egajdzis (6692) - Pennsburg, Pennsylvania, USA - JUL 26, 2003
UPDATED: SEP 21, 2003 Amber color with decent white head (larger than I was expecting). Malty, diactyl flavor, actually has more flavor than other beers at this price. Going to school in Philly, we lived off this stuff, now its a treat when a friend's got it for free. RaginCajun (320) - Houston, Texas, USA - AUG 3, 2003
Okay stuff, only moderately better than macroswill. Very metallic (from the can?) and light; not much taste. Gets a little sweet after 3 or 4 12oz. though, but without that nasty macro aftertaste. wildchefbill (245) - Sarasota, Florida, USA - OCT 19, 2003
Pours amber with a nice white head. Mild aroma with a little skunkiness. OK Malt flavor with very little hops. Better than most macrobrews, but not real good. SledgeJr (3577) - Omaha, Nebraska, USA - JUN 29, 2004
In the 22 oz. bomber bottle. The bottle caught my eye, so I thought "what the hell." To my disappointment, it was a twist cap and could not be put into homebrew service. However, that was not the only let down to this little Pennsylvania favorite. Pours a rich amber color, but virtually without carbonation! No head unless you hop into the glass and splash around a little with your swim fins. Smells like water. Doesn’t taste much different than aqua vitae either. After having a Frankenheim lager earlier this evening, I must say that this lacks the same lager yeast flavor. However, the two lagers are equally wet. I think that I must be missing something here, as the ratebeerians seem to respect the Pride of Pottsville. BrooklynWallis (14) - Cols., Ohio, USA - AUG 4, 2004
Not nearly as good as I expected. Tastes kinda flat, and doesn’t have the "bite" I would have expected. A bit of a dissappointment.
jon112981 (327) - Bristow, Virginia, USA - DEC 30, 2004
Not a bad beer at all. It’s too pale in a glass for me but I wouldn’t recomend it in a glass. It’s a great session beer. Little head, bubbly. It has a stronger flavor than your basic macro-brew and excellent for the price. flynnguy (14) - New Jersey, USA - JAN 25, 2005
Bland and overcarbonated. Going to school at Drexel University, this was a "quality" beer at the parties. I would certainly choose it over most of the stuff that they usually served but I don’t think I’d actually buy this beer. I think it’s a little too orange for a pale lager and it can’t be because of the flavor. It’s drinkable but that’s about all I can say for it. gerbache (8) - Oakland, California, USA - JAN 30, 2005 does not count
Seemed really bland and tasteless. It’s drinkable, but not particularly memorable. I suppose it’s good for quenching the thirst, but I don’t think I’d buy this myself. bourne (161) - Suwon, SOUTH KOREA - MAR 23, 2005
Deep brown in color with thick white head that lasts a while. stong taste and hoppy armoma when compared with bud and the like. Nothing special but not too much wrong with it. tjthresh (1875) - Greenfield, Indiana, USA - MAY 23, 2005
Poured from a can into a straight sided pint. Grainy with a bit of floral hop aroma. That may be a strech. No problems with the appearance. Exactly as it should be pale/straw with a thin cap of snow white head. No real hop flavor or bitterness at all. Not much bitterness to speak of either. Just grainy. Med bodied with lively CO2 rolls through the mouth. Very drying. Pretty much exactly what you’d expect from the style. I’d chose Yuengling any day over the big boys.