The chocolate aroma floated throughout the atmosphere, and the batter was rising in the oven. I took it out when it seemed to be finished, and felt pleased with myself. As it turns out, it was way too gooey, too sweet, and was overall, not good. I think this was as a result of the container I baked it in. The recipe requires a ramekin, but I didn't have one. If you have a ramekin, it will probably work out better.
Flourless Chocolate Cakes
cangelica Posted: 07/07/14
lissalane Posted: 07/20/11
Excellent, choice when your looking for that 'deep chocolate' taste and watching your fat-calorie intake. Was so easy to make, loved it!!!!!!! San Antonio, TX.
skfongers Posted: 07/23/11
This was amazing for only 124 calories! It was so light and airy, which most flour-less cakes are heavy and dense. Key is to whip those egg whites as much as possible! I used almond instead of walnuts and it was great. Will definitely keep this handy for special occasions and my chocolate addictions.
mrscrazyed Posted: 02/03/12
I panicked yesterday afternoon when I realized that I had no dessert to offer our dinner guests -- who would be arriving in less than an hour. Not only did this come together quickly, but it was the perfect ending to our meal: not overly sweet or heavy, but just the right amount of richness. I prepared the cakes before dinner; all I had to do was pop them in the oven while I started the coffee Didn't have strawberries, but will definitely try it next time. And I used ground almonds as I'm not keen on pecans. Will definitely be making this again.
Dominique90 Posted: 09/19/12
I didn't think this recipe was good at all. The serving size is so tiny, it makes about 3 mouthfuls of cake and the cake itself just tasted sweet, it did not have the deep chocolatey flavour I was looking for.