How does KFC stay in business? THIS is how!
However, every time I go to KFC, I say to myself afterward: “This is the LAST time I am going to KFC.” It’s always a disappointment. Seriously, the crust is always soft and doughy and peels off like sunburned skin.
Well I swan, Shawn. 
Now wait a minnit. I’d heard that the chemical was there too make black men, only black men, impotent.
Me. 
How? Do hold the wing with the knife then pull the meat off with the fork? Sounds awkward to me. I dunno. I’m not very agile.
I have a friend that has an aversion to eating with her fingers. The first time she, my fiancee, and I went to dinner together, she got wings. But then, she ate them with fork and knife. It drove me nuts, since so much meat was left on the bones.
When she excused herself to the ladies room, I dove into the pile of bones to nibble off a good 33% of the original meat. My fiancee just stared at me, to which I replied, “She wasn’t going to eat that meat anyways.”
Nah. I agree with Shawn1767, even though I’m not from New Orleans. Popeye’s chicken has always been much better (to my tastes, and my family’s tastes growing up) than KFC. I know exactly what he means about soggy chicken, although that applies to the original recipe KFC, not so much the extra crispy version (which is more like Popeye’s in terms of texture.) They’re different enough to warrant the distinction. In fact, here in Chicago, KFC was my least favorite of the major chains. I prefer Church’s and Brown’s to them, mostly because KFC has always seemed over salted to me, and their original recipe chicken is “soft and doughy” as Shawn described.
As to the OP, no, I eat my chicken with my hands.
Pretty much. Also some using the knife to cut the meat off the bone. And sometimes just stabbing what’s left on the bone with the fork to bring it up to the mouth to gnaw off stuff that’s really hard to get off.
Different strokes for different folks, eh?
I don’t know if I’d try that at the Anchor Bar though. 
A cool place to visit if you’re in the neighborhood.
As promised, I did a limited but unbiased taste test. I bought two legs from KFC and two ftom Popeye’s. In the interest of fairness I allowed all to come to room temp (about 70 deg). My results;
Neither was anywhere near wet or soggy, although the KFC meat was somewhat more moist. I think this was more from cooking time than anything else.
The Popeye’s was, without a doubt, saltier tasting but not unedible. The breading was maybe a little crisper, but all breadings soften when they cool.
The KFC had more herb and spice flavor, but seemed more bland than I remember.
All in all, I kinda prefer KFC but if I was already past them I’d stop at Popeye’s, which is closer, and also on my way home.
I’m thinking the last time I went to Church’s I decided I’d go there from then on for the tastier breading and the chicken wasn’t over cooked.
So my next mission will be to do another taste test between Popeye’s and Church:s.
In case any locals wish to duplicate (chellenge) my opinions, all three are on San Pablo ave between Berkeley and Richmond in rainy California.
Oh how I suffer for science.
Peace,
mangeorge
Why would anyone choose kfc original recipe over their crispy one? It’s never soggy.
KFC also has a grilled version, which was pretty good the one time I tried it but it seemed a little sweet.
My test was for comparison. Popey’s doesn’t have an extra crispy.
I suspect the use of the word “soggy” is for effect. Hyperbole fits here, I think.
The two types of KFC chicken are made differently (at least according to Wikipedia). The original recipe is made in a pressure fryer, and the extra crispy is marinaded in garlic and thrown in a conventional fryer. The pressure-fried version seems more juicy to me, but the relatively soggy (maybe not “soggy,” but soft & limp in comparison with the other fried chickens mentioned) crust throws me off. As I mention in my post, the extra-crispy version is comparable to Popeye’s, although in my experience, it’s the KFC that’s saltier.
Sorry, I didn’t mean you, and the testing makes perfect sense. But there’s mentions upthread of soggy KFC, and I was just thinking why bother with their original? The crispy version is such a superior product.
Next test, KFC crispy vs Church’s whatever.
Seems a lot of people prefer the original recipe. I can see certain arguments for it: I do think the crust is more flavorful (too much going on, in my opinion), but I do love that super crispy skin on a chicken.
Interestingly, I found this Slashfood “blind” taste test between KFC original vs Popeye’s Mild (I put “blind” in scare quotes because you have to be blind not to notice the difference between these two chickens), and KFC original overwhelmingly beat Popeye’s (24-9).
I dislike the crust on KFC original recipe. I also find a distinct difference between KFC and Popeyes.
By the way, I noticed that some Popeyes are branded as “Popeyes Chicken and Biscuits” and others are “Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen.” Why the discrepancy?
Last night I tested KFC extra crispy vs Church’s original. Again, it was pretty close but Church’s won by a nose. It was as I remember, tasty and crisp. I am now a Church’s fan, and I want to try their spicy. Maybe I’ll do Church’s spicy vs Popeye’s.
My ranking so far:
Church’s original
KFC extra crispy
KFC original
Popeye’s mild, a close fourth.
These would all be better, for me anyway, while still hot.
From a United State dining etiquette guide:
Go tell the Spartans,
I mean do as the Romans do.
I do. I don’t like getting my hands greasy or nibbling meat off bones. When Mr. Neville and I are having any kind of meat with bones, I give him the bones to nibble when I am finished with them. Then everybody’s happy.