I think 23 equal 100 kcal
1 Like
I fuel my training with jelly candy all the time, it tastes good and is much cheaper than gels. Plus I have zero cravings for it outside of training. For races however I use gels as they are easier to ingest during the race than having to chew on something.
1 Like
Confession time: I have done this when I’ve been craving something sweet and there’s been nothing else around 
1 Like
I prefer Wine Gums , 5gms of Carbs per sweetie , the major challenge is not consuming the entire packet in 1 hit , 2 wine gums every 10 mins during a fast group ride works really well , also very convenient & cheap , Dates also pretty good in the winter , get to sticky in the summer but that’s a whole new subject 
Jelly babies. Fuelled my junior canoe racing career and now fuels my middle aged bike riding. Sugar, colouring and pigs trotters…what could be nicer?!
Why aren’t you guys just making your own gels?
I bought 4 x High 5 bottles from Amazon and then I do the following:
200g Fructose
400g Maltodextrin
400g water
2 tablespoons (10g) of citric acid
2 tablespoons (10g of citrus aroma)
1g caffein-stick (might not be suitable for everyone but it’s fine for me)
Heat the water to an almost boil and stir in the sugars. Stir until resolved and take it of the pan.
Transfer the gel to a drink bottle (approx 1000g / 1 litre) when it cools and stick it in the refrigerator.
It’s a pretty fluid drink mix and I calculate it to 35ml / serving just as Clif has in their servings.
That amounts to 280kcal/70g carbs with 35g of sugar.
EDIT: If you’re looking for the same kind of thicker gel as Clif has then add between 200-300g of water instead of 400g.
10 Likes
The time it takes me to order gels off Wiggle is a lot shorter than this is the primary reason. I’d save what, a hundred dollars over an entire year if I did this for every single gel I ate?
3 Likes
I can only speak for myself but I’m not very fond of using plastics and throwing these around. In my re-usable bottle I can fit 5 “gel-packs”. The opportunity to create my own compositions of flavors also contribute to not buying. Cutting costs is merely a bonus.
3 Likes
I quite like the SiS gels. But the Torq ones can be a touch tastier. Both work like magic for me. The Torq rhubarb one is my fav.
Yes Torq Rhubarb is really nice, SIS can be heinously bad. I don’t get how they can make basically candy paste taste so bad. I did try stuffing 5 jelly babies in my face last fast group ride and realized the downside, trying to breath hard with 5 jelly babies in the old pie hole is not easy. I’ve settled on using jelly babies on the turbo and gels outside on hard rides.
2 Likes
I have never heard of Swedish Fish!
(A brit)
Totally cater to the North American taste. They’re sweet, they’re a different texture - less chewy gummy, more waxy/oily. But I find them so easy to eat on the bike! Gotta get yourself to an American candy store!
Haribo are delicious, but require so much chewing 
3 Likes
I suppose another benefit of gels and their packaging is that it doesn’t have to touch your teeth and thereby contribute to teeth decay.
Think he means these:
https://www.cloetta.se/varumarken-och-produkter/losviktsgodis/sott2/pastellfisk/
We sure do like our candy here in Sweden. 
1 Like
These are the nemesis of all who consume them and wish they could refuse their deliciousness
I love how they say “fat free food” for something that’s mostly sugar, and 150 cal per serving, followed by a minuscule unreadable number for the serving size.
1 Like
That serving-type of nutrient declaration is typically American. I got pretty fooled when someone bought Cookie Butter from the states to our office. As usual I read the nutrient-table only to find out that it’s specified by serving not by 100g. It actually had per 100g as well but a breif period I thought it was very poor caloric-wise. Which we all know is very far from the truth. 
I have cooking oil in spray that says “fat-free” - they defined the serving size as a spray lasting something like 0,4 seconds, which brings the fat content of a “serving” below the threshold required to declare it fat-free. Oil. Fat free.
1 Like
It’s funny that you find that deceptive. I much prefer the serving-size nutrition table once you know how to read it. When I’m in Europe, I have no idea how to figure out how many calories I am actually eating without a scale (which I have never used) or without eating the whole bag. In the US, all you usually need is a measuring cup in cases where serving size isn’t specified as “pieces” or whatever. I always thought the European model was designed for compliance while being maximum deceptive.
I can see how the 100g thing gives you a nutrient density by weight relative comparison. But in absolute terms I find it useless.
1 Like
you want rowntrees fruit pastilles, even better than jelly babies
1 Like