We recently did blind taste tests between Pepsi and Mountain Dew Throwbacks and their modern-recipe counterparts. The only differences we perceived were:
[ul]
[li]Throwback of both varieties had smaller, or gentler (if that makes sense) bubbles[/li][li]Modern formula of both varieties had a sweeter aftertaste that lingered longer than the throwback formula[/li][li]We preferred throwback ever so slightly, but couldn’t articulate why and it was a very very slight preference. Not enough to seek out Throwback, especially since we drink very little soda.[/li][/ul]
I agree that the cans are way cooler for throwback.
I can tell the difference between a sugar Coke and a HFCS Coke, but the difference isn’t great enough for me to go through the trouble of purchasing Mexican Coca-Cola. I wonder if the throwback soda is a contingency plan on the part of Pepsi. If corn prices continue to rise there may be a point where switching back to sugar is more profitable.
I don’t drink much soda any more but if the non-HFCS versions are available when I want one, at the same price, I’ll grab one, or a six pack or whatever. I definitely prefer the Pepsi throwback, otherwise it’s just too sweet.
In terms of calories, every calorie is a calorie. It’s a meaningless tautology. If you’re trying to suggest that the caloric load of soda is, like many (not all) candy bars, made up only of simple carbohydrates, that’d be more true and more meaningful to discuss, if people want to get into the nutritional value of soda, which I think everyone is aware is limited only to being basic, shortlasting fuel.
I don’t know if there’s a connection. When I was a kid I was allowed to have pop maybe once a week, during the summer, or if there was a special occasion. Pretty much the same with my earliest kids–it was a special thing. But we’ve all relaxed our standards and my youngest son consumes at least one a DAY, which is bad, since he has braces and I really worry about what his teeth will look like when the braces come off. (Except for the pop, he practices good dental hygiene, though.)
I think possibly HFCS made pop cheaper, hence some people saw it as a viable alternative to more expensive beverages (i.e., milk, real juice). I saw a woman giving Mountain Dew to a toddler and I was horrified. I don’t think anyone would have given a baby something like that when I was a toddler.
I loved getting cokes at the Mexican store but when I started drinking Coke Zero I loved it so much I choose it over even Mexican store cokes.
So no, I’m exclusively a Coke Zero girl now.
Bought a case of Coke (from Mexico) with old-fashioned sugar a year or two ago, with expectations for extra “bite” like the good old days. Instead, the difference was in the opposite direction.
.
[Off topic] I had braces for years and consumed a 2 liter bottle of regular Coke every day. Maybe I lucked out, but my teeth are fine. Unless he has really soft teeth or gets tons of cavities, I’d say a can of Coke is not a huge problem if he’s brushing and flossing.[/Off topic]
The OP confuses me because Pepsi Throwback and Mountain Dew Throwback have both been on the market for 2 years.
Pepsi Throwback is, IMO, vastly superior to Pepsi and Coke. Yes, I can tell a difference - regular colas leave a mucous-like feeling on my throat but Throwback is smooth, and the flavors taste more “clear” in general. I don’t like either version of Mountain Dew. By the way, both of those products now have permanent spots on the Pepsi product line.
You were very lucky. I didn’t see Mountain Dew Throwback at my Kroger until last February. At first they had these single bottles for sale on a special display. A month later I started seeing six packs and then eventually 12 packs.
Mountain Dew Throwback quickly caught my eye because of the old vintage can. I always loved those Hillbillies on the green bottles thirty odd years ago. It’s nice seeing them back.
If everyone was aware of that, there wouldn’t be people who constantly have a bottle of Mountain Dew on their person. I think the vast majority of non-SDMB posters out there haven’t the slightest clue how many calories they drink in a day.
Well actually the deal with sucrose is that it’s a glucose and fructose molecule that have been chemically bonded to each other into a single sucrose molecule. However in that 45/55 mix the glucose/fructose molecules are separate a distinct molecules. However there’s one gotcha. You know how soft drinks tend to be acidic? Guess what will break up a sucrose molecule into a molecule of glucose/fructose? Yup, acids do that. (I’ve always wondered if anybody checked a bottle of those “real sugar” sodas what percentage of the sucrose had already broken up. It would of course depend on how acidic the soda was and what temperature it was kept at.)
I pretty much agree with you though that the ‘real sugar’ thing is just marketing. (I mean hell people think honey is healthier when that’s pretty close to HFCS, it just has a little maltose in it.) Last I checked the sucrase enzymes in your body break up sucrose pretty quickly.
New Sierra Mist tastes absolutely awful. Sure, 7-Up pulled off going back to natural ingredients, but not Sierra Mist. But since 7-Up also ruined their Cherry 7-Up, I stick with Sprite, or, better yet, an off brand lemon-line soda (Clover Valley, to be precise) that actually has some distinguishable lime flavor to it.
The rest I don’t do because they don’t make caffeine free varieties, as far as I know. Heck, even the HFCS caffeine free sodas are hard to find now. My local stores never have any.
And I think you assume that everyone, if only they were enlightened, would have the same dietary priorities that you do. Which is a load of sugary nonsense.
I don’t drink much soda, buy my husband does. He loves the “throwback” sodas with the real sugar, especially colas. He insists he can tell the difference. So when they’re on sale, I stock up for him. To me it all tastes like bubbly sugar water.
The difference between soda with sugar and soda with HFCS seems like the difference between smoking Marlboro’s and Marlboro Lights. One may be slightly less awful for you, but they are both pretty awful.
It’s nice seeing them back.