heykevin (1274) - Decorah, Iowa, USA - MAR 28, 2002
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Vaguely skunky megaeuropils. Served on draft so being lightstruck is not an excuse. Marginally better than Heineken I’d say, but that isn’t really much of a compliment.
ToadMan (559) - Washington, Washington DC, USA - MAR 25, 2002
1.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
I guess I just dont like Pilsners, I would only put this half a notch above Bud.
Volgon (2763) - Manchester, New Hampshire, USA - MAR 25, 2002
2.7 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
UPDATED: AUG 29, 2006 Not-quite hazy yellow/amber body with a fast moving head. Light flowery aroma, crisp, clean, and ends slightly bitter. Old rating: I tried to find a bottle without dust, or under a light or covered in slime, but it tasted horribly lightstruck. Eh. It beats the hell out of about 90% of the beer drank in America, but as you all know, that ain’t saying much.
rauchbier (3598) - Isle Of Beer, Lincolnshire, ENGLAND - MAR 25, 2002
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Sold as a premium brand here in the U.K., but all that means is it costs more and is strong. To the average U.K. drinker 4.5% abv is strong. Aroma and flavour is muted although hints of hop are apparent. The head lasts about a nanosecond. Overall the beer is probably worth of the ’premium’ tag as it is far superior to any English lagers. It has a soft smooth palate and aftertaste and doesnt have the nasty aftertaste of many other stronger lagers that just seem to have a couple of bags of brewing sugar thrown in to boost the alcohol.
DubbelO7 (42) - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA - MAR 24, 2002
2.5 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 7/20
Good beer for the money... at least here in Western Canada ...
I moved up to here from the Eastern U.S. and never was willing to pay what was being charged for it in Pennsylvania.
It seems to be a beer of choice here, cheap cheap and cheap again .
reminds me of Heineken etcetra yet not as caustic.
kwik-lime (1290) - London, Greater London, ENGLAND - MAR 23, 2002
2.4 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 9/20
UPDATED: JUN 22, 2013 Ubiquitously popular, relatively well-hopped but somewhat grainy and overly gassy lager. There are worse out there.
neilrichards (191) - Leicestershire, ENGLAND - MAR 20, 2002
3.2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
A good, crisp lager. The drink of choice in most, city center pubs. Enjoyable at any time.
DougShoemaker (3147) - Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - MAR 19, 2002
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Smells hoppy. Golden. Bitter. Average
dprior (118) - Somerville, Massachusetts, USA - MAR 15, 2002
1.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 5/20
Yuck. Smells rank, tastes rank. Very watery. Nothing on the palate.
JoeCPH99 (2) - - MAR 15, 2002 does not count
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Stella Artois is one of the best lagers on the market. On draught the pint usually has no head, has a clean taste and goes down easy. Bottled Stella comes in green bottles, and tastes clean also, doesn’t taste at all skunky. Acceptable in cans. You aren’t going to be taken aback with it, but if you are looking for lager you can’t do much better.