Рейтинг протеиновых коктейлей (основе проверки в лаборатории)

Context

• Lab tests were performed according to GOST standards and measured protein, fat, and carbohydrates for multiple ready-to-drink protein shakes and one pudding.
• Reported analytical error: ±0.13 (same units as lab transcript).
• Carbohydrate figures can be inflated by dietary fiber or thickeners, so carbs are treated as a less objective metric for these products.
• The reviewer ranks products primarily by cost per 1 g of actual tested protein, plus taste and price scores (0–5). Full test protocols will be published on the reviewer’s Telegram channel.

Note: cost-efficiency (RUB per 1 g tested protein) is emphasized as the main buying criterion.

Top-line verdict

• Best overall value / ranked leader: Shock — very low cost per gram of protein, pleasant/neutral taste.
• Other highly recommended: Exhibitor and Milk Culture — good price-to-protein ratio and acceptable taste.
• Some products slightly under- or overshot their declared protein (often within the ±0.13 lab error). Packaging and taste vary; tube formats can be awkward to drink.

Detailed product-by-product findings

1) Aman Hyper — Banana Shake

• Lab: 8.74 g protein (±0.13) vs label ≈8 g; fat 0.3 (label 0.4).
• Bottle totals cited: ≈21.8 g protein per bottle (video).
• Price: ≈180 RUB per bottle → ≈8.24 RUB per 1 g protein.
• Scores: Price 1/5; Taste 5/5 (real banana flavor).
• Pros: Protein matches/exceeds label; very good banana taste.
• Cons: Expensive per gram of protein.

2) Bombar (chocolate & strawberry)

• Lab: Chocolate 6.86 g protein (matches label); Strawberry ≈7.3 g (slightly higher). Fat: chocolate 0.1, strawberry 0.2.
• Price: ≈180 RUB per bottle → ≈7.5 RUB per 1 g protein.
• Scores: Price 2/5; Taste — strawberry 4–5/5 (excellent), chocolate 2/5 (poor).
• Pros: Strawberry flavor highly liked; protein numbers accurate.
• Cons: Relatively high price; chocolate flavor disliked by reviewer.

3) SN Energy (Osnevskaya Farm) — Strawberry (30 g positioning)

• Lab: ≈11.35 g protein (label 13 g) → jar ended up ≈26 g total protein (not 30 g). Fat ≈1.5 g (label 0 g).
• Price: ≈175 RUB per jar → ≈6.70 RUB per 1 g protein.
• Scores: Price 3/5; Taste 1–2/5 (sour, not sweet).
• Pros: Reasonable price.
• Cons: Lower-than-claimed protein per jar and sour taste.

4) Neo — 30 g (chocolate) and 20 g (mango) variants

• Lab: 30 g variant — measured 11.8 g protein (label 11.6 g); fat 0.3. 20 g variant — measured 8.14 g protein (label 7.7 g).
• Packaging: Tube/bottle format can be awkward — thick product hard to draw through tube; noisy slurping.
• Price: 30 g ≈165 RUB → ≈5.38 RUB per 1 g (score 4/5). 20 g ≈150 RUB → ≈7.09 RUB per 1 g (score 2/5).
• Taste: 30 g ~3–4/5 (average), 20 g ~3/5.
• Pros: 30 g variant very good price; protein close to label.
• Cons: Packaging inconvenient in public; taste only average.

5) Milk Culture — 35 g positioning

• Lab: Label 14 g → measured 12.99 g (slightly lower); jar total ≈32.5 g tested protein. Fat 0.2; carbs ≈5.5.
• Price: 164 RUB → ≈5.05 RUB per 1 g (score 5/5).
• Taste: Neutral, not sour; reviewer 4/5.
• Pros: Very good price per gram, acceptable taste; promising newcomer.
• Cons: Small shortfall vs stated protein.

6) Exhibitor (named “exhibitor/hit” in video)

• Lab: Label 12 g → measured 12.33 g; fat ≈0.7 (label 0); carbs ≈2.5.
• Price: ≈170 RUB for 30 g protein → ≈5.52 RUB per 1 g (score 5/5).
• Taste: Moderately sweet / sour-milk, pleasant — 4/5.
• Pros: Good balance of price, taste and tested protein.
• Cons: Minor fat detected despite label zero.

7) Shock — Banana (40 g positioning)

• Lab: Label ≈8.1 g → measured 8.7 g; fat 0.4. Some packages contained ≈43 g total protein.
• Price: ≈190 RUB → ≈4.36 RUB per 1 g (best value).
• Scores: Taste 4/5 (pleasant/neutral).
• Pros: Best cost-per-protein among tested items, good protein numbers, convenient box format.
• Verdict: Overall leader / best value for cost-conscious buyers.

8) Protein Max (M West)

• Lab: Label 12 g → measured 12.61 g; fat 0.6; carbs possibly higher due to thickeners.
• Price: ≈200 RUB → ≈6.70 RUB per 1 g (score 3/5).
• Taste: Poor mouthfeel — powdery residue on teeth, runny; reviewer 2/5.
• Pros: Protein close to label.
• Cons: Unpleasant texture and taste, price middling.

9) Let’s Go — 30 g

• Lab: Label 6 g → measured 5.85 g (slightly low); fat 0→0.1; carbs high (possible thickeners).
• Price: ≈176 RUB for ≈29.5 g packaging → ≈6 RUB per 1 g (score 3/5).
• Taste: Strawberry flavor best, but product felt thin; overall taste 2/5.
• Pros: One decent flavor.
• Cons: Thin texture, mediocre taste, protein close to or under label.

10) Protein pudding (caramel; non-shake)

• Lab: Label 10 g → measured 10.4 g protein; fat 1.6 (label 1.5); carbs 6.9.
• Price: ≈150–155 RUB → ≈7.45 RUB per 1 g (score 2/5).
• Taste: Caramel tasty — 4/5.
• Pros: Good taste, accurate protein.
• Cons: Expensive per gram of protein compared with shakes.

Other general observations

• Most measured protein values matched or slightly exceeded label values; a few were slightly under. Deviations often fall within the lab’s stated error (±0.13).
• Carbohydrate numbers are unreliable as a quality indicator because they may include fibers/thickeners used to modify texture.
• Packaging format matters: tube-type containers can be awkward to drink when the liquid is thick.
• The reviewer consistently emphasizes cost-efficiency (RUB per 1 g tested protein) as the main buying metric.
• Full lab protocols will be shared on the reviewer’s Telegram channel for verification.

Final recommendation (concise)

• Best value / overall leader: Shock — ≈4.36 RUB/g protein, pleasant taste.
• Good balance of price + taste: Exhibitor and Milk Culture — ≈5–5.5 RUB/g protein, acceptable taste.
• Best-tasting single flavors: Bombar strawberry, Aman banana, and the caramel protein pudding (all tasty, but pudding is expensive per protein gram).
• Avoid if you dislike texture/sourness: SN Energy (sour), Protein Max (powdery residue), and some tube-packaged Neo variants (inconvenient to drink).
• If you prioritize protein accuracy + price, use the lab-tested cost-per-gram metric shown. Full protocols will be available on the reviewer’s Telegram channel.

Speakers / perspectives

• Single reviewer voice in the video; no other speakers or experts quoted. The reviewer reports lab data, personal tasting impressions, and price-based scoring.