Can you really taste the difference?

If it's that big a deal then Coke and Pepsi should just switch everything back to sugar. I know hfcs is cheaper but if it's that big of a taste difference maybe it would jump start the non diet csd category enough to offset the price.

Does anyone know the cost per case of throwback Pepsi vs hfcs Pepsi? I'm sure that the bottling run was huge, so it would probably compare better price wise than what Passover Coke costs.

then you run into the debate over beet sugar vs cane....

Which of those is cheaper?... and do they taste the same?

Most people are just used to the hfcs stuff by now, so unless sugar became cheaper, I doubt you'll see a switch back, and I doubt a switch back would re-energize anything. The category is actually slowly regaining some loss, or at least not losing any more than it did.

Originally Posted by cokeman19

Which of those is cheaper?... and do they taste the same?

I believe BEET sugar is cheaper which is why the Pepsi throwback this year tastes like crap!! (Beet sugar)

Last year it had both mixed together and tasted wonderful!

Sadly its all about $$$ in this country,NO ONE CARES ABOUT QUALITY AND THATS SAD......

Doesn't Pepsi mkix beet and HFCS in Pepsi, WCP, and CFP?

The labels do show HFCS and "sucrose" on Pepsi, but the sucrose is well down on the list, and I've wondered at the percentage and type of sucrose used. Also wondered if the sucrose added is in some kind of solution form - (harkening back to the old "el masko" days of WW2 rationing, where Pepsi took delivery of a liquified sugar solution instead of pure granulated for a time to get around quotas.)

I'm still hard pressed to notice any difference between Throwback I and Throwback II. The Wyoming bottler is located in the same town as the regional sugar beet refinery, so I've wondered as to the amount of local sucrose used there. But last year I had Throwback from other bottlers too - in Colorado they get there from, I believe "SO" code, plus I think the CA code was on the stuff I got in Nevada last spring. And for TBII I've had it from SO and AS as well as the WY. And I really don't notice any difference, not like I can with the Passover stuff I just got.


-Andy

Originally Posted by 24 Pepsi Max Flame Fan

Doesn't Pepsi mkix beet and HFCS in Pepsi, WCP, and CFP?

Yup i think they do,your right!!

If they didnt make a big deal about using the more expensive CANE SUGAR,it would taste even better!

If you love soda (i.e. to start off you can tell Coke vs. Pepsi) you can taste the difference. If you are say over 35 you will remember the taste if you loved soda as a kid.

But to the masses, they drink soda as swill and drink it to drink it; I've tried opening the eyes of even my soda loving friends and family and most of them just look at me like I'm crazy. Which I am.

Half the fun is nostalgia - "the way things used to be" and the other half is the better taste. But to someone born in the early 80's, who is now 30, they don't have memories of anything but HFCS and the nostalgia factor, as well as the shock of the "New Coke" debacle and the switch from sugar to HFCS, doesn't kick in.

I always thought the mainstream brands (Coke & Pepsi) could and should introduce a "premium" soda that uses imperial cane sugar and filtered spring water, et al. Pepsi tried it with Pepsi Natural but it's not the "real" formula and I've never even seen it on a shelf.

I think I've tried just about everything now; the sugar Coke is INCREDIBLE. I've been a Pepsi drinker my entire life but OMG I love the sugar Coke I get from PA.

I stocked up on Pepsi Throwback and scooped some up on sale; but it's pretty much the same price as all the other Pepsi stuff. I also saw it at Sam's Club once and only once, in 18-can boxes for somewhere around $4.

Sugar tastes better to the soda "connoisseur" if you can call it such; further, demands for corn for other purposes like ethanol are driving its subsidized prices higher making sugar, despite the tariffs, more economical. And I think people in general are starting to revolt against HFCS and its "unnatural" production methods, as well as emerging links to diabetes et al. Soda isn't healthy for you, but IMO it's like butter vs. margarine -- neither is good for you, but why not have the good tasting natural stuff instead of the unnatural synthetic stuff when you have some?

Originally Posted by Android

I'm still hard pressed to notice any difference between Throwback I and Throwback II.

I live in the NYC 'burbs and the difference is night and day. Makes me wonder if locally I was cane and beet, and II is all beet?

I would put TB I and KFP Pepsi close together and TB II is much different.

Originally Posted by janstett

I always thought the mainstream brands (Coke & Pepsi) could and should introduce a "premium" soda that uses imperial cane sugar and filtered spring water, et al. Pepsi tried it with Pepsi Natural but it's not the "real" formula and I've never even seen it on a shelf.

I remember when RC introduced "Royal Crown Draft Premium Cola" in the 1990's. According to the box (which I still have), it was made with cane sugar, pure filtered water, and "the finest Kola nuts". It was usually sold by the case (24 glass bottles) and was relatively costly at the time. I think I paid upwards of $20 for a case at a major supermarket chain in Pennsylvania.

This premium RC received a fair amount of publicity at the time (media coverage, endcap feature displays, etc), but it didn't last long. I'm sure the price point and large (and heavy!) package size turned a lot of people off. Fifteen or twenty dollars is a lot to risk on a product that you may or may not like.