KFC’s Double Down

6 Comments

In case you’ve been living in an igloo without any access to news, Kentucky Fried Chicken (or KFC as they like to call it de-emphasize the fried) has come out with a “sandwich” they call the Double Down. I put quotes around the sandwich, because there is no bread in it. It’s two slabs of chicken breast (either grilled or fried) cheese and bacon with some sauce.

This KFC Double Down has gotten quite a bit of press recently… and most of it bad. Many have claimed that it’s unhealthy and just a heart attack waiting to happen. Should we be worried? Here is the Double Down’s nutritional information (for brevity, I’m just giving the highlights):

Sandwich	Calories	Fat	Carbs	Protein	Sodium	Cholesterol
Grilled	460	23	3	61	1430	185
Fried	540	32	11	53	1380	145

Clearly, the KFC Double Down isn’t going to win any awards for best fat, sodium, and cholesterol choices. However, it should get points for being low carb and high protein (making it friendly for followers of the Atkins’ Diet).

Now let’s look at a couple of other fast foods:

Food	Calories	Fat	Carbs	Protein	Sodium	Cholesterol
KFC Crispy Twister w/Crispy Strip	590	31	49	28	1220	60
McDonald’s Triple Thick Chocolate Milkshake (16oz.)	580	17	15	94	280	65

I’d argue that the KFC Crispy Twister w/Crispy Strip is less healthy as it’s essentially replacing the protein with carbs and tacking on more calories. McDonald’s Triple Thick Milkshake isn’t much better considering that it’s just the medium size (there’s a 32oz one with a whopping 1150 calories) and it is just a drink, not a meal. Here you are sacrificing fat and protein for carbs. You save a lot of sodium and cholesterol, but if you are ordering one these you may be likely to ruin those savings with an order of McDonalds fries.

The way I see it, there is some redeeming health value to the Double Downs, especially the grilled one. I think the press is guilty of a knee-jerk reaction to a new concept that they didn’t fully understand.

While this site focuses on health, it’s also import to keep three additional factors in mind: taste, convenience, and cost. In the interest of providing a complete review, I went for a taste test. I figured that most people would opt for the fried version as it would appeal to their taste buds, so that’s what I went with too. It wasn’t bad, but it didn’t knock my socks off either. I think I set my expectations too high. Also the chicken to bacon ratio was overwhelmingly tilted towards the chicken side. My suggestion is that they pound the chicken breasts a little flatter and add another slice of bacon.

In general fast food is pretty convenient – but I realize that KFC isn’t near everyone. My order took about 12 minutes of waiting, but it wasn’t the Double Down’s fault. All the KFC orders at my restaurant were slow on this day… odd because it wasn’t particular busy.

Lastly there’s the cost. At $4.95, it’s more expensive than many fast food sandwich options. For just about the same money, you could get a McDouble every day of the work week. I’m not recommending that, but simply pointing out that fast food prices are competitive and the Double Downs aren’t competing well.

This post deals with:

chicken, double down, fried, grilled, kfc

... and focuses on:

Food Choice

Posted by Lazy Man on April 15, 2010 in Food Choice.

Previous: “What’s Your Gain?”