Head-to-Head Analysis

Salines Traditional Salt Crackers vs Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo

Wondering which one to pick? We analyzed the nutritional profile, ingredients, and vegan status to help you decide.

Package of Salines Traditional Salt Crackers

Salines Traditional Salt Crackers

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo

Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
429 kcal
Energy
536 kcal
10.7g
Sugars
0g
16.1g
Fat
32.1g
7.1g
Protein
3.6g
2.4g
Salt
2.1g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Salines Traditional Salt Crackers and Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo side-by-side, the nutritional differences become quite clear. Both products cater to specific dietary needs, but picking the right one depends on whether you are prioritizing weight loss, muscle gain, or clean eating.

For calorie-conscious consumers, Salines Traditional Salt Crackers is the clear winner. With 107 fewer calories per 100g than its competitor, it allows for more volume while keeping your energy intake in check.

However, watch out for the sugar content. Salines Traditional Salt Crackers contains significantly more sugar (10.7g) compared to the milder Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Salines Traditional Salt Crackers offers a protein boost with 7.14g per 100g, outperforming Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Salines Traditional Salt Crackers or Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo?

It depends on your goals. Salines Traditional Salt Crackers has 429 calories, while Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo has 536 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Salines Traditional Salt Crackers vegan?

No, Salines Traditional Salt Crackers is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Salines Traditional Salt Crackers and Pringles Scorchin' Buffalo?

There is a difference of 107 calories per 100g between the two products.

Data source: Open Food Facts. Comparisons are generated automatically based on nutritional values per 100g.