RobBestwick (797) - Calgary, Alberta, CANADA - DEC 15, 2014
1.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 5/20
Pours with a golden colour and small head. Grassy aroma. Lots of carbonation. Weak lager flavour with metallic notes. Very thin with a watery finish.
ben4321 (5481) - Hoboken, New Jersey, USA - NOV 16, 2014
2.4 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 9/20
Rating this off a recent large format that I drank at the Indian place down the street in Hoboken. Surrised Iíve never rated this before, as I tend to consume one every so often with Indian. Itís solid or better as far as adjunct lager goes. Another way to say itís a poor beer, but not a terrible one.
Travlr (20297) - Washington, Washington DC, USA - OCT 15, 2014
1.5 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 4/20
Giant bottle at a local Indian restaurant. Clear pale yellow color, white coca cola head. Aroma of corn flakes. Taste is weak straw. Safer than the water.
slowrunner77 (9411) - Reno, Nevada, USA - OCT 14, 2014
1.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 6/20
"Had a mini Indian beer taste-off between Blue Himalayan and Taj Mahal. Not expecting greatness from either commercially produced lager, but here I go anyway. Look-same light straw color while pouring. TM is typical macro lager. Canít even say that for BH...slightly hazy...slightly. Even pouring down the middle produces little or no head. Aroma-both typical macro lager aroma, with a slight extra unpleasantness to the BH. Feel-BH is flat, and as the aroma and taste are not good either, the mouthfeel is horrible too. TM isnít good, but has better carbonation and isnít as repulsive. flavor-BH rivals the worst of the American macros...no way in hell iím finishing this. TM is closer to average but still donít want to finish. overall, Blue Himalayan is foul pee water, while Taj Mahal is somewhere between horrible and respectable, although a little closer to the later. No more Indian beer for me. Iíll be dumping 18 of the 22 oz of BH, and probably wonít quite finish the TM either."
Bork (452) - Rosewood, Georgia, USA - OCT 12, 2014
1.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 6/20
Regular adjunct lager with the non-malts taking center stage. Some hops of dubious quality. Turns undrinkable when it warms up.
oliodnb (652) - ITALY - OCT 12, 2014
1.4 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 5/20
65cl bottle at an Indian restaurant. Probably the beer with less taste I ever had. At least no weird flavors.
Patrickctenchi (5786) - Coxís Knob, columbus, Indiana, USA - SEP 5, 2014
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 9/20
Cleargold, with a short white head.
Aroma of mild, sweet grain malt.
Taste is grain malt, rice....sweet....almost the sugar/cornflake taste of an NA...
Really not too bad, no skunk, just overly sweet.
ordybill (1234) - Douglasville, Georgia, USA - SEP 2, 2014
3.8 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 16/20
This Indian Lager is a very good American styled lager beer. I bought it from a "Whole Foods" store in Marietta, GA and it traveled well from the brewery. No hint of skunkiness, a good crisp taste. A non-overpowering aroma and a pretty full body for a lager. I would definitely drink this again. I would compare it with the other well known Indian brew "Kingfisher", Interesting label to boot, not shiny and eclectic like many micro-brews but an old school label that did get me to notice it in the cooler.
berkshirejohn (5826) - Bracknell, Berkshire, ENGLAND - SEP 1, 2014
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
12oz bottle from an Indian store in Rochester, NY. Straw with a ring of white head; some spicy hops on the aroma; full bodied with a sweet rice grain taste; and a clean finish. Much better than expected.
lukedarock (246) - Howell, Michigan, USA - AUG 31, 2014
3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 10/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 10/20
This is kinda like a well done pale lager with a bit of spice, really not too bad but no must drink