this shouldn’t have been surprising.

Those of us of a certain age should probably just enjoy our Yumbo memories and not try to make new ones.

http://www.bk.com/menu-item/yumbo-hot-ham-cheese-sandwich

The early demise of Burger King’s Satisfries

iStock_000016208114SmallSeems like we only just blogged about the introduction of Burger King’s lower-calorie Satisfries. Less than a year later, we’re blogging about the end of the chain’s healthier option for french fry lovers.

This is a blow to the fast-food chain, which has struggled to keep up with its direct rivals McDonald’s and Wendy’s while also dealing with customers fleeing for brands like Chipotle and Panera, which are marketed as healthier options. Satisfries were supposed to make burger fans feel better about their fast-food meal.

Satisfries are made with a special batter that absorbs less oil, causing them to have 20% fewer calories than regular Burger King fries. A small serving of Satisfries contains 270 calories and 11 grams of fat, while the conventional version has 340 calories and 15 grams of fat.

Price may have been one factor in why customers largely rejected the lower-calorie option. A small order of the lower-calorie fries typically costs about $1.89, compared to $1.59 for a bag of its regular fries.

Earlier this week, Burger King’s 7,500 North American eateries were given the option of continuing to offer Satisfries. Owners of only 2,500 restaurants decided to do so.

“The remaining restaurants will treat the product as a limited-time menu offering and have begun phasing it out after this unprecedented run,” Burger King North America President Alex Macedo said in a statement.

The company maintains that it always planned to allow customer demand to decide the fate of the product.

Essentially, Satisfries are dead at 5,000 Burger Kings and on life support at 2,500 others. The product was launched to cater to what seemed like a specific consumer demand — healthier products — but ultimately it seems people who eat fries are not going to change their habits to save a few calories.

FoodFacts.com has to wonder whether it’s possible for any fast food chain to successfully introduce a menu item that can be perceived as a healthier option. An honest look at Satisfries tells us that while there is a savings in fat and calories, the difference may not be big enough to convince educated consumers that these fries could actually be deemed healthier.

Burger King did make an effort, though. And for that, they should be commended.

We’d love to see those efforts continue. Maybe they could begin with offering a burger with a lower fat content. That might make a real difference to consumers. Just a thought.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/08/15/why-did-customers-reject-burger-kings-satisfries.aspx

Under the Bun: Burger King’s A.1 Ultimate Bacon Cheeseburger

Screen Shot 2014-08-04 at 11.23.08 AMThe world of fast food is an incredibly competitive arena and every manufacturer attempts to stay ahead of the pack with new product introductions. Unfortunately, most of those introductions don’t make the cut here at FoodFacts.com. Burger King certainly hasn’t been an exception in this regard. And they’ve been pretty busy this summer introducing a number of new menu items to their already crowded selection.

Let’s go under the bun tonight with the latest from Burger King and take a closer look at the new A.1 Ultimate Bacon Cheeseburger.

According to the Burger King website, this new creation features two 1⁄4 lb. savory fire-grilled beef patties, topped with thick-cut smoked bacon, melted American cheese, and featuring savory A.1 Thick & Hearty sauce, all on a warm, toasted, Artisan bun. They do manage to make the new cheeseburger sound especially appealing. But how appealing is it really, beyond the mouth-watering description?

We’ve got the nutrition facts for the A.1 Ultimate Bacon Cheeseburger for you here — and our immediate answer to that last question is “not very appealing at all.” We’ll admit it, we aren’t really surprised. Take a look:

Calories:                     850
Fat:                             51 g
Trans Fat:                    3 g
Saturated Fat:           22 g
Cholesterol:              140 mg
Sodium: 1                 480 mg

Wow. This new cheeseburger is junk food overload. There’s only one burger on the Burger King menu that can actually claim worse nutrition facts than the A.1 Ultimate Bacon Cheeseburger and that’s the Triple Whopper. To be honest, we can’t really imagine anyone consuming either.

Consider that the RDI for fat based on a 2,000 calorie per day diet is 65 grams, saturated fat is 20 grams, cholesterol 200 mg and sodium 2400 mg. If you eat the new A.1 Ultimate Bacon Cheeseburger for lunch, you really don’t have much room left for anything else in your diet that day. And we didn’t even get to the french fries yet!

Not touching this one. Sorry, Burger King.

http://www.bk.com/en/us/menu-nutrition/lunch-and-dinner-menu-202/fire-grilled-burgers-and-sandwiches-220/a-1-and-reg-ultimate-bacon-cheeseburger-m2740/index.html

Under the Bun: The Burger King Extra Long Cheeseburger

rtttertte566edit334This week we have the pleasure of featuring another Under the Bun installment. Here, we turn our attention to the new Burger King Extra Long Cheeseburger. That’s right, the Extra Long Cheeseburger. Kind of looks like a hot dog, but there are two burgers inside the bun instead. You may be asking why anyone needs a cheeseburger that’s sort of like a hot dog. What’ the attraction here, anyway? Couldn’t someone just order a double cheeseburger?

FoodFacts.com wants to report that, in fact, the Burger King Extra Long Cheeseburger is actually just an odd translation of a double cheeseburger (except for the crispy onion rings topping the two burgers that lay side by side on a hoagie roll). Not the most original fast food creation. But let’s take a look at the nutrition facts before we make any decisions.

Here are the nutrition facts for the new sandwich:

Calories:                 590
Fat:                         28 g.
Saturated Fat:       11 g.
Trans Fat:              1.5 g.
Cholesterol:          70 mg.
Sugar:                   14 g.
Sodium:                1080 mg.

The Extra-Long Cheeseburger might be a translation of a double cheeseburger, but it’s certainly no better. With more calories, more fat, more trans fat and more sodium. In addition, you’ll be treated to 55% of your RDI for saturated fat.

While we don’t yet have access to the ingredient list, we can say with confidence that we won’t be trying this sandwich after looking at the nutrition facts listed.

And really, Burger King, there are better directions to go for new product introductions. We don’t get this sandwich at all. It didn’t take much creativity or thought. With fast food chains at least attempting to introduce healthier foods (even when their attempts aren’t incredibly successful), Burger King should be trying to follow suit. It’s called staying relevant. This sandwich isn’t.

http://www.bk.com/en/us/menu-nutrition/lunch-and-dinner-menu-202/fire-grilled-burgers-and-sandwiches-220/extra-long-bbq-cheeseburger-m2738/index.html