Here are the initial results of the survey. It was sent to all U&U customers who received 2439 and above.
We will let it run for a few more days to get a larger sample size. But I think you can start to see the issue we have with thickness (and we have the same issue with sweetness), everyone has a different opinion.
Much appreciated. Thanks for running the survey 
I post again this message I posted on an other thread:
I have noticed that Huel U&U 2.0 (batch 2476 for me, the only one I have, 8 pouches in a single order, yeah!) needs more water that 1.1, for the same thickness:
Before (1.1): 160 g + 600 ml
Now (2.0 batch 2476): 160 g + 800 ml
(Iām using a big 1 liter shaker).
But I donāt mind adding more water. I like water. And I have plenty of it in my tap. Water is good for your body, you knowā¦
We have now had 185 replies to the survey and itās pretty conclusive that the new U&U is not too thick for the majority. 185 is a reasonable sample size so I think the decision is made. (We will continue to check the numbers over the next few days and if it changes I will let you know.) But to me it looks like we should leave U&U at the current level of thickness.
Oh I thought this survey was regarding feedback for the previous version of Huel.
Your use of the word WAS implies the previous version.
Hi Julian, I really think you should run this survey again.
I for one answered the survey when I was still using bags of UU huel that I ordered at the start of august, where I could easily make 3 scoops of huel thick or thin as I wanted within the total volume of the shaker bottle. I could also easily drink the whole shake in just a couple of minutes, and there were almost never any lumps and the powder mixed easily with a brief stir and a good few shakes.
Since ordering my second batch of 4 bags of UU which I started using last week, I can meet none of these conditions. I donāt have a mixer, so I have to sit here with a fork for about 10 minutes trying to mash the lumps into the mixture (shaking totally fails to break the lumps up), it takes a good 10 minutes to ādrinkā (read: chew and swallow, mouthful at a timeā¦), and I canāt control the consistency within the volume of the shaker bottle, since the mixture is always too thick to my taste even when itās full to the brim (this is with either 3 or 4 scoops, both quantities that I managed absolutely fine with the first 4 bags I bought).
I canāt be sure if this has happened to anyone else, but my opinion on the current batch is the polar opposite to the opinion I expressed in that survey!
One unhappy customer 
Edit: Iāve been browsing through this forum a bit more, and itās possible that I in fact answered a different survey sent out to all v2 customers. In that case, you should definitely do another survey to get the opinions of me and other people who hadnāt yet ordered a bag of the new batch!
Edit 2: Also, having read above that you hadnāt taken the flavour pouches into account reminds me that I can now no longer change the flavour and consistency as I could before through adding nut butters and/or nut milks, since these have a thickening effect which I just couldnāt stomach now, and I am 100% certain that I wonāt be able to shake peanut butter into this new batch as I could into the first one 
I often add flavour my vanilla and the thickness is just fine for 3 scoops. I never need a fork.
This video may help - https://julianrhearn.wistia.com/medias/ccle307284
Or you can try this method.
400ml cold water
As Iāve said, I think the main problem is just the change. Vanilla customer donāt report the same problems, e.g. ā10 minutes to ādrinkā (read: chew and swallow, mouthful at a timeā and āI have to sit here with a fork for about 10 minutes trying to mash the lumps into the mixtureā
Itās already been pretty established that a near-25% opinion of dissatisfaction isnāt going to change anything, and that weāll all probably āget used to itā eventually. That another full quarter of survey answers think this is all still too thin boggles my mind. At 350mil and a put through a blender itās edible by spoon.
Iām getting used to it by ordering 24 bags of v1.2, and will be drinking that quite happily for the next three or four or possibly eight monthsā¦ if I decide to just order another 60 bags. Turns out the best-before date of that last precious precious batch is at about June or July. Iām aware that showing my customer ire might not be best demonstrated by ordering more of the product, but it is after all 80% of my calorie intake and I want to eat.
Iām still wondering whether or not those who prefer flavored soylents consist heavily of those who can actually stomach anything past the viscosity of water, and that weāre gravitating towards the UU. Being in this little minority, Iāll just have to continue looking for alternatives.
So far Ambronite has been too expensive, Nano has been a flavored shitshow and Pulve has yet to deliver. Huel remains the quality option.
Damn shame thereās not enough of us to garner a single separate batch every now and then, or even just once a year. But here we are.
Maybe thereāll be more soylents in the future. Iāve a couple of upcoming brands on my radar. Even if itās just to mix in with the Huel.
Yes Iām really surprised that people still say itās too thin! For that reason I am wondering if some people werenāt still answering based on an older batch?
Honestly, I can understand that the thickness might be super appealing for people with a very sweet version, as personally I used to always love really thick milkshakes. But Iām at a stage in my life where I just want a quick, easy, plain, simple meal, and this new mix that I have to chew my way through just doesnāt fit the bill.
I only ordered 4 bags, so I just have to make it to the end of october! It could be worse 
Iāll explore some of the alternatives too, I had no idea there were so many around.
Iād recommend giving Stoner Shake a try, if v2.1 doesnāt work for you. A bit more expensive than Huel, but very nice when blended (shaking alone doesnāt work so well, ironically), consistency similar to v1.2, and no maltodextrin which most of the other soylents rely on. Vegetarian though, not vegan.
Yeah it amazes me that people might want it thicker too but the whole survey makes perfect sense if people are referring to v1.2.
The use of the word WAS to me would indicate they were referring to Huel 1.2, in terms of thickness WAS 5 partsā¦
Answer being 50% said it WAS just right (but isnt now) etc
It doesnt make sense that 50 odd percent of UU users were unhappy about v1.2 being to thin yet there are practically no posts regarding that on here and the 22% who think it is now too thick now have made all this fuss.
Where were this 50% complaining it was too thin since v1.2 came out? Or did Huel psychically know 50% were unhappy and thickened it up for them and now they are happy?
Hopefully Julian will ensure its thickness is reduced slightly as he mentioned elsewhere he hadnāt taken into account people might be adding flavouring systems to it.
Then itāll be alright again.
Caloric density is not a priorityā¦