I am not talking about the chemical difference (sugar is chemically a molecule formed by two monosaccarides: glucose and fructose). I am wondering about the difference from the cooking point of view in using pure glucose syrup vs. a syrup made of simple kitchen sugar dissolved in water.
-
3Sugar is actually a class of molecules including glucose, fructose, and many other sugars. Sucrose is what you were thinking of, which is specifically a disaccharide consisting of glucose and fructose.– Michael MiorSep 27, 2010 at 20:31
-
I still have the same problem regarding using liquid glucose in my fondant recipe, the answer that it has the consistancy of peanut butter, does the consistancy of corn syrup work?– user8242Dec 8, 2011 at 1:04
1 Answer
Pure glucose is significantly thicker than a sugar syrup you would make on your own. It's even thicker than honey. At the previous restaurant I was at, we would use glucose in some limited applications when making certain kinds of caramel sauces (sorry, I didn't steal any recipes before I left), as (if I recall correctly) it has a higher tolerance for heat, and provides sweetness without caramelizing at the same temperatures as table sugar.
-
1Oh look, another person came along to downvote without providing a single reason why. Well done--you do know that doing this makes people less interested in participating, yes?– danielSep 30, 2010 at 9:49
-
Is there still a difference (apart from the caramelizing part), if you would have a syrup that is as thick as glucose? Is there a difference in taste or consistency?– MienMay 9, 2011 at 15:44
-
I don't think it's possible to make a sucrose syrup as thick as pure glucose without caramelization. Glucose is purely sweet, there's no flavour that we normally associate with table sugar. I don't understand why you're asking about consistency; if it were the same thickness it would be the same consistency. Pure glucose has the consistency of something somewhere between peanut butter and chewy toffee.– danielMay 9, 2011 at 23:12