HOME > Chowhound > Chains >

Big Macs more like slightly overgrown sliders

u
UWantWhat Jan 20, 2011 08:41 PM

I have found or believe that the Big Mac has been downsized significantly over the years. Perhaps it is because it never was all that big in the first place and my hands have grown over the years. Today it seems they are slightly larger than the original White Castle Sliders. Could I be wrong about this? What do you think, Big Mac renamed to Little Mack?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. KaimukiMan RE: UWantWhat Jan 20, 2011 09:20 PM

    I'm pretty sure it is still made of two pieces of #10 meat, McDonalds original 10 patties per pound burger. In other words, no change, it wasn't that big in the first place and your hands have grown.

    8 Replies
    1. re: KaimukiMan
      mucho gordo RE: KaimukiMan Jan 21, 2011 10:12 AM

      10 patties per pound?? How is that possible? That's a little over an ounce per.

      1. re: mucho gordo
        alanbarnes RE: mucho gordo Jan 21, 2011 10:18 AM

        1.6 ounces, to be precise. It's the standard Micky D's patty. http://www.scribd.com/doc/2606654/mcd...

        1. re: alanbarnes
          mucho gordo RE: alanbarnes Jan 21, 2011 11:44 AM

          It seems awfully small. Is that the standard for most burger chains?

          1. re: mucho gordo
            f
            ferret RE: mucho gordo Jan 21, 2011 11:55 AM

            They're all in the ballpark, give or take a few tenths of an ounce.

            1. re: mucho gordo
              johnseberg RE: mucho gordo Jan 22, 2011 04:42 PM

              I remember, like, 30 years ago, a competitor advertising that McDonald's burgers were 10 to a pound. IIRC, the ads were for Dairy Queen, and they claimed to make 5 to a pound patties.

              According to Wikipedia, White Castle patties were 18 to a pound, in the early years. No mention as to whether that has changed, as far as I can see. So small there is no need to flip!

          2. re: mucho gordo
            KaimukiMan RE: mucho gordo Jan 21, 2011 10:19 AM

            thats how they make them. the entire sandwich weighs 3.5 ounces including buns and condiments.

            1. re: mucho gordo
              s
              sjahns RE: mucho gordo Jan 21, 2011 10:21 AM

              I worked at McD's in highschool, and KaimukiMan is right, with the exception of the Angus Third Pounders, that I don't' know anything about they have two meat "distinctions"
              10:1 (reg. meat) double cheeseburgers, bic macs, ect.
              4:1 (quarter meat) qtr pounders

              And yeah, it is 10 per pound and that is PRE-COOKED weight, so when cooked they are even less than an ounce per piece.

              1. re: sjahns
                KaimukiMan RE: sjahns Jan 21, 2011 11:17 AM

                Makes you think twice about that big 12oz steak at the steakhouse.... thats like 8 burgers worth.

          3. w
            willdupre RE: UWantWhat Jan 20, 2011 09:36 PM

            nope it hasn't shrunk everything else has gone supersize. sodas and fries have all gone up in size through the years, so of course the burgers are looking smaller in comparison.

            2 Replies
            1. re: willdupre
              j
              Jenny Ondioline RE: willdupre Jan 21, 2011 10:35 PM

              I think that's the key right there: the Big Mac is the same size, it's just that the (higher profit margin) items around it have gotten much larger.

              1. re: Jenny Ondioline
                ipsedixit RE: Jenny Ondioline Jan 23, 2011 09:26 AM

                Bingo!

            2. ChrisOC RE: UWantWhat Jan 23, 2011 08:03 AM

              Now I know why I always liked the quarter pounder over the big mac.

              1. e
                ediblover RE: UWantWhat Jan 23, 2011 08:22 AM

                This topic made me wonder about a related topic: 100% beef. Whenever I see that (and I think most are with me on this), I think, "Yeah... Is that even worth advertising?" Was there ever a time the Big Mac patties had non-beef fillers? Were filler-burgers even common that it's worth mentioning that your patties are 100% beef?

                6 Replies
                1. re: ediblover
                  alanbarnes RE: ediblover Jan 23, 2011 09:14 AM

                  I remember a spate of rumors in the '70s (?) about McD using extenders in its beef patties. Don't know if that's when they started emphasizing "100% beef," but there have definitely been suggestions that the patties were not.

                  1. re: alanbarnes
                    j
                    Jenny Ondioline RE: alanbarnes Jan 23, 2011 10:20 AM

                    Exactly. I remember the rumors from elementary school. Specifically, the rumor was that they had kangaroo meat in them, which honestly, a moment's thought...how is kangaroo meat CHEAPER than beef?

                    1. re: Jenny Ondioline
                      ipsedixit RE: Jenny Ondioline Jan 23, 2011 10:26 AM

                      It is in Australia. Kangaroos are considered pests in many parts down under, sort of like pigeons in America.

                      1. re: Jenny Ondioline
                        alanbarnes RE: Jenny Ondioline Jan 23, 2011 10:46 AM

                        I ordered a kangaroo burger for dinner last night; it was a buck more than regular beef.

                    2. re: ediblover
                      KaimukiMan RE: ediblover Jan 24, 2011 12:44 AM

                      McDonalds talked about 100% beef to differentiate themselves from 'local' low end places that were suspect. this was part of their emphasis on quality, cleanliness, and speedy service. And back in the 50's and 60's adding filler to burgers was pretty common.

                      1. re: ediblover
                        j
                        Japanecdote RE: ediblover Jan 27, 2011 07:26 PM

                        In Japan, for instance, most of the burgers (and ground "beef") are a mix of beef and pork. 100% beef is nice to hear sometimes.

                      2. Jennalynn RE: UWantWhat Jan 23, 2011 09:20 AM

                        I recall growing up that McD's had an ad campaign that touted: "A burger, fries and soda and change back from your dollar."

                        That was a regular hamburger, what would now be a small fries and soda.

                        This was considered a fine meal for a grownup.

                        Really shows you how our portions have grown over the years. I don't think our current state of health is really about fat in our foods etc. I think it's all about portion size.

                        3 Replies
                        1. re: Jennalynn
                          m
                          Mayor of Melonville RE: Jennalynn Jan 23, 2011 09:38 AM

                          I was in grade school when the first MickeyD's appeared in our locale. In this era before sales taxes, 2 burgers, fries, and a coke cost 50 cents. Burgers were 15 each,fries 10, coke 10.

                          1. re: Jennalynn
                            c oliver RE: Jennalynn Jan 23, 2011 10:40 AM

                            I don't know how long ago that was but that meal is still just $3.

                            1. re: Jennalynn
                              jfood RE: Jennalynn Jan 23, 2011 11:01 AM

                              Oh Boy do I hate saying this.

                              I remember $0.08 WC sliders and $0.19 McD's.

                              So a 6-pack of WC, fries and a coke was <$0.75 and 2 burgers, fries and a coke at McD was about the same.

                            2. ChrisOC RE: UWantWhat Jan 24, 2011 07:39 AM

                              I also remember the rumors that 100% beef included eyeballs and udders!

                              11 Replies
                              1. re: ChrisOC
                                h
                                Heatherb RE: ChrisOC Jan 24, 2011 07:46 AM

                                I think that was probably accurate and not just a rumor:)

                                1. re: Heatherb
                                  alanbarnes RE: Heatherb Jan 24, 2011 07:50 AM

                                  Nope. Has to be muscle meat to be labeled "100% beef." http://www.snopes.com/horrors/food/co...

                                  1. re: alanbarnes
                                    h
                                    Heatherb RE: alanbarnes Jan 24, 2011 11:03 AM

                                    Well... I guess that's a relief... Though from what I read in Fast Food Nation, it shouldn't be a huge one!

                                    1. re: Heatherb
                                      s
                                      sjahns RE: Heatherb Jan 24, 2011 12:09 PM

                                      The one I worked at in High School was at a truck stop off the interstate, and one time a truck driver actually asked me if it was 100% beef (I'm still young, this wasn't THAT long ago) so I went to the back and got an empty box to show him which was labeled 100% beef. So yes, it is actually beef lol It's not the best *quality* but I have actually been to the slaughtering/packing plant (it's very close to the one I worked at and had to go with a manager when we ran out of patties)
                                      I remember when I was a kid every said it was Kangaroo meat too, but it's definately not lol Aside from massive amounts of preservatives, all of McDonalds meat is 100% of whatever animal it comes from (yes, even the chicken!) and (atlantic "whitefish") Potatoes as well. Now the sauces are a different story. The Tubes of Big Mac Sauce, Tarter Sauce and Mayo have the ingredient list on the side of the tube and the Big Mac sauce went from the top of the tube all the way to the bottom and there were probably only 5 things I could actually readily pronounce.

                                      1. re: sjahns
                                        f
                                        ferret RE: sjahns Jan 24, 2011 04:51 PM

                                        McDonald's has repeatedly stated that there are no preservatives in their meat and there's no reason that there would be. The hamburgers are frozen and it's not like they have warehouses stacked with years of inventory. McDonald's gets a bad rap for a lot of things but they do maintain standards for their raw materials. It's just that they assemble the materials into mega-caloric end products.

                                        1. re: ferret
                                          s
                                          sjahns RE: ferret Jan 25, 2011 02:16 PM

                                          They do have standards for their raw materials, yes but there are preservatives and it's not necessarily a bad thing. With the production of food like McDonalds on such an enormous scale, food safety is a major concern, obviously. This issue is definately not completely taken care of with food handling procedures by employees in the individual restaurants. There is a reason that if you leave a happy meal on the counter for 6 months it will not mold. The freezers are kept at 0 degrees fahrenheit with all meat products and various other food products but, obviously this will not prevent food borne bacteria from becoming a problem once the foods are cooked. Sodium phophate, disodium guanylate (msg "disguiser") and sodium benzoate and nitrites are all used in various forms in their food products. These are all common "natural" preservatives and are considered "safe" (i'm not arguing the safety, just the presence) so they are not as scrutinized.

                                          1. re: sjahns
                                            f
                                            ferret RE: sjahns Jan 25, 2011 02:36 PM

                                            "There is a reason that if you leave a happy meal on the counter for 6 months it will not mold."

                                            That has been debunked and can be reproduced without preservatives. It has to do with the relative thinness of the 1.6 ounce patty drying out before mold can form. Try it with a Quarter Pounder patty (or a humid environment) and you'll see mold.

                                            Test results:

                                            http://aht.seriouseats.com/archives/2...

                                            1. re: ferret
                                              s
                                              sjahns RE: ferret Jan 25, 2011 07:06 PM

                                              Thanks for the link! I didn't know there have been more tests, I guess the patty size makes sense though.

                                              1. re: ferret
                                                KaimukiMan RE: ferret Jan 25, 2011 09:00 PM

                                                trust me, a mcdonalds hamburger WILL spoil and mold. quite a surprise in the trunk after going away to a neighbor island for the weekend and leaving the car in the sun. maybe not in arizona or parts of california, but in Honolulu... yeah, it will, as will the fries.

                                                1. re: KaimukiMan
                                                  s
                                                  sjahns RE: KaimukiMan Jan 26, 2011 08:07 PM

                                                  Oh my...that sounds awful! A lot worse then "forgotten" bananas lol

                                            2. re: ferret
                                              Steve Green RE: ferret Feb 3, 2011 08:35 AM

                                              Watch "Food Inc.", or just do a search on "ammonia burgers". You might never eat commercial ground beef again. I guess ammonia isn't considered a preservative.

                                  Show Hidden Posts