Burger Kings new Satisfries ... dont satisfy

Burger King has introduced Satisfries, left, which have Burger King has introduced Satisfries, left, which have fewer calories and fat than classic fries, right. (Sept. 24, 2013) Photo Credit: Newsday / Erica Marcus

advertisement | advertise on newsday

Feed Me

The dish on Long Island's restaurant and food scene.

How satisfying are Burger Kings new Satisfries? Not terribly. The French fries, which debuted Tuesday at around 7,200 Burger Kings across North America, have about 20 percent fewer calories and 25 percent less fat than the chains original version, according to the company. Id say they were about 20 percent worse.

Burger Kings old fries (now identified as classic) are pale fingers of vaguely potato-y fluff that somehow manage to taste oily without affording the consumer the crispy, browned pleasure of most deep-fried foods. The new crinkle-cut Satisfries are comparably pale and fluffy, but since they are thicker, they manifest more fluffy interior and less oily exterior. Add to this less salt and you have a singularly unsatisfying fry.

advertisement | advertise on newsday

After my jaunt to Burger King, I headed to McDonalds to sample what the worlds largest burger chain calls its World Famous Fries. They were better than either of Burger Kings, if only because they are thinner.

In for a penny, in for a pound. While I was at Burger King I met a fellow who agreed that French fries were not The Home of the Whopper's strong suit. You should go to Wendys, he told me. Off I went, and he was right. The Wendys fries were thin, like McDonalds, but browner, and with bits of skin still attached. They even tasted like potatoes.
 

Subscribe to our newsletter for restaurant recommendations, recipes and more.

You also may be interested in: