Reviewed: Nov. 27, 2009

So good - I can't believe there aren't more reviews for this recipe! My fiance and his mother loved these. Next time I will make more of the oat layer and less of the chocolate-butterscotch-nut layer - now it's about two parts chocolate to one part oats. I suppose you could reduce the chocolate part by using a larger pan, but you'd still need to increase the oat portion. Whether you do or don't choose to make this change, I recommend trying this recipe - it's sure to be a crowd pleaser.

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
0 users found this review helpful

Reviewer:

JENNIFER

Cooking Level: Intermediate

Living In: Houston, Texas, USA

My Profile | Cooks I Like | Reviews
Photos | Recipes | Blog

Reviewed: Mar. 15, 2008

13 x 9 2c choc chips and 1 c butterscotch still very rich, would reduce again

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
1 user found this review helpful

Reviewer:

TWOTIMEMOM

My Profile | Cooks I Like | Reviews
Photos | Recipes | Blog

Reviewed: Aug. 16, 2007

I made this twice with different results. The first time, I followed the recipe exactly. The oatmeal crust was brick-hard and the chocolate kept separating from the crust when I was trying to chisel it out of the pan. On the 2nd attempt, I made several changes: I halved the recipe and put it in an 8x8 pan. I turned the oven down to 350 and only baked the oatmeal crust for 5 minutes. I also used 3 parts chocolate chips and 1 part butterscotch chips because I thought it was too sweet with the 50/50 mix. Lastly, I used Crisco to grease the pan instead of baking spray. The 2nd batch was much improved over the first!

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
1 user found this review helpful

Reviewer:

JELDOYLE

My Profile | Cooks I Like | Reviews
Photos | Recipes | Blog

Reviewed: Oct. 15, 2002

I made these for my church youth group, the kids loved 'em, but I had a problem getting the topping to stick to the base... they kept separating. Other than that they were a huge hit!

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
0 users found this review helpful

Reviewer:

MILLYMOE

My Profile | Cooks I Like | Reviews
Photos | Recipes | Blog

Reviewed: Jun. 27, 2002

This recipe is PERFECT and written just the way they are supposed to be baked in my opinion. I even doubled the recipe and baked them in a 15x10. In a 9x9 square they bake beautifully. Cookies are meant to be rich and decadent. I just don't see how any could complain about these divine treats! YUMMY!

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
2 users found this review helpful

Reviewer:

BabaEva

Cooking Level: Expert

My Profile | Cooks I Like | Reviews
Photos | Recipes | Blog

Reviewed: Jun. 11, 2001

Yes, it should be a 9x13 pan! I think next time, I'll stay with the 8" square (who has ever heard of a 9" square??) and leave the oatmeal mixture at the same proporation. However, I'd reduce the chocolate topping to half. They are yummy! The 8" square could feed 100 people! They are rich like fudge...a small piece goes a long way.

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
1 user found this review helpful

Reviewer:

Cande R.

Cooking Level: Intermediate

My Profile | Cooks I Like | Reviews
Photos | Recipes | Blog

Reviewed: Jun. 5, 2001

I used the 9 X 13 once i saw how much oatmeal you put in them. So use that size! Other than that these are the best bar cookies i've ever had, it got a girl to like me! yeah!

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
3 users found this review helpful

Reviewer:

THINGAMAJIG13

My Profile | Cooks I Like | Reviews
Photos | Recipes | Blog

Reviewed: Jun. 3, 2001

The recipe says "9 inch baking pan" so I used a 9" square pan and I believe this should be 9x13 inch pan. There was too much chocolate topping, making it higher than the bars themselves and sickeningly sweet. We didn't care for them much.

Was this review helpful? [ YES ]
2 users found this review helpful