beernovice39 (256), South Carolina, USA
| 2.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 3/5 | 3/10 | 1/5 | 11/20 | Jul 28, 2009 As a fan of Lagers I think this one is overrated...Not much better than the macro pee....now I must admit if I could find it for $8.50 a case like superdude1979 below I would buy it and push it on "friends" Jordiam (70), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| 2.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 2/5 | 10/20 | Jul 27, 2009 Overrated, of course, but still alright in some circumstances.
Pours like a typical lager, nothing too special, but DAMN is it ever skunky for a pale lager! Now I’m not saying it’s always super-skunked out, it depends how fresh it is, but it goes skunky FAST! Either way, it’s still a skiny smell and taste with mild metallic and dry, hoppy flavour. I’d rather have a heineken just so I don’t get blitzed by skunk. dalek123 (103), Houston, Texas, USA
| 2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 3/5 | 2/10 | 3/5 | 10/20 | Jul 26, 2009 Pours pale gold with a medium sized white head. Nose is a little skunky. Taste is mild hop biiterness. This is basically not that much different from most macrobrew pale lagers. superdude1979 (60), Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 4/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 | Jul 26, 2009 Not much special here. I got a case on sale for $10, and then I was able to use a coupon for an additional $1.50 off. This beer is always so expensive and I don’t really know why. Pours a nice golden color, easy on the palate, no aftertaste or any sort of flavour. Not as watered down as American Macro swill, but no real flavor. Not worth what they charge. turbothy (719), Bonn, Germany
| 2.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 8/20 | Jul 24, 2009 0.5L can. Pours straw yellow. Faint grass aroma. Slight malt flavour. Not good, but definitely drinkable. One of the better of the ubiquitous macro lagers. BigBeerHead (42), Reading, Bedfordshire, England
| 0.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 1/10 | 1/5 | 1/10 | 1/5 | 1/20 | Jul 24, 2009 This is awful and I don’t know what they put into it and how much longer they can continue to sell this tripe but simply a rubbish lager which taskes a bit like Kronenbourg 1664. If you have any sense you shall not be drinking ’Wife Beater’ as this gets you off your head and will make you regret stuff you’ve done and the hangover is not much better. ben4321 (984), Rockville, Maryland, USA
| 2.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 9/20 | Jul 22, 2009 Overall Impression: I’ve always thought of this beer as being a little overrated, but not on here, it seems the rest of the RateBeerians agree that it is pretty mediocre. It’s not bad for what it is, and it’s better then most of its competition, like Heineken, so it has that going for it, but overall it’s just a dull but drinkable Pale Lager. BruceLeroy (76), North Dakota, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Jul 21, 2009 Tastes a lot like Heineken, but a little less skunky and a little drier. Barely perceptable fruit aftertaste which is kind of interesting. I paid $2.25 for a bottle of this, I think it was overpriced. Also bottle is 11.2oz, not 12oz. $6.99 for a six pack would be more in line. Aroma is weak. Also I think it could use a touch more carbonation. Overall a pretty decent lager for a hot summer day. Not too sweet, not too bitter. But I’m disappointed with the price and the bottle should be 12oz!
|