Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > Los Angeles Area >
Feb 25, 2006 10:11 PM

Mastros Steakhouse

  • n

Is Mastros in Beverly Hills as good as they say or is it a safe and better bet to dine at Mortons or Ruth Chris?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. Totally overrated. While the steak is pretty good, i would much rather have Ruth's Chris. The oysters were scary big. They were about 3 bites each. After 1/2 dozen, I was afraid of oysters for almost a year. If you go try it, don't get the oysters.

    5 Replies
    1. re: imda14u29

      I prefer Mastro's over Ruth Chris, and love the HUGE oysters.

      1. re: imda14u29

        Agree. Mastro's is the epitome of quantity over quality. Ruth's Chris makes a much better steak, and their broccoli au gratin is like to die...

        If you go to Mastro's avoid the big seafood tray thing, that's how they pay the rent. And definitely avoid the creamed spinach, hack ptuey...


        1. re: jcwla

          The au gratin at Ruths Chris is disgusting, like something at elementary school and the only decent Ruths Chris in town is the Irvine location, the BH store is the worst in terms of steak quality and ambience.

        2. re: imda14u29

          This is so funny reading this since I choked on one of their oysters, they are so big and you swallow a oyster that I had to rush to the mens room.

          1. re: Mike

            hahaah mike, reading your post made me lol, especially after reading the other post about the oyster being 3 bites big. it must have not been a good experience, but its funny to read about it. thanks for sharing.

        3. I disagree with prior posts dissing Mastros. From my previous experiences there, I find that Mastros is absolutely worth every penny. It is the best steakhouse in L.A. currently, bar none.

          Of course, if you're looking to save a few bucks you could compromise and go to Ruth's Chris or Mortons, both of which are fairly decent.

          1. I have a questions about the two, quality of food aside.

            I have only been to Ruth's Chris in Irvine and both Mastro's in Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. I can only assume the Ruth's Chris in Beverly Hills is a very differerent experience then the Irvine location.

            The Irvine location was a mess. Parking was a terrible. We were all hearded up front like cattle just waiting for our name to be called. There were young children running around. The service was o.k but hardly of the Mastro's level.

            The Mastro's Steakhouse & Ocean Club in Orange County are where you go for a classy evening, while the Ruth's Chris in Irvine was like family night at a shopping center.

            I am not saying this to be critical of Ruth's Chris, I would just like to know if I should try the Beverly Hills location.

            1 Reply
            1. re: cdmedici

              My view can be summed up in a single sentence: Why go to Ruth's Chris if there's a Mastro's nearby?

              I think Morton's is better than RC and have had excellent luck at the Morton's in Santa Ana (near So. Coast Plaza).

              But I'm really looking forward to visiting the new Mastro's by South Coast Plaza in the near future. Thanks for your review of it above, cdmedici!

            2. Ruth's Chris and Mastros are in completely different dining categories, even though they are both steak houses. Ruth's Chris is far more casual, although the food is pretty damn good. And I find it consistent from location to location. (Palm Springs, Sacramento and Maui, and good esperiences all).

              Morton's is NOT consisten and I refuse to spend money there ever again after having had the worst steak of my entire life there about 4 months ago and not having the situation resolved to my satisfaction by management.

              Mastros is PSYCHOTICALLY delicious. One of me favorite restaurants in any is like they cover their steaks in crack, they are so good. And the seafood tray is extravagant, but my husband and I love it....I love love love mastros!

              3 Replies
              1. re: hellolizzie

                i was going to post a response to the original poster's inquiry - but your's pretty much sums it up. mastros is the real deal.

                1. re: jaydee

                  "it is like they cover their steaks in crack, they are so good." that sold me right there haha

                2. re: hellolizzie

                  I can't agree more with Mastros... the bone-in filet is FANTASTIC. The rib-eye is really good too.

                  We went last night with some friends and I had their Chilean Sea Bass — it was DELICIOUS! But I would still want the filet or rib eye.


                3. I have not been to Mastros yet, but I have heard great things from everyone. These posts are the first negatives I have ever heard of Mastros. I am dying to try it for myself and soon will try and post a review.

                  As far as Ruth's Chris. My first experiences with RC were up in San Francisco, and I fell in love with the place. Definately in for a great steak and a wonderful experience. I have been to the one in Beverly Hills twice as well, and I must agree that it is not as good as the San Fran one, but still, amazing steaks. RC is definately my top steak house at this point (keep in mind I have not tried Mastros yet).

                  Mortons is completely overrated. I prefer not to go if I can avoid it. The steaks are decent, above average, but not in the same category as RC. If Mortons was half price it would be worth going.