Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > San Francisco Bay Area >
Apr 13, 2005 05:07 AM

HK style guk jyu pa faan

  • k

any opinions on who has the better renditions of the hk classic guk jyu pa faan (yup cantonese, though it looks rather korean orthographically ...)? i'm thinking mainly about the ke jap (ketsup) style, rather than haak jiu or whatever style, and definitely not the non-baked ones. opinions on the presence of peas or corn in the rice, consistency of the egg in the rice, chop thickness? on a buddy's suggestion i had it at ruby cafe (or something similar) where the old jackson cafe used to be near kearny. i thought it was pretty good, sauce was pretty tasty, with a good-sized portion for the price. also think that t28's is not bad except that they tend to be more pricey in general. what's spots have you heard are good and reliable?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. i'm anticipating an eventual graze-by of guk jyu pa faan spots. so even if you just have names of spots that aren't necessarily vouched for that'd be very appreciated too. thanks again!

    1. There's VIP on Broadway in Chinatown. Never tried it but seen people eating it.

      1 Reply
      1. re: GP

        This is my brother's favorite dish and he says that VIP on Broadway prepares it the best.

      2. I'll bet if you put baked pork chop on rice in your subject line you'll get more replies. We've had it at the Macau cafe in the Richmond Pacific East mall, and the HK style cafe on Broadway in San Mateo. Both have the cream sauce, no peas in the rice. They are both OK, nothing special.

        1. That would be Sterling Ruby on Jackson St.

          I don't know if it's on the menu, but you might want to check out Broadway Bistro in Millbrae. It seems to do a superior job with other HK style western dishes.

          2 Replies
          1. re: Melanie Wong

            thanks for quick responses guys. why is it that good chinese stuff is so often not in the City, sigh.

            to peter, yup i know you're probably right about saying it in english getting more responses but i guess i'm a bit squeamish about it. it's kinda crazy, seems to me, that in a region with so many gwongdung-oid folks that people here are unable to order any chinese or gwongdung food in its respective language/dialect. plus it it gets rather confusing - though often pretty amusing - when folks have to do the translation thing for chinese dishes. but in comparison with other "ethnic" foods why is that people can say: ramen but not tongmin, or carnitas but not siu yuk, or albondigas but not yu daan, or samosa but not cheun gyun, you feel me? i mean, people asking for carnitas or chilaquiles in mexican spots don't ask for pork confit and crisp fried tortillas simmered in tomato gravy with cheese and egg, that would seem very weird; but in a chinese place that's what you see. anyhoo, sorry about the ranting and raving, it's not aimed at you peter, it's more that the situation is rather ridiculous and it also makes communication about food rather unwieldy and imprecise alotta times. but thanks for the VIP tip, never had the jyu pa faan, but i dig their minsi ngau yuk faan sometimes.

            also, i swung by tak kee (noriega) yesterday for the guk jyu pa faan. i was hungry so it was yummy, but objectively it wasn't anything special. the rice only had egg, no peas or nothing, a bit drier than i prefer. the sauce was not bad, maybe on the sweet side, no cheese, they should have baked it longer, it didn't caramelize. the chops themselves were pretty good though, they were decent size, their thickness was the style i like (maybe 5/8"), stayed pretty juicy, not too tough, but not too mushy/tender, just enough resistance to make for a satisfying chew. enjoyable but not a standout.

            1. re: ken ivorous

              For the record, Washington Bakery in SF Chinatown, which spawned Broadway Bistro, has baked pork chop over rice (tomato sauce version) on the menu and might be worth checking out.

          2. The original comment has been removed