Normally, I avoid McDonald's unless I'm drunk or feeling particularly nostalgic for chicken nuggets. However, last Sunday I decided to visit McDonald's after work. This was because I have developed a taste for Hungry Jack's chicken royale burger and was curious to see how the McDonald's equivalent would compare. So when I got to McDonald's I ordered the McChicken, which is basically a crumbed, fried chicken fillet with lettuce, mayonnaise and a bun. The first difference I noticed was the price: a chicken royale is noticably cheaper than a McChicken, despite the two burgers being practically the same size. The next thing I noticed is that the McChicken fillet is in the shape of a love heart. Some might find this cute, but I found it slightly disconcerting as I am puzzled what McDonald's do to a chicken fillet to get it into this shape. Another difference between the chicken royale and a McChicken is that the McChicken has a lightly toasted bun, whereas the bun of a chicken royale is soft. Which is better is a matter of personal opinion, but I prefer a soft bun. In terms of taste however, both burgers have slightly less mayonnaise than I would like, but the chicken royale compensates for this with the flavour of the chicken fillet to a greater degree than the McChicken does. In conclusion the chicken royale is a better burger than the McChicken. This is not to say that the McChicken is a bad burger, but I'm only ever likely to order it again if I am hungry and McDonald's is the only place that's around or open.
No comments:
Post a Comment