I accidentally ordered Vanilla v2 and had one beaker of it, UU v2 is far thicker than that.
Yeah I did the same, first batch of UU v2 was fine, next batch was thick.
I think the current batch I am using is too thick. I usually make my Huel with 100g Huel 50 U/U and 50 vanilla, with 200ml oat or almond milk and 300ml water, that has always suited me fine, currently it is really thickā¦reading the various comments I assume it could be just one or two batches of U/U that are problematicā¦both my UU and vanilla are v2ā¦not sure of the batch dos though as decanted into plastic tubs and disposed of the packets.
1 Like
The issues are several. Firstly, the mouthfeel and thickness isā¦ not great to some people. The thicker it is the closer I get to throwing up, so yay. I and many others just canāt drink thick liquids. Itās a chore, or worse.
I donāt do milkshakes, letās just say 
Second, as someone who would prefer to limit my water intake from Huel so as to make drinking even more water at the gym easier, a greater caloric density is preferable. To be able to drink 2k calories on as little as 1.5-1.8 liters of water is astounding, and one of my favorite aspects of the whole soylent thing. If I further want to consume another 1k of calories, be it food or more huel, that was perfectly doable when it was thinner. Not quite so much when I end up adding way way more water, consuming more mass and inhibiting my ability to eatā¦ well, even more calories. 6dl of shake is a lot, and itās not as fun trying to do that five or six or seven times a day. Itās about as much water as I would drink earlier, yes, but now the volume I usually had at the gym is folded into the water I drink with my Huel. Iām not happy with 3 liters or more a day.
Third, I felt perfectly full for four hours on very little volume on previous thickness(what little of it there was). That might be personal to whoever drinks it but I had no issue here, I was immune to hunger for hours. The artificial thickness makes me feel much fullerā¦ for much longer, which in my case wasnāt preferable. Or necessary. Or pleasant to have in my mouth.
Further, is it thickness for mouthfeel or thickness for satiety that is the aimed for result?
How much would someone have to drink if they preferred it on the thin side, but weighed much much more and had a resting TDEE of 3k calories?
And so on 
3 Likes
The survey has been sent out to over 1200 U&U customers today. We will publish the results on Friday. I will happily accept what the majority want.
1 Like
Hi Julian,
Thank you for taking the time to carry out the survey, even if the majority decide one way or the other I appreciate it.
I do however want to check if the question relates to V1.2 or V2.0?
ā1. Did you think Unflavoured and Unsweetened Huel wasā
The āwasā makes me wonder if it was V1.2? Or the V2 I had? It isnāt clear which version we are voting on. Edit: actually batch I suppose as early V2 was thinner until 2439 and the gum change as this has already caused some confusion in discussing thickness and V2?
Best regards,
Matt
This is very cool of you, unfortunately though, I havenāt received a survey email. Could it be because I cancelled my subscription?
We sent it to customers who ordered since v2 was launched.
I havenāt tried the latest U&U yet. Iām a bit torn myself. I usually buy 3 bags of vanilla and 1 bag U&U. I use the vanilla either on its own or with the flavours, but I use the U&U with coffee and monin syrup as a breakfast. On the one hand I quite like that the U&U is thin in my coffee-like drink, but it is a bit annoying how you have to constantly swirl it around while drinking it, otherwise it all just sinks straight to the bottom. It also doesnāt seem as filling. But for some reason I still like it like that. Other than breakfast though I prefer it thicker so it feels more filling.
I just voted assuming the question is for V2 batch 2439, was that correct? The results may be skewed by those who had V2 with the thinner gum mix, or will the responses be grouped by what batches customers received?
Edit: point being proved by @t00sp00ky earlier who had very different experiences of V2 between batches, so a vote on V2 alone will not be accurate
1 Like
We have tried multiple batches and donāt believe there is a noticeable different so the question is for all v2 customers.
You have also confirmed through posts on the forum and through customer support that all batches of 2.0 up to a point, somewhere around 2439, did not have the new gum mix. 2415 was in line with 1.2.
2 Likes
I was just about to come on and say that too, it had been confirmed the gum mix had changed the thickness in V2 between batches
1 Like
I just looked batch 2456 is thick.
My previous batch was not, I didnāt check batch number though but it was a few days after v2 came out so must have been an early one.
I didnāt either.
Can someone please keep a pouch of thick and thin batches of v2. I will exchange them for you and pay for pickup. I would like to try them for myself. Iāve tried multiple batches and all are the same for me.
First bags of v2 that I had were ordered on the 16th Aug.
If anything it was thinner than v1.2 but very salty, the next bags I received are less salty and thick.
1 Like
Surely they cant be the same.
Huel changed the gum mix at some point, if it made no difference, there was no point.
One of your own staff has said Gum Arabic was increased by 4 times but it still wasnāt thick enough in UU so the gum mix was changed (to make it thicker), sooooo?
2 Likes
Iāve answered the survey, when using batch 2415, saying the thickness was fine. Iāve had a couple of meals today out of batch number 2476 and Iām not able to mix them lump free using the mixing bottle. Normally 10seconds and Iām slurping but 5 minutes and it wasnāt getting any better. Both bags are of V2 but there is a difference. Powder lumps test my gag reflexā¦
3 Likes
Thatās the problem with the survey, the gum change with 2439 means the result of just asking if V2 is too thick or thin will be inaccurate.