From the dawn of prepackaged snack good creation, there have been clear lines of evolutionary development. Following the progenitor of all these treats, the Hostess Cupcake created in 1919, diverged the Ho-Ho (1920), Suzy-Q’s (1961), and finally the Ding Dong (1967).
But all of these products pale in comparison to the Twinkie. Engineered in 1930, it not only survived a flavor change in World War II, but also has evolved into one of the most nuanced and copied bakery items in history. And now it’s getting a new modification: chocolate cake.
To be sure, this is not the first time chocolate and Twinkie have tangoed together. The elusive Chocodile beguiled East Coast junk food addicts for years before a 2014 national re-release, while chocolate cream-injected Twinkies make a yearly appearance around Halloween (presumably because Hostess thinks rhyming is a good way to market empty calories).
But never before have we seen this.
The first question I had was “Why?” The second question I had was “Why not?” The third question I had was “Do you know where the toilet paper aisle is?” because I was in an unfamiliar Walmart running errands.
Having conquered my weekly duties, I made sure to rewards myself with the new Chocolate Cake Twinkies. I was unimpressed; shorter and denser than the standard Twinkie, the Chocolate Cake Twinkies had a moist devil’s food crumb that is neither overwhelmingly chocolaty nor excessively dull. It is, as you’d expect from anything Hostess makes, super sweet, so much so that the chocolate becomes a cocoa sidekick to the insane rush of sugar.
While the Twinkies tasted a lot like a chocolate Zinger sans frosting (or every other Hostess chocolate baked good, for that matter) I did find myself missing the chocolate “shell” provided by products like Ho-Hos.
I thought the chocolate might at least make the cream stand out, but this was not the case. If anything, it made my taste buds have less appreciation for the cream, which instead of balancing a rich chocolate sponge cake, mostly just tasted whipped marshmallow cream.
If there’s ever been a less satiating display of chocolate cake outside of this scene in Matilda, this is it. It’s not that the chocolate Twinkies suck, but rather that the essence of a Twinkie has always been it’s light, chiffon-flavored sponge cake filling. It’s what makes people eat them in droves, reference them in legal discourse, and, my personal favorite, put them on pizza. Without the light vanilla cake, the chocolate Twinkie just becomes a Zinger without the frosting, or, worse yet, Ho Hos without its shell.
(Nutrition Facts – 2 cakes (77g) – 260 calories, 80 calories from fat, 9 grams of fat, 4.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 15 milligrams of cholesterol, 350 milligrams of sodium, 42 grams of carbohydrates, 1 grams of fiber, 29 grams of sugar, and 3 grams of protein..)
Purchased Price: $1.00
Size: 2.7 oz./2-pack
Purchased at: Walmart
Rating: 3 out of 10
Pros: Smells like Cocoa Krispies. Moist cake element. Not as bad for you as eating an entire chocolate cake.
Cons: More of a cocoa than chocolate flavor. Squishy, dense cake texture. No balance with cream element. Tastes exactly like every other Hostess chocolate baked good except without the frosting or shell.
14 thoughts to “REVIEW: Hostess Chocolate Cake Twinkies”
Wow! I couldn’t be disagree more. I thought this version of a Twinkie was tasty and basically like a not dry af Suzy Q. Deiftiely light on the cocoa but way above a 3 IMO!
Aw man, I wanted so much to like these–haven’t found or tried them yet though. Haven’t had a Suzy Q either, but how would you say they compare to Drake’s Devil Dogs?
Haven’t had Devil Dogs! For me I think it’s safe to say if you like Ho Ho’s or Ding Dongs you would probably like this BUT I’ve seen a number of folks less enthused than I, so, I’ll guess you just have to keep huntin!
You are right that was my first thought tast just like Suzy Qs did and I like them, the new SuzyQ sucks!
Your right. Theese are the closest thing to the old Suzy Qs. I just bought another 10 pack at Market Basket for $2.99. Don’t like the new Suzy Qs
I wish I had read this before I decided to buy/eat one….found them at the 99c Store today…glad only picked up one 2 pack…..not sure I’m going to waste the calories eating the second one tomorrow.
For me the best Twinkie is the Chocodile…..I was not at all impressed with the chocolate taste at all, more like lack of it. Was spongy but I’d rather have wasted the calories eating a regular plain Twinkie than this chocolate cake version.
Hostess DID make thes in the 1980’s. I remember them , and I’ve been waiting 35+ years for them to come back. They were only available for about a year and then they stopped making them. ( Maybe it was only one summer. )
I totally disagree. I found this chocolate Twinkie to be amazing.
if you miss the old moist Suzy-Q then here it is reinvented and shaped like a Twinkie. Enjoy, they are awesome!
First, thank you for posting the nutrition info! I caved and bought a box, but wasn’t near the box when I wanted to log it. Anyway, you to the rescue! NOT impressed at all. Maybe it’s been too long since I’ve had a real Twinkie, but I remember the cake being spongier, this was just like lame chocolate cake. Tastes fine just not a Twinkie. I agree with the guy that said Chocodiles!! Mmm, chocolate covered Twinkies, those were the best. Oh, and these are like half the size! Ugh…
I really liked the chocolate twinkies, even though they are smaller than twinkies of old. The fudge covered twinkies are great, but I like the less filing chocolate ones. Alas, I haven’t been able to find them for several weeks.
I shall keep on hunting!
Very disappointed in the new chocolate Twinkie. Guess I was expecting more than a redone Suzy Q. Will not buy or recommend them. Will stick with the original.
Chocolate twinkies suck! They look like chocolate but they sure don’t taste like chocolate. I did find some a couple of weeks ago that had a peanut butter filling and they were good, but only because of the peanut butter. I bought some more yesterday with the plain cream filling in them and I’m highly disappointed.
Dry, small with very little cream or chocolate flavor. I will never buy these again.
Comments are closed.