Any reason why mountain house went smaller size with there meals?

Elite

WKR
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Messages
921
I recently ordered some mountain house online during a good sale. Received and noticed the new sizing is way smaller? I can’t be the only one who can eat a entire package after sheep hunting all day? Regret ordering this stuff now

ff434883530ffec5bcc6af45600a8598.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
May 28, 2022
Messages
77
I believe they did so in order for people not to freak out over 8,000 mg of sodium per serving. Much better to see 2000 mg instead.
 

sacklunch

WKR
Joined
Dec 12, 2022
Messages
412
I believe they did so in order for people not to freak out over 8,000 mg of sodium per serving. Much better to see 2000 mg instead.
It's 136g overall weight down to 102g, according to the front of those. That math doesn't work out if the ingredients/recipe hasn't changed.

I imagine it has much more to do with selling a slightly smaller ammount of food without a corresponding drop in sales price.
 
Joined
Mar 27, 2017
Messages
1,415
Location
North Carolina
my dad used to sell candy and talked about this happening constantly. They would run the normal size and slap a king size on it for a limited time as they shift the normal down

Plus side! Imagine all the weight they are saving you
 

ODB

WKR
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
3,795
Location
N.F.D.
Same reason your pound of black rifle (and others) coffee is 12 Oz.

That’s a Troy pound and not avoirdupois pound. But we still say a pound of coffee.

Jedi mind trick.
 
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Messages
1,472
Location
AK
Money is the reason.

I would imagine the average Mtn. House consumer was never eating close to the 2.5 servings they came in and that feedback may have played into it. How much bear conditioning happened out there where people had to bury or improperly dump half their uneaten mtn. house? I'd typically mix two bags, separate into 3 meals, and still rarely eat it all. So this serving size is more what I'm looking for, just wish the price had lowered with the serving size......
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
5,733
Location
Lenexa, KS
When I was brand new to backpacking, and coincidentally quite poor, I would buy one Mountain House for each dinner, and since the package said 2 servings I'd split it with my buddy who was even poorer than me. Never really thought to consider much more than that. After a few days we'd be starving. That first pizza out of the backcountry tasted like heaven.
 

eddielasvegas

WKR & Chairman of the Rokslide Welcoming Committee
Classified Approved
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
3,168
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
I asked this very question two years ago. Here's my question and the reply from MH CS. Draw your own conclusions.

Eddie

1683668603282.png


1683668656039.png
 
Last edited:

Titan_Bow

WKR
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
1,118
Location
Colorado
Can you show a comparison of the Nutrition Facts between the 2? Just playing devils advocate here, but the packaging and size change doesn't necessarily mean its truly "less" (ie. if its still calorically about the same, just in a smaller form, thats actually a good thing for backpacking)
 

bpa556

FNG
Joined
Jul 25, 2021
Messages
86
Can you show a comparison of the Nutrition Facts between the 2? Just playing devils advocate here, but the packaging and size change doesn't necessarily mean its truly "less" (ie. if its still calorically about the same, just in a smaller form, thats actually a good thing for backpacking)

Agreed. Nutritional (caloric) content is more important than physical weight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top