nigos (631) - Ipswich, Suffolk, ENGLAND - AUG 15, 2003
1.7 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 7/20
Toilet water and citrus nose with hints of brandy. Dull amber colour with a rapidly vanishing head. Sweet treacle and apple taste, slightly skunked with a short, thin bitterish finish. Pretty poor really, better than that famous piss Fosters though.
PEAK (14) - AUSTRALIA - AUG 11, 2003
1.3 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
Sweet blande beer found every where. For a hard earned thirst this beer is not for me. 22 BU?
Jahills (151) - Cambridge (Hobart), AUSTRALIA - AUG 10, 2003
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
UPDATED: JAN 8, 2004 A little mettallic but a very easy drinking lager. A tough beer.
bluevegie (3071) - Perth, AUSTRALIA - AUG 4, 2003
1.9 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Thank god I got this one out of the way, now I can get on with some real beers!Sweet and very little taste.
farmboy (218) - Barwon Heads, AUSTRALIA - AUG 3, 2003
0.5 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 1/20
UPDATED: JAN 3, 2006 This stuff is about as bad it gets. How this can be called a beer is an embarrassment. It is nothing more than a bottle full of chemicals that happens to be 4.9% alcohol. Vile, unadulerated filth and I’m a Victorian.
RE-RATE: On a trip to the UK recently, I was bought a bottle of VB by one of my so-called friends and drank it as not to hurt his feelings. I was quite staggered at how much WORSE this is when it’s brewed in the UK. This was sickly sweet and metallic all rolled into one. I aint no fan of VB, but the Aussie version is completely unlike the UK version. Both are bad, but if forced to choose I’d take the Oz one every time. I couldn’t even finish the UK bottle.
theread (58) - Wagga Wagga, AUSTRALIA - AUG 1, 2003
1.2 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 5/20
UPDATED: JAN 4, 2004 This was once good, or I remember it so, back in the 70's and early 80's. It has become mass produced blandness that looks like beer, but that is where the similarity ends. It is way too sweet and has no bitterness. It reminds me of fizzy weird pineapple juice. A sad indictment of Australian beer taste if this is the most popular. Not good. Cheers folks
Nanger (6) - Melbourne, AUSTRALIA - AUG 1, 2003 does not count
1.7 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
Another drab beer from the company that has wrecked Australians good taste in beer.
I stopped drinking it a long time ago, i think it was when thay started putting dirty dishwashing water in it. Well thats what it tastes like anyway!
groundfisher (1) - AUSTRALIA - JUL 31, 2003 does not count
1.9 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 10/20
This isn't such a good beer. However, this is a very inexpensive beer. It is very good for its price - when you buy a cheap beer you know what to expect.
steasa (12) - Brisbane, AUSTRALIA - JUL 27, 2003
0.7 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 1/20
UPDATED: AUG 7, 2003 Thin,overfizzed brewed soft drink.Very evident overuse of mollasses/sugar cane which comes through in the taste.Slight hint of weak hops in the taste.Extremely sweet and sickly.Awful!
fiulijn (19385) - Vancouver, British Columbia, CANADA - JUL 4, 2003
1.9 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
Golden color. Simple aroma, almost stinking. Very simple body and watery final. Drinkable, useless.