Product Review: Cadbury Curly Wurly
- Sep 29, 2025
- 3 min read
My partner recently handed me a new snack that had me intrigued. The Cadbury Curly Wurly looks unlike any other snack I've tried before. This popular United Kingdom snack looks tasty so lets tear into this treat and see what its all about!
Packaging
The packaging has an image of the product on the outside and a playful "curlywurly" text logo on the front of the package. There is a "98 CALORIES PER BAR" message on the front which might be enticing to some. A Mars Snickers Bar or Hershey's Reeses Cup (2 pack) both have around ~200 Calories so I guess this is a "healthier" option?
It looks to be a chocolate coated caramel or toffee in a lattice or staircase shape. I've been handling the bar delicately. Whether or not it is a brittle toffee or chewy caramel inside is completely unknown to me at this point still.
The reverse side of the package and under the flap yield a wall of information.
"Glucose Syrup" immediately stands out to me in the Ingredients list. Products marketed in the US don't typically have this ingredient by that name so I had to confirm what it was. It looks to be similar to "Corn Syrup" except that it represents a broader range of starches used other than corn. It certainly helps to reaffirm the significant utilization of Corn Syrup on the US market. The other part that stands out is the numbers after other ingredients,
emulsifiers (E471, lecithins, E442, E476)
sabiliser (E509)
The "E Numbers" are also new to me. I will have to spend some time in the future learning about how the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) defines and regulates all of these numbers. I suppose its nice that it helps to reduce the total character size of the ingredients list and provides some naming standardization.
Product Tasting
An effortless tear through the plastic reveals the Curly Wurly in all of its caramel and chocolate swirly goodness.
While opening it I realized that it is not at all brittle but quite soft and malleable. I hoped it was a hard toffee and I would be breaking it apart and eating crumbles at a time but that doesn't seem to be the case. In retrospect my teeth appreciated that it was a soft caramel. I decided to go hands only for the first taste sample.
The taste is a bit basic and leaves a lot to desire. The chocolate flavor is passable and indistinguishable from any other mass produced milk chocolate I've tasted. The caramel is lacking any depth of flavor and is slightly grainy. It tastes overwhelmingly sweet with only a hint at milk or butter flavors. I would have preferred more bitter flavor but I understand the need for the product to appeal to a wide audience. If you've ever had a Nestle Rolo the taste is almost exactly the same. I doubt I could tell the two apart based on flavor alone. I much prefer this form factor for snacking over a Rolo, at least.
The rest of the bar was torn apart by hand and tooth. The chocolate flavor always comes first and is then washed away by the caramel as you continue to chew. The chew is satisfying as the caramel lingers while slowly breaking down in your mouth. Was it the delicious flavor that pushed me to finish the candy? Probably not. Was is that sweet dopamine hit from a product that is 50% sugar by mass? Probably so.
The Verdict
If I woke up Christmas morning and found that Santa had placed these in my stockings yes of course I would eat them. But, I probably would not go out and buy one myself. The flavor is not distinct or enjoyable enough to win me over. It does have unique look and presumably a historical presence in the UK so I suppose it has that going for it. If it were me though I'd rather have a Cadbury Crunchie!
Packaging ★★★☆☆
Taste ★★☆☆☆
Smash or Pass? Pass
Comments