RateBeer
overall
4
39
style

bottled
common

on tap
common

Broad Distribution

Add Distribution Data
RATINGS: 1755   WEIGHTED AVG: 1.98   EST. CALORIES: 135   ABV: 4.5%
Share this beer with friends!
COMMERCIAL DESCRIPTION
Ingredients: Water, malt, rice, hops, corn, brewers yeast.
From the glass lined tanks of Old Latrobe we tender this premium beer for your enjoyment, as a tribute to your good taste. It comes from the mountain springs to you.


4.2
   AROMA 9/10   APPEARANCE 4/5   TASTE 8/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 18/20
walterz42099 (61) - York, Pennsylvania, USA - APR 21, 2001
very pale, but very drinkable

1.2
   AROMA 2/10   APPEARANCE 4/5   TASTE 1/10   PALATE 2/5   OVERALL 3/20
P-shans99 (3) - USA - APR 20, 2001 does not count
Every time I go to a bar, I see people buying this stuff. God Bless massive advertising - it’s the only possible explantion. Dolemike1: Yuengling’s pretty good for the money.

1.3
   AROMA 2/10   APPEARANCE 2/5   TASTE 3/10   PALATE 1/5   OVERALL 5/20
Monahan99 (29) - parkersburg, West Virginia, USA - APR 19, 2001
I always found the lingering sweet taste of this beer to be a little repulsive. Not worth the money.

3
   AROMA 5/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 6/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 13/20
Jake Barnes (456) - St. Louis, Missouri, USA - APR 18, 2001
When someone figures out how this became so popular please let me know.

2.1
   AROMA 3/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 5/10   PALATE 2/5   OVERALL 8/20
weeicemon (126) - Lancaster, California, USA - APR 14, 2001
Immediate crispness turns into a thinnish bland beer. Corn permeates throughout from beginning to end. A resonable amount of maltiness can be detected. While at first satisfying, it becomes somewhat had to drink later.

0.9
   AROMA 2/10   APPEARANCE 1/5   TASTE 1/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 2/20
dolemike1 (1288) - Jeannette, Pennsylvania, USA - APR 12, 2001
The green death is just bad. If anyone knows a decent Pennsylvania lager, please tell me.

2.2
   AROMA 3/10   APPEARANCE 2/5   TASTE 4/10   PALATE 4/5   OVERALL 9/20
PhillyBeer2112 (2496) - Oviedo, Florida, USA - APR 2, 2001
The hype behind this beer is mystifying to me as well. A number of years ago, it was just another budget beer, but then suddenly it starting costing a bit more and was being consumed by yuppies. Strange. Anyway - I’ve had it fresh in PA and its moderately good, not stale like Aubrey’s was. Its one interesting property was that it had some body and creaminess, and a surprising sweetness but no real flavor. Still, its better than most macro swill lagers and has no bad off-flavors.

1.6
   AROMA 3/10   APPEARANCE 2/5   TASTE 3/10   PALATE 2/5   OVERALL 6/20
jstu9 (402) - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA - APR 2, 2001
Similar to any macrobrew, but it has a little bit of taste and character. Better than light beers

2.7
   AROMA 5/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 5/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 11/20
celticg99 (22) - Naperville, Illinois, USA - APR 1, 2001
This beer is not too expensive and not too bad. SOmetimes it tastes a little bit skunky

2.9
   AROMA 5/10   APPEARANCE 3/5   TASTE 6/10   PALATE 3/5   OVERALL 12/20
boto (1808) - Granby, Connecticut, USA - MAR 30, 2001
As for the commercial American beers, this one is a little better than the rest. A very refreshing beer.


We Want To Hear From You



Join us! RateBeer is made by beer enthusiasts for the craft beer community. Your basic membership is free and allows you to read all beer ratings. Click here to create your account... and give your opinion!

Join Us »



Page   1 « 170 171 172  173  174 175 176


Tick this beer

for your profile
  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Copyright © 2000-2014,
RateBeer LLC. All rights
reserved.
about us
About RateBeer
FAQ
Contact/Feedback
New Beers
add
Advanced Search
Add A Beer
Add A Brewer
Add A Place
Events
membership
Log In
Edit Personal Info
Buy Premium Membership
Your Messages
the best
RateBeer Best
100 Beer Club
The Top 50