Whopper vs. Big Mac — Who does Double better?

Coming back from a hectic vacation and facing a column deadline that I absolutely could have planned for and yet put off for another time, I found myself fixated on a simple food subject that's been the topic of conversation around me lately: McDonald's has revamped its burger recipe. Not only are the burgers supposed to be juicier, the cheese meltier and the buns softer, but McDonald's is releasing a new limited time Double Big Mac, with double the meat. But this wasn't enough for me to wax poetic about, so I decided that I would taste a Double Big Mac and a Double Whopper back-to-back and decide which one I truly prefer. I'm fairly unbiased and enjoy both burgers occasionally. If I'm going to do this, I'm going to get ridiculous with it and treat it like a true tasting, serious business style. Never let anyone accuse me of being a food snob, so let's dig into fast food burgers, ya'll.

The numbers

The Double Big Mac costs $6.99 and weighs 9.4 ounces, or 74 cents per ounce. The calorie count is 780. The beef on a Double Big Mac weighs 6.4 ounces before cooking, which leaves a mere 3 ounces of bun and toppings. That means 68% of a Double Big Mac's weight is beef.

The Double Whopper costs $7.19 (61 cents per ounce), so 20 cents more than its competitor. It weighs 11.7 ounces, so heavier by 2.3 ounces. The calorie count is 941, so 161 more. The beef on a Double Whopper weighs 8 ounces before cooking, so 3.7 ounces of the burger is bun and toppings, which makes sense because the Whopper has heavy tomato slices. Roughly 68% of the Whopper's total weight is beef, which is identical to the Double Mac, which I found interesting.

The taste

I tried the Big Mac first because I was dying to see if the new burger recipe even registered a change on my taste bud radar. The buns on my Big Mac were 100% not softer. They were firmer, spongier, but they did hold together much better than my Whopper bun. I didn't notice the cheese being meltier. Slightly waxy, I could still pull the cheese from the bun and bread without it breaking apart. And I didn't notice any appreciable extra juiciness in the burger. If anything, it was less salty, and therefore had a little bit less flavor. I had heard that there was supposed to be more sauce on the Big Macs with the new recipe, but it was scarce. I did appreciate the increased meat-to-bun ratio on a Double Mac, though. It tasted more like a burger and less like a bunch of bread.

The Double Whopper surprised me. With the extra patty, that flame-broiled smokiness really kicked in, and while by no means a gourmet, quality burger, it was very tasty. The patties are larger, thicker and therefore juicier than the Mac. I do like tomato on my burgers, a fresh pop that adds to the juiciness. Though I left the onions on for the weigh-in, I took them off before eating the burger because I do not enjoy white raw onion on anything. I enjoyed the mayo amount on the Whopper, as well. Though not as complex a flavor as the Big Mac sauce, it complemented the smoky beef nicely and coated the mouth in a not unpleasant way. I had to wipe with a napkin more with the Whopper for sure. The bun was soft and did fall apart on the edges, unable to hold up the massive burger.

The winner

While the Double Mac had a nicer meat-to-bun ratio than a normal Big Mac, the bun killed it for me. It was spongy and firm, and while it made eating the burger neater, I preferred the soft texture of the Whopper bun. Also, the double meat on the Whopper was deliciously smoky, a better flavor than the smaller patties on the Big Mac. Add on the tomato slices and the Whopper was a clear winner for me.

Will I ever order a Big Mac again? Absolutely, but probably not a double. These sandwiches are, at their core, different burgers with different flavor profiles. They both have the same goal of making money though, and I guess this time, that goal was achieved.