Food chains you trust enough to try any new item

[jhlurie]

I figured I'd bring back an oldie but goodie. I mean for a bunch of foodies there are an awful lot of strong opinions one way or the other about fast food.

But then I thought I'd put a new spin on it. Instead of a simple "yea" or "nay" on fast food, or list of favorite items or any of the other variations we've done, here's something new.

No matter how often (or how little) you eat fast food is there any chain where whenever you see a new menu item you feel obliged to try it at least once, within the bounds of the basic ingredients being ones you like.

I can say for certain that there are many chains where I'd never try ANYTHING no matter how interesting it looked. Taco Bell is the prime example for me of this. I don't care how good it SEEMS, I've been burned with bad taste and very suspect digestive results far too often to even risk eating at this dump.

And some chains where I normally wouldn't eat, but an interesting item might at least get me try. A place like Arby's or the New York-based chain Ranch 1 might qualify.

Where do I personally almost always at least TRY every new item? Believe it or not, McDonalds. Not that McDonald's is the best fast food, but in my opinion it IS the most consistent. I may never eat the item again. I may only infrequently eat ANY kind of fast food. I may only eat McDonald's a fraction of those times, and I may never get back to the new item I've tried even if I'd liked it... but at McDonald's (despite rare media reports of chicken heads fried up as McNuggets), I'm really NOT that worried.

Cinnabon gets a similar status. It's too darned fattening to eat very often, but if I see a new item, I'm gonna buy it at least once.

Anyone else bestow this status on any other chains? "None" is certainly a valid answer, but may get a bit tiresome.

[Jinmyo]

None. Nope. Never.  :p

About Taco Bell. I've never eaten there and wouldn't but their food has always seemed to me more promising and a better deal than burger chains. Sorry to hear t'aint so.

[Bux]

I'm with Jinmyo, at least as long as she's not thinking Taco Bell.

I don't suppose Ducasse counts as a food chain and I don't suppose I'll get to eat at any of his restaurants often enough to go through the whole menu once. So I won't know what's new.

All I can really add to a thread on food chains is just to say it's nice to be on the top of one. I'd hate to be a soy bean or whatever little fish eat.

[Fat Guy]

I am profounded, Bux.

I will try any item at Arthur Treacher's Fish & Chips. As far as I'm concerned, it's the best of the fast food chains. And it's not just the best; it's actually good. I'm not sure there has been anything added to the menu there since the 1970s (interestingly, the first Arthur Treacher's opened in Columbus, Ohio, just 11 days after I was born), except maybe the Crunch Pup, which I'm not sure they serve anymore. Arthur Treacher's often appears bundled with two other very good chains: Pudgie's and Nathan's.

I also like Chick-Fil-A but would probably not be inclined to try new menu items there. Ditto for Pudgie's and Nathan's.

Regarding Taco Bell, I think the bean burritos will do in a pinch, and the price is right. But I wouldn't depart much from that.

Subway is useful out on the open road. At least you can get a salad made from fresh vegetables for cheap. But again I wouldn't venture too far deep into the Subway menu.

I too will try any new item at McDonald's once, because I think of it as a question of cultural literacy.

[jhlurie]

Chick-Fil-A does have a special place in my heart.  I'm only very familiar with one location, but the basic chicken sandwich there gets the job done.  In plain, its fried and its good.  The rest of the menu?  I dunno...

Nathan's used to be on my "try anything" list, but I've yanked it off because the chain became over-franchised, and while the full service location still do the job and do it well, the ones inside of department stores, the ones joined at the hip with Dunkin Donut stores, and the ones in rest stops, actually somehow manage to ruin those great hot dogs.  And if you can ruin one of those, I'm certainly not going to try your Deluxe Chicken Sandwich or your Philly Cheese steak.

Arthur Treacher's?  Yeah... they did add chicken to the menu in the 1970's.  You are right, Fat Guy.

After some thought I've changed my mind a bit about Arby's.  While their food is by no means excellent, I've always found their menu interesting.  For a fast food place they actually take a few risks, and so maybe just curiousity would drive me to try most things on their menu, even if my expectations weren't high.

It's funny.  I only eat this kind of food about once, maybe twice a month these days and yet I still have such strong opinions.  I suppose once you've had a few meals that cost as much as a month of fast food you can never truly go back... but that doesn't strip you of your opinions about it. :)

[Rachel Perlow]

I miss Roy Rogers. They had the best fried chicken. Way better than KFC. Even Popeye's, while better than KFC, is no Roy Rogers.  :(

[Jinmyo]

Even Roy Rogers isn't Roy Rogers anymore. Clicke.

[macrosan]

I am profounded,Bux

....I think of it as a question of cultural literacy

Danishly profounded, I hope

and

Surely you mean literal culturacy,Steven ?!?!?

Macdonalds are indeed consistent. So consistent, that I know I never need eat there in the hope of finding acceptable food.

In the UK, one chain I do think is good is Pizza Express. The only other that I get food from is KFC, although I get the impression that their control over their franchisees is looser than it once was. My recent experiences (at two different locations) was of lukewarm food, greasy fries and a general unkempt-looking establishment. I have crossed them off my list until further notice. But yes, I did try all their new offerings (like spicy shicken, nuggets and so on) but always returned to the original finger-lickin' chicken.

[NewYorkTexan]

Krispy Kreme makes my list.  They offer a seasonal donut that is often very good.  The current donut du jour is New York cheesecake, which is excellent.   The pumpkin pie donut was not a successful experiment!

I refuse to try any new products at McDonalds.  Several years ago, they first introduced the McRib.  The commercials made it look so good that I tried it.  It was the most vile fast food product ever created.

[tommy]

I can say for certain that there are many chains where I'd never try ANYTHING no matter how interesting it looked.  Taco Bell is the prime example for me of this.  I don't care how good it SEEMS, I've been burned with bad taste and food poisoning far too often to even risk eating at this dump.

i love the crunchy taco supreme at taco hell.  and i order them every time.  however, i am *always* sucked into whatever they are promoting, and generally order it along with my 3 tacos supreme.  i am always disappointed.  you'd think i'd learn, no?

[Varmint]

The one place that I would never try a new food item is Hardee's, easily the least consistent fast food restaurant in the South.  I think there's some sort of inverse proportionality at work here:  The nastiest "special" items are likely to come from the restaurants that introduce them the most frequently.  If a fast food restaurant has to keep introducing new items, it may be a sign that their overall quality isn't all that great to retain their customer base.

I will also add that McDonald's is the one fast food chain that I'll visit if I'm in the middle of nowhere and need to get something quickly.  The average McDonald's is better from a quality and sanitary standpoint than the average from the other chains.

[Wilfrid]

Speaking of fried chicken, is Popeye's any good?  Or just how bad is it?  I used to like - within bounds - KFC in the UK, but each experiment with it in New York has been disgusting.

[tommy]

If a fast food restaurant has to keep introducing new items, it may be a sign that their overall quality isn't all that great to retain their customer base.

i disagree to a point here.  most chains introduce new items occasionally to spice up their otherwise static menu.  some do it routinely in smaller markets, basically testing the waters for a possible national release, while others, like taco hell, rotate special items on a regular basis, knowing that they will disappear in a few months.  at least, that's the way it seems to me.

wilfrid, there is a thread somewhere on popeye's chicken.  i think the consensus was that it is better than most.  i like it.  i can't speak for NYC outlets, however, as all of my fried chicken is consumed in NJ.

[Fat Guy]

Popeye's is far superior to KFC. They make a very acceptable piece of chicken, provided you can get it relatively soon after it comes out of the fryer.

In addition, KFC tends to be a lot better in the middle of nowhere than in New York City. Most fast food places in New York City are inferior to their heartland counterparts.

[jhlurie]

The main distinction and difference in quality I've found is between "full service" locations and "express" locations.  Yes, even fast food quality varies depending on the size of the kitchen.

Shocking.

[Rail Paul]

Sonic restaurants in the South and Southwest tend to be pretty good. Drive-up, car-hops, tray affixes to your window. I'd try any thing new on their menu.

Menu is hot dogs, chili, burgers, devilishly good onion rings. It's tough to escape with less than 500 grams of saturated fat clinging to your hips.

Whattaburger, on the other hand, is terrible, in my experience. Even the food they do every day is consistently bad. LotsaBurger, same thing. LotsaGas is more like it.

[IslandMom]

Okay... with all of the old topic locked I figured I'd bring back an oldie but goodie.  I mean for a bunch of foodies there are an awful lot of strong opinions one way or the other about fast food.

But then I thought I'd put a new spin on it.  Instead of a simple "yea" or "nay" on fast food, or list of favorite items or any of the other variations we've done, here's something new.

No matter how often (or how little) you eat fast food is there any chain where whenever you see a new menu item you feel obliged to try it at least once, within the bounds of the basic ingredients being ones you like.

I can say for certain that there are many chains where I'd never try ANYTHING no matter how interesting it looked.  Taco Bell is the prime example for me of this.  I don't care how good it SEEMS, I've been burned with bad taste and food poisoning far too often to even risk eating at this dump.

And some chains where I normally wouldn't eat, but an interesting item might at least get me try.  A place like Arby's or the New York-based chain Ranch 1 might qualify.

Where do I personally almost always at least TRY every new item?  Believe it or not, McDonalds.  Not that McDonald's is the best fast food, but in my opinion it IS the most consistent.  I may never eat the item again.  I may only infrequently eat ANY kind of fast food.  I may only eat McDonald's a fraction of those times, and I may never get back to the new item I've tried even if I'd liked it... but at McDonald's (despite rare media reports of chicken heads fried up as McNuggets), I'm really NOT that worried.

Cinnabon gets a similar status.  It's too darned fattening to eat very often, but if I see a new item, I'm gonna buy it at least once.

Anyone else bestow this status on any other chains?  "None" is certainly a valid answer, but may get a bit tiresome.  :D

I like Ivar's and Kidd Valley (in Washington state).  My hubby likes Red Mill (burgers and shakes), and #1 son likes Kidd  Valley (burgers and shakes, and my all time favorite fish sandwich).  #2 son likes Dick's (burgers and shakes), #3 son likes Kidd Valley.  Unfortunately for me, hubby, #1 and #3 sons, there are no Kidd Valleys, Ivars, or Red Mills here in Hawaii.  (#2 son is lucky - he lives in Seattle).  For the "fast foods" here, I like Teddy's Bigger Burgers, Maui Tacos, and though not fast food, Chili's is usually pretty reliable.  Okay, now you know my dirty secret - that I eat fast foods.  Please don't report me to my friend Ryan, a clinical pharmacist who doubles as the cholesterol sheriff! :D

[Liza]

Sorry. You lost a hello: "Food Chains you trust enough..."

I don't trust any of them.

[jhlurie]

Sorry. You lost a hello: "Food Chains you trust enough..."

I don't trust any of them.

Has Bux taken over your brain?  :D

Here we go back to the old argument here about whether or not "consistency" is enough of a reason for chains to exist.

[Liza]

Sorry, that was supposed to read "You lost me at hello", a clever reference and inversion to a line from "Jerry Maguire".

Whoopsy.

Again, consistency has nothing to do with it for me. I have an innate mistrust of corporations and food chains.

Had Bux taken over my brain, my posting would have been better but Davy would have objected.

[Frank Language]

Speaking of food chains...

Because I've been eating lower on the food chain for the past six months, I can't honestly say I'm the most adventurous eater anymore - at least by omnivore standards. What will I try? Anything without meat or dairy - and I mean anything - but that leaves out most fast food chains. (Actually, I have tried the McVeggie burger and I thought it sucked - but that was probably largely because of the white-bread bun they put it on.)

There is, fortunately, a guide for vegetarians on the road who are on the road and may have to eat at fast-food joints: The Vegetarian Resource Group Guide to Fast Food. At most chains there is usually at least one item vegetarians can order without feeling compromised, and that's a good feeling. (It's also necessary these days for the operators of these restaurants - and I use that term loosely - to accomodate the needs of all their varied clientele.)

[DISCLAIMER: No, this post doesn't satisfy the parameters of the topic, but it does satisfy the parameters of the tangential thinking that's rampant on eGullet. And while I'm off-topic, has anyone seen Scotland, PA? I like the part where McBeth is dueling with McDuff - an avowed vegetarian - and forces him to eat a burger. Maybe I should start a topic about Scotland, PA.]

[Beachfan]

Does Mrs. Field's cookies count?  I trust them.  I'd try one of their veggieburgers.  But probably not if they came out with baked clams.

Perhaps that's a REAL litmus test of trust.  Which food chain would you trust enough to order their baked clams?

[jhlurie]

I decided to dredge up this ancient topic, because it just sort of popped up during an unrelated search and well... I'm still interested.

eGullet, historically, has been very split on the issue of fast food. But I maintain to this day that fast food--while it may overwhelmingly be junk--is rife with exceptions. There are other threads where we've talked about specific menu items which are exceptions (you know... the "one good item at The Olive Garden" or the "three things at Taco Bell which don't make you hurl" kind of situations), but I think it's even more enlightening to talk about the chains which buck the trend totally and manage to actually mass produce a consistently across-the-board decent menu--where their record is good enough that you are at least willing to TRY almost anything there, because you know that, at a minimum, it will be eatable.

Do those chains exist? I thought so 3 years ago, and I still do now. And yes, I still think McDonald's tops the list. We aren't talking about excellence here as much as consistency. McDonald's is nothing if not consistent.

[Tess]

I haven't had anything bad off the Steak'n'Shake menu. I haven't made a big effort to try everything, though.

My boyfriend and his best friend between them have probably had everything on the Jack in the Box menu, but that has more to do with being drunk late at night in Honolulu than with aiming for completeness. I've had the tacos and really liked them. We don't have Jack in the Box where we live, or I would surely be more familiar with it.

[viva]

McDonald's also has the advantage from an international perspective - when I travel for long stretches, sometimes I just want something that reminds me of home. McDonald's serves the purpose because I know the fries will taste the same no matter what (now, if they would just introduce the McGriddle in France, I would be a happy camper - pain au chocolat can't come close to providing the hangover cure that the McGriddle offers). Sometimes, when I just want something familiar, the McDonald's at the Sao Paulo airport does the trick just nicely, no matter how wonderful the churrascuria next door might be.

From a domestic US perspective, I'll take anything In N' Out Burger has to serve up. But they don't change their menu, so the point is moot.