Candy Test Part II

This is the second part of the Candy Test series. Be sure to have a look at part one as well. Part one I did myself, for the second part I was joined by Life Mary – self proclaimed candy expert. The photos taken during the second test really suck bad, but I’m sure you can live with them.

Strawberry Foam

Strawberry Foam. Presentation: 2
Taste: 1
Consistency: 1
Duration: 5
Overall: 2
The strawberry foam looks a bit boring, it doesn’t yell “eat me, eat me!” to any of us. The ones we’d got our hands on had probably been in storage a little longer than they were supposed to and had turned both very sticky and very hard. Also, the taste was more or less gone. Life Mary wasn’t able to finish hers so I ate that one as well.

Candy Test Part I

I try not to eat too much candy. Christmas and Easter are exceptions, and I usually buy a little a couple of times a year in addition to that. Because of this, it’s very, very important that when I eat candy, I only eat the best. To make sure that I will (and as an excuse to eat some candy) I’ve decided to test a lot of sweets and grade them all based on the following criteria:

  • Presentation: Color and shape is important. A piece of candy should both taste and look good to ensure ultimate satisfaction.
  • Taste: Of course the most important part of a piece of candy.
  • Consistency: What happens when you put your teeth into it? So gross you want to spit it out or do you just want to stuff your mouth full of them?
  • Duration: How long does the candy last? If it tastes good, we want it to last as long as possible.

Each criteria will be graded from 1 to 6, where 1 is the worst and 6 is the best score. An overall score, that tries to reflect the general impression of the candy and not necessarily the average score, is also given. First up is the candy you can buy at Lucky Lips next to the Saga cinema in Oslo. I stopped by and bought one piece of most of what they had.

Am I nuts? Yes, I am.