Feast Get Feast
Menu

Portions and preparation · USDA nutrition

Pork, chop calories per cup: 231–309 across all 5 named USDA examples

Across all 5 named USDA examples, a cup contains 231–309 calories. Each included example lists 135 g for that measure. The same household label can carry a different gram weight elsewhere in USDA data.

Portion calculator

Estimate your portion

Choose a source measure or enter the weight you ate.

Preparation and portion

Named measures come from this exact source record.

Estimated for 1 regular · 120 g

275calories

Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten

Protein
30.1 g
Carbs
8.6 g
Fat
12.7 g

These values scale the selected reference food by weight. Ingredients, preparation, and portion size can change your meal’s estimate.

FoodData Central Survey Foods (FNDDS) · FDC 2705870 Full nutrition profile →

Compare all 5 food records, nutrition tables and USDA sources

The 5 exact records in this guide report 205–342 calories in the records' own listed source servings and 171–229 calories per 100 grams. Those are observations from named database records—not a universal range or an estimate of an unseen plate.

Match my meal

Start with the description closest to what you ate

For Pork, chop, begin by separating “Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten” from “Pork, chop, stuffed.” Choosing a card filters this source set; it does not infer the portion or fill in ingredients the chosen description does not name.

Showing all 5 linked records.

Equal-weight view

How pork, chop records compare at 100 grams

All 5 cited records are shown at the same 100-gram weight. The source servings may differ.

  1. Pork, chop, lean only eaten 171 kcal
    171 kcal
  2. Pork, chop, stuffed 190 kcal
    190 kcal
  3. Pork, chop, lean and fat eaten 195 kcal
    195 kcal
  4. Pork, chop, coated, lean only eaten 208 kcal
    208 kcal
  5. Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten 229 kcal
    229 kcal

Shared basis: 100 g · kilocalories

What this page compares

Named source records, not one universal meal

This guide keeps 5 named USDA records in view: 5 direct matches. They span 2 source categories, including Pork and Meat mixed dishes. The exact descriptions remain the unit of comparison; the familiar heading is only the doorway into the evidence.

Why these records appear together: The deterministic grouping rule “normalized first two description segments” placed these 5 records together under the exact grouping key “pork chop.” That rule determines membership before any nutrition result is read.

For Pork, chop, this page can compare 5 named records from FDC 2705870 through FDC 2705872. It cannot observe which preparation was eaten, recover unnamed additions, or supply the eaten grams.

Read the shared calculation, provenance, and uncertainty method →

Editor’s decision brief

The three facts to carry into the table

Carry the denominator, exact identity, and strongest observed contrast into every number below.

Portion

120–180 g before composition

The largest source amount is 1.5× the smallest. Read per-serving calorie differences with that mass gap in view.

Composition

58 kcal separates the fixed-weight endpoints

The lower endpoint is “chop, lean only eaten”; the higher is “chop, coated, lean and fat eaten.” This isolates density, not ingredient causation.

Discriminator

1.0 g fiber gap per 100 g

Of protein, fiber, and sodium, the strongest normalized contrast is between “chop, lean and fat eaten” (0.0 g) and “stuffed” (1.0 g).

Observed source examples

Three landmarks inside this source set—not universal endpoints

The cards are ordered by calories in each record's listed serving. Serving weights differ, so use per-100-gram values to compare composition. These selected records do not define a calorie range for every pork, chop.

Important: “Lower” begins with Pork, chop, lean only eaten; “higher” ends with Pork, chop, stuffed, using each record’s own source amount. Those labels order this selected set only—they are not endpoints for every pork, chop meal.

Full comparison

Compare every selected FNDDS record

For Pork, chop, serving columns preserve each record’s own listed amount, while calories per 100 g hold weight constant. A dash means the cited record does not supply that field; it does not mean the nutrient is absent.

On smaller screens, focus the table and scroll horizontally to read every column.

USDA records selected for the Pork, chop nutrition guide
Exact source record Match Source amount Calories kcal / 100 g Protein Fiber Sodium USDA
Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten Direct name match 120 gUSDA reference amount 275 kcal 229 30.1 g 0.5 g 491 mg FDC 2705870 ↗
Pork, chop, coated, lean only eaten Direct name match 120 gUSDA reference amount 250 kcal 208 31.2 g 0.5 g 496 mg FDC 2705871 ↗
Pork, chop, lean and fat eaten Direct name match 120 gUSDA reference amount 234 kcal 195 32.4 g 0 g 421 mg FDC 2705867 ↗
Pork, chop, lean only eaten Direct name match 120 gUSDA reference amount 205 kcal 171 33.6 g 0 g 427 mg FDC 2705868 ↗
Pork, chop, stuffed Direct name match 180 gUSDA reference amount 342 kcal 190 33.1 g 1.8 g 745 mg FDC 2705872 ↗

Portion analysis

Serving total and calorie density answer different questions

The listed source amounts run from 120 to 180 grams—a 60-gram gap before composition enters the comparison. Their own source servings run from 205 calories for “chop, lean only eaten” to 342 for “stuffed.” At a fixed 100 grams, “chop, lean only eaten” is 171 calories and “chop, coated, lean and fat eaten” is 229—a fixed-weight separation of 58 calories. For Pork, chop, the serving view answers “how much is in the database portion?”; the 100-gram view answers “how concentrated is the matched record?” Neither reveals how many grams were actually eaten.

The scaling rule: multiply a per-100-gram value by eaten grams ÷ 100. The arithmetic is exact; the result is only as defensible as the record match and portion estimate.

Preparation analysis

The long description carries the evidence

The published descriptions distinguish forms such as “chop, coated, lean and fat eaten”, “chop, coated, lean only eaten”, “chop, lean and fat eaten”, “chop, lean only eaten”, and “chop, stuffed”. The source formulations contain 9 distinct ingredient codes; examples that appear in only part of the set include salt, table, bread, crumbs, dry, grated, plain, pork, fresh, loin, top loin (chops), boneless, separable lean and fat, cooked, broiled, and pork, fresh, loin, top loin (chops), boneless, separable lean and fat, with added solution, cooked, broiled. On this Pork, chop page, those rows make the records inspectable, but they are not a controlled experiment: they cannot tell us that one named input, by itself, caused a nutrient difference.

Database precision is not meal certainty. Retain the exact description beside the number so later corrections remain possible.

What changes the comparison

Four drivers worth checking before choosing a record

The family label “Pork, chop” cannot resolve the differences between Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten and Pork, chop, stuffed. The four checks below identify the record wording, source weight, and formulation evidence that can.

  1. 01

    Source weight before serving calories

    The source amounts span 120–180 grams. Compare per 100 grams before reading a serving-calorie gap as a composition gap.

  2. 02

    The words that split the family

    Representative record-level distinctions include “chop, coated, lean and fat eaten”, “chop, coated, lean only eaten”, “chop, lean and fat eaten”, “chop, lean only eaten”, and “chop, stuffed”. Those phrases are evidence for choosing a record, not decorative subtitle text.

  3. 03

    Formulation evidence, with limits

    9 source-input codes appear across the selected records. Their presence and listed weights describe USDA formulations, not finished plated proportions.

  4. 04

    The unresolved plate

    Even “Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten” leaves the eaten grams and unnamed oils, sauces, toppings, substitutions, or leftovers unresolved. Preserve those Pork, chop unknowns for correction instead of converting them into false precision.

Record matching

Match identity first; scale quantity second

Read the source name as a sequence of decisions. First confirm that pork, chop is the right meal family. Then resolve the phrases that actually separate this set—“chop, coated, lean and fat eaten”, “chop, coated, lean only eaten”, “chop, lean only eaten”, and “chop, stuffed”—before comparing gram weight. If a package, menu, or known recipe provides a closer first-party description, prefer it and keep this USDA record as a transparent fallback.

A practical matching checklist

  1. Read the complete Pork, chop source description, including preparation and additions.
  2. Compare the listed source weight with the amount actually eaten.
  3. Prefer a current package or restaurant source when a specific branded item is known.
  4. Record toppings, sauces, cooking fat, sides, and substitutions that the selected description does not name.

Decision support from the exact records on this page

Turn source data into a better next decision

These conclusions and reading paths are computed from 5 exact records behind Pork, chop source-record guide. Links are chosen by record identity, controlled contrast, formulation input, nutrient spread, or serving context—not by loose keyword similarity.

Equal-weight result

Pork, chop, stuffed is higher in dietary fiber per 100 g

Pork, chop, stuffed reports 1 g versus 0 g for Pork, chop, lean and fat eaten: a 1 g difference when both are normalized to 100 g.

Inspect the underlying evidence

The denominator changes the answer

Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten is denser; Pork, chop, stuffed is higher in its source amount

Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten reports 229 kcal per 100 g and 275 kcal in USDA source amount (120 g). Pork, chop, stuffed reports a lower 190 kcal per 100 g but a higher 342 kcal in USDA source amount (180 g).

Choose the record before reading the number

Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten and Pork, chop, lean only eaten are not interchangeable

The page keeps both records at the same 100 g denominator and makes Coating wording (coated or breaded versus No matching controlled term in the source name) the explicit record-description contrast. It does not show that the wording difference caused a nutrient difference. Pick the description that matches the food in front of you rather than averaging away the distinction.

Inspect the underlying evidence

Contextual knowledge graph

Follow the relationship that matches your question

For Pork, chop source-record guide, each path states why the destination belongs here, so you can distinguish a true evidentiary connection from a merely similar label.

Compare two records on this page Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten vs Pork, chop, lean only eaten

Both records appear in this page’s evidence set. The explicit record-description contrast is Coating wording: coated or breaded versus No matching controlled term in the source name; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.

Follow this evidence path Compare two records on this page Pork, chop, coated, lean only eaten vs Pork, chop, lean and fat eaten

Both records appear in this page’s evidence set. The explicit record-description contrast is Coating wording: coated or breaded versus No matching controlled term in the source name; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.

Follow this evidence path A formulation detail that separates records Salt, table

USDA input 2047 appears in 4 of 5 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 0.6–0.6 g across those source formulations. These are source-formulation input weights, not plated or serving weights. Follow the code to inspect every represented occurrence.

Follow this evidence path A formulation detail that separates records Bread, crumbs, dry, grated, plain

USDA input 18079 appears in 2 of 5 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 10–10 g across those source formulations. These are source-formulation input weights, not plated or serving weights. Follow the code to inspect every represented occurrence.

Follow this evidence path 4 context records in this source topic Pork

Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten and Pork, chop, coated, lean only eaten belong to this USDA source-category collection. Its displayed ranges and complete exact-record catalog provide the peer set for a manual comparison; the destination does not preselect this page’s record.

Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Dietary fiber: density and serving context

In this page’s records, dietary fiber runs from 0 g in Pork, chop, lean and fat eaten to 1 g in Pork, chop, stuffed, all per 100 g.

Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Calcium: density and serving context

In this page’s records, calcium runs from 6 mg in Pork, chop, lean only eaten to 26 mg in Pork, chop, coated, lean and fat eaten, all per 100 g.

Follow this evidence path