Chicken finger smackdown

Holy jinkies, did I really go the entirety of 2025 and half of 2026 without posting any entries? Yikes. Well, let me resolve that with this detailed, point-by-point list comparing Huey Magoo’s (HM) and Raising Cane’s (RC).

Both restaurants specialize in chicken fingers and honestly are very similar. I’ve been a fan of HM for quite some time now. Only today did I manage to give RC a try having realized there was a location not too bad a drive from work. Here we go:

• The Chicken Tenders
  • HM offers meals with three, five, or seven tenders. RC offers meals with three, four, or six tenders. In both cases, the three-piece meal does not include coleslaw. I generally go for the five-piece at HM, and today I ordered the four-piece at RC since the six-piece seemed like way too much food.
  • Whereas HM boasts that they only use the tenderloin portion of chicken, I’m not sure if RC does the same or if it’s typical breast meat. I can definitely say that the tenders I had at RC were actually more, uhh, “tender” than those from HM. They actually sort of started falling apart from being so soft. Haven’t made up my mind if that’s a good thing or a bad thing.
  • Although tasty, I’m not a huge fan of the breading at RC. Slightly overbreaded in my opinion, and definitely more saturated from the frying than HM.
  • The size of the tenders is probably comparable between both restaurants. RC tenders felt smaller because they are shorter than HM, but they also are somewhat bulkier, so I suspect comparable amount of meat.
  • Unlike RC, HM offers a grilled tender option for those who’d prefer to avoid the fried breading.
    • ADVANTAGE—HM for perception of less oil saturated tenders plus a grilled option.
• The Sauce
  • I know full well the ingredients and proportions aren’t identical. But truly, Magoo sauce and Cane’s sauce are only marginally different in flavor. Both are delicious.
    • ADVANTAGE—HM only because while RC also has a honey mustard you can ask for instead, HM has many to choose from, including honey mustard, barbecue, buffalo, blue cheese, garlic parmesan, sweet red chili, a spicy version of Magoo sauce, and periodic limited time flavors such as barbecue ranch.
• The Coleslaw
  • Very similar. RC is noticeably creamier, but not so much so that I would go out of my way for it over HM.
    • ADVANTAGE—It’s a tie.
• The Fries
  • Both serve crinkle-style fries. HM’s are fairly thick and include a light seasoning I enjoy. RC’s are thinner and just salted.
    • ADVANTAGE—HM for serving thicker fries. BONUS: providing ketchup cups deep and wide enough to actually dunk several fries instead of the tiny paper condiment cups RC uses.
• The Texas Toast
  • Both were fine. My slice at RC today seemed slightly smaller than HM. Could’ve just been a fluke. I’d have to find opportunity to visit RC once or twice more to know for sure.
    • ADVANTAGE— It’s a tie.
• The Price
  • (Prices do not include tax). My four-piece meal at RC today was $12.29. A five-piece meal at HM is $11.49. Furthermore, a three-piece meal (no coleslaw) at RC is $10.49 compared to $9.49 at HM.
    • ADVANTAGE—Definitively HM.
    • ADDENDUM—Oops, I failed to account for the fact that the RC price includes a drink. HM does not. So maybe not “definitively” HM, but I still think HM is a somewhat better value since the larger meals include one extra tender.
• The Location (extra credit)
  • Not really fair for this to count toward my tally, but HM is vastly easier to get to from my office.

So the score is HM:6 to RC:2 (which only got points due to the ties). And HM would be 7 points if I counted the extra credit.

I guess that locks in my preference!