|
|
Following on from yesterday's ponderings on the popular chocolate and honeycomb snack, Maltesers, we got to thinking: Maltesers are also present in bags of Revels. The question is, given that Revels are sold in 35g bags, is there a set number of each type of sweet in each bag?
If there is, then we could guess that each bag is filled with a simple process of counting a number of each sweet and placing them in the bag.
If there isn't then some strange sweet selection process must occur at Masterfoods to ensure a 35g weight bag. If this is true, are some types of sweet more likely to occur in each bag of Revels?
Weighty and high-brow thinking indeed.
So Dave Mash and I, each armed with a bag of Revels, set to out highly scientific task - counting (before consuming) each type of Revel. Yes, even the horrid coffee ones.
And our results?
As you can see, although the total number of sweets remains a steady 18 per packet, the distribution of sweet types is different.
Hmmm. More research into this is required. Obviously we can't decide on the most frequent Revels sweet with a simple 2 bag sample. Oh no.
Which is where you come in. Go and buy a bag of revels, and tell us YOUR results. Its important. |
| |
|
Date posted: 25 Feb, 2004 14:27 by Reg
|
|
But it's now Lent, and I have given up chocolate for 40 days!
HAVE I FUCK! Religion's a bunch of arse - bring on the chocolate!
Apart from the coffee ones. Oh, and the orange ones too.
|
|
|
Date posted: 25 Feb, 2004 14:31 by Wild
|
|
I love the smell of scientific research in the morning.
|
|
|
Date posted: 25 Feb, 2004 14:59 by CC
|
|
Revels = evil & not to be trusted!
|
|
|
Date posted: 25 Feb, 2004 17:15 by Xavier
|
|
Shouldn't it be necessary to:
1. check there is 35g of contents in the bag (not including air)
2. check the weight of each group within each bag?
Also, how should we count siamese sweets (if any) and what if said siamese sweet is made up of a coupling of more than one type of sweet.
|
|
|
Date posted: 25 Feb, 2004 17:17 by Wild
|
|
Now that's interesting.
Are you saying that a coupling of more than 1 type of sweet is possible? If so then it means they go through the chocolate coating phase all together. Hmmmm. interesting. The mind boggles at the complexity of it all!
|
|
|
Date posted: 26 Feb, 2004 17:31 by micko69
|
|
our vending machine in work has ran out, fear not, when it is refilled tomorrow, i will be checking them out and sending the results!
|
|
|
Date posted: 29 Feb, 2004 19:31 by Emma
|
|
i bought a big bag of them, and i found that the majority in the pack, were either orange and coffee, theys was like 15 of them in there when there was around 4/5/6 of each of the others!
|
|
|
Date posted: 01 Mar, 2004 00:47 by ?
|
|
You said "Religion's a bunch of arse" ! But what about the Truth ? This is a different story "Gods" revalation in the Bible is not a religion, it is the truth.
|
|
|
Date posted: 01 Mar, 2004 09:27 by Reg
|
|
Dear ?
I think the chocolate has gone to your head.
|
|
|
Date posted: 11 Mar, 2004 14:14 by Tim
|
|
I don't know about religion, but I have weighed a few packets of Revels in my (lunch)time.
The weights of the 4 packets we tested ranged between 37g and 41g (net).
So this rather undermines the initial assumption: "given that Revels are sold in 35g bags"
My guess is Revels are just added to the packet until the last one tips the balance over the 35g mark plus, say, 10%.
I wish it was more clever than that, but you can't hide from science.
|
|
|
Date posted: 11 Mar, 2004 14:17 by Reg
|
|
Wow, that's really screwed up the equation.
|
|
|
Date posted: 21 Sep, 2004 12:07 by Jo
|
|
Bring back the peanut! The raisin is an inferior subsitiute for the crunch!
|
|
|
Date posted: 21 Sep, 2004 12:24 by Reg
|
|
Raisin is good, better than the creme ones, but peanut was best of all! Apart from maybe the malteser.
|
|
|
