Burger King’s hot dogs are an embarrassing disgrace

THE new hot dog from the US version of Hungry Jack’s - Burger King - is a Whopper of a marketing disaster, and a culinary calamity, too.

THE new hot dog from the US version of Hungry Jack’s - Burger King - is a Whopper of a marketing disaster, and a culinary calamity, too.

Rolled out with Apple-like hoopla, it’s the worst embarrassment in the name of horizontal meat matter since Anthony Weiner discovered Twitter.

It took Burger King 62 years to launch a hot dog — enough time, you’d think, to come up with a decent one.

But, like most ooze-slathered fast-food products served on buns, Burger King’s feeble ‘furters are all about mouth feel for eaters who confuse a tongue bath with taste.

Steve Cuozzo tries Burger King’s ‘Classic’ dog.

The “classic” ($US2.49 or $3.42) is a barely half-inch-thick, dry, Oscar Mayer-made affair tasting faintly of the beef of which it (supposedly) 100 per cent consists.

The “flame-grilled,” moisture-deprived dog’s insipid quality is masked by messy squiggles of mustard, ketchup, liquefied green chilli and chopped onions.

It’s scored lengthwise to capture the condiments’ congealed ooze.

But while Burger King’s pseudoclassic is at least tolerable, the chilli/cheese dog ($US2.89 or $3.96) is an inedible mutt. The watery chilli’s a blur of flavourless beans. “Cheddar” is a shredded, orange-coloured abomination that could be easily mistaken for wood chips.

Amazingly, Burger King’s doomed dog stampeded competing chains into crash programs to crank out their own upstart sausages.

Put ‘em back in your pants, guys.

Hot dogs aren’t available at Hungry Jack’s in Australia. It remains to be seen if they extend the frankfurt experiment Down Under.

This article originally appeared in the New York Post and was reproduced with permission.

Originally published as Burger King’s hot dogs are an embarrassing disgrace