Archives



« Rice Krispies Treats Kazaam Crunch | Main | McDonald’s Philly Cheese Steak Sandwich »

Jack in the Box Chicken Cordon Blue Sandwich

By Marvo | December 9, 2004

Chicken Cordon Blue

When I first heard about it, I REALLY wanted to try the new Hardee’s Monster Thickburger, but there were two reasons why I didn’t:

1. There isn’t a Hardee’s anywhere here in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

2. I don’t think I have the balls to consume it. (Come on. 1,420 calories, 107 grams of fat, 229 milligrams of cholesterol, and 2,651 milligrams of sodium would scare many people and make vegans faint.)

Addicted Impulsive Buy reader Aymie asked if I was going to review it, however I told her the previously mentioned reasons why I couldn’t.

A few weeks later, another addicted Impulsive Buy reader, Aymie’s Mom (Who REALLY is Aymie’s mom) told me about her husband’s review of the Monster Thickburger.

I was instantly jealous of him.

Sure the best way I could try to outdo him was to combine two McDonald’s Big Macs, but if I did that I would still be short 200 calories, 40 grams of fat, 70 milligrams of cholesterol, and 600 milligrams of sodium.

You’ve won this battle TheShu, but if McDonald’s ever creates the Quadruple Big Mac, the war will be mine. Muahaha. Muahaha.

Well to help me overcome the sadness of not eating a Hardee’s Monster Thickburger, I decided to try the new Jack in the Box Chicken Cordon Blue Sandwich, with its chicken breast, Swiss cheese, and two slices of ham, in between toasted sourdough bread. (Sacre blu! I know, you French-heads. It should be cordon blu. Don’t yell at me, yell at Jack.)

Despite the plastic looking Swiss cheese (check out the picture), it was pretty good. Sure it’s ONLY got 555 calories, a paltry 28 grams of fat, a tiny 100 milligrams of cholesterol, and a modest 1335 milligrams of sodium, but I think it’s one of the tastier fast food chicken sandwiches I’ve had. It’s sure better than this one.

I wonder if Hardee’s will come out with a Monster Chicken Thickburger.


Item: Jack in the Box Chicken Cordon Blue Sandwich
Purchase Price: $5.79 (small combo)
Rating: 3 out of 5
Pros: No heart attack. Tasty. Ham. Sourdough bread.
Cons: Pricey. Not enough calories, fat, cholesterol, or sodium, or in other words, it’s not a Hardee’s Monster Thickburger. Name may upset the French.

Topics: Fast Food, Food, Jack in the Box |



Related Reviews:


Jack in the Box Classic Chicken Ciabatta
Jack in the Box Meaty Breakfast Burrito
McDonald’s Crispy Chicken Bacon Ranch Sandwich
McDonald’s Southern Style Chicken Sandwich
Jack in the Box Asian Chicken Salad

19 Responses to “Jack in the Box Chicken Cordon Blue Sandwich”

  1. Suzanne Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 3:55 am

    You crack me up! I loved the previous review too!
    *snorts*

    Hey, did you sign in on my guest map all the way from Hawaii? Come by the blog and post a pin mkay?

  2. Bombadil Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 4:01 am

    I don’t care how good it was, that is one nasty looking sandwhich.

  3. Aymie's mom Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 4:06 am

    Thanks for the smile Marvo :) I promise the next time I’m in your neighborhood, I’ll bring you a Monster ThickBurger from Hardees :) We have Jack In The Box’s here in NC, but didn’t somebody die from eating there years back…I’ll pass!!!

  4. strawberrie-shortcake Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 4:56 am

    YIKES! I had no idea about the calorie count! Im only 5′ tall …130 lbs ..LOL ..not for long if I eat too many of those hardee (hardy) burgers!

  5. Ian Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 6:12 am

    Sadly, i don’t think there is a Jack in the Box in Suburban New Jersey.

    You could of course double up the Chicken Cordon Blue and double your cal count.

    Hmm. I think you’re review had left me hungry.

  6. Jason Stone Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 6:19 am

    The French government would probably just outlaw it. Similar to what they have done with vending machines in schools here. They are desperately trying to keep out all of those fattening influences.

  7. UncleHornHead Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 6:37 am

    Agreed Bombadil-

    Not the most appetizing looking repast now is it?

  8. marvo Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 11:09 am

    Suzanne - Mkay.

    Bombadil - Nasty is in the eyes of the beholder.

    Aymie’s Mom - I think that incident had to do with tainted meat, but there hasn’t been anything like that since. Knock on wood. Personally, Jack in the Box is still better than McDonald’s. But damn I wish there was a Hardee’s here.

    strawberrie-shortcake - I don’t know if you want to eat a burger that’s bigger than you.

    Ian - I could, but that would be an $8 sandwich, without the drink and fries.

    Jason Stone - French food isn’t fattening?

    UncleHornHead - Repast? They’ll be none of that sir. Using words I have to look up. Geez… :-)

  9. Dawn (webmiztris) Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 12:34 pm

    It’s a good thing you didn’t try the monsterthick burger. We don’t want you to die! I can tell by looking at it that it’s probably DAMN good, but not worth it when you consider you can’t eat for three days afterwards if you don’t have to turn into a cow.

  10. Johnny Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 12:35 pm

    Just a note…Hardees and Carl’s Jr. are the same company so maybe Carl’s Jr. has what you’re looking for!

  11. akiko Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 1:16 pm

    Why don’t these sandwhiches look as good as they do on tv? Isn’t that false advertising?

  12. marvo Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 1:21 pm

    Dawn - Imagine the bowel movements.

    Johnny - I hear Carl’s Jr. has a new Pastrami Burger. Hmm…

    akiko - When 16 year olds are making them, can you really expect perfection?

  13. Aymie Says:
    December 9th, 2004 at 2:42 pm

    That doesnt even look appealing. But I’m not one for fast food, unless we’re talkin Big Mac and fries. :)

  14. Mellie Helen Says:
    December 12th, 2004 at 9:34 am

    …wouldn’t that be cordon bleu? Or perhaps the best French term to describe these meals would be “le mort”…

  15. marvo Says:
    December 12th, 2004 at 11:00 am

    Aymie - Big Mac and fries…Drool.

    Mellie Helen - Definitely le mort. Whatever it means.

  16. Brad Says:
    December 13th, 2004 at 2:02 pm

    Hate to be the turd in your coffee, but if this thing really had 1335 grams of sodium, that’d be just under a pound of salt. I think you meant milligrams (same with the cholesterol). A guy’s gotta dream, though…

    (Posts like this remind me why I was the kid that always got beat up on the playground. Crap.)

  17. marvo Says:
    December 13th, 2004 at 2:06 pm

    Brad - Ooops, yeah it was milligrams. But what if it was grams…

  18. Brad Says:
    December 13th, 2004 at 2:45 pm

    Why not review a salt lick? You know.. one of those big blocks of salt used for livestock.

    You’d get roughly the same taste as a burger with a pound of salt. Not only that, but it makes a great doorstop between servings.

  19. marvo Says:
    December 13th, 2004 at 3:32 pm

    Brad - If there’s anything I’ve learned from my family’s medical history, it’s this: Lots of salt = High blood pressure = Possible heart attack