Kibble size - does it matter?

I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but I recently changed foods from Burns, which has a smallish kibble size, to Whites Premium (which is another good naturally preserved food) and have been interested to see the difference that the kibble size makes.

The Whites is a good chunky kibble and has slowed her down at meal times. The Burns was gobbled up really without chewing or crunching and I'm wondering whether the reason I could never keep the weight on her was because she wasn't digesting the food properly.

Now she's looking so much better, and as it's quite a bit cheaper than Burns so am I !

The question is "How crucial is kibble size?"

I prefer slightly larger kibble, as it means my Boxer-Hoover Murphy has to actually chew his food instead of inhaling it! He is eating more slowly now, which can only be a good thing!

Unless you've got a very fast eater (and are worried about bloat etc) or a dog with mouth/teeth problems, I'm not sure kibble size matters than much.

I don't think mine cares. He inhales it whether they are large sized (I got James Welbelloved Large Breed once when I used to feed it by accident, they are huge - like little turds!) or small. Incidentally the food I feed now is small sized kibble.

I noticed my dog seems to be eating less since he moved to the adult royal canin, which the kibble is a lot bigger.

I fed Charlie AG large puppy and he thrived on it, but when I changed to large adult he brought most of the meals back up. He is a very greedy dog though and used to eat far too fast!
I had to buy AG normal adult and he's been fine with it.
Maybe your dog prefers the larger kibble and if she is doing fine on it I'd stick with it. It also helps it's cheaper too

I feed AG large breed - nice big pieces - Teagan(Bullmastiff) still doesnt chew it, but it doesnt slide down as fast as normal sized pieces!