clueo (112), Pennsylvania, USA
| 3.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 | Oct 20, 2008 Pretty good for a Bud! Nice mild hoppy flavor and smell. Tast is not too strong but the finish is smooth. I quite enjoyed this pleasant suprise! StFun (535), Indiana, USA
| 2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 3/5 | 6/20 | Oct 20, 2008 Updated: Jan 16, 2009What a dud. Thought this might be pretty good, as I’ve read a lot of raters say it was above average. To me, it isn’t. At all. Aroma is muddled, and the texture is watery. Astringent throughout. Touches of hops, but not much else. I would order this instead of Bud Lite for sure, but wouldn’t really spend money on it if anything else were available to me. Meh. HighWine (164), , California, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 | Oct 20, 2008 Had a bottle , ok two, and echo glenn’s description below. Definitely better when really cold. I didn’t want to like it but was actually pleasantly surprised. glennmastrange (857), hobe sound, Florida, USA
| 2.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 4/5 | 12/20 | Oct 20, 2008 Bottle. Moderate cereal note for the malt, light herbs and a hint of orange for the hops, very light dough for the yeast, with metallic, sulfur and a faint spiciness in the background. Head is small, creamy, slightly off white, with good lacing and is mostly diminishing. Color is clear copper/red. Flavor starts lightyl sweet and acidic, and finishes lightly to moderately bitter. Palate is medium, watery but a bit slick, and has a lively carbonation. I definitely gave this beer a fair shake. In fact I gave it a slightly high overall score because of how impressed I was to have a product like this from a company that gives us Bud Light, Wild Blue, Bud Extra and Tequiza. Hey AB, why not go the extra mile and put out something over the top? You have the resources I would guess. durhambeer (1218), Durham, USA
| 2.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Oct 19, 2008 Sample from WBF, and this will probably be the last I’ll sample this. I was really hoping for better and went in really wanting to give this a fair shot, but the nose smelled like wet dog to me. More malty and grainy than hoppy and just not very good. wheatfreak (41), Marinette, Wisconsin, USA
| 2.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Oct 19, 2008 Updated: Dec 21, 2008Pours a light amber hue with a small head which dissipates quickly. Has a little malty flavor in the beginning and finishes up with an earthy hoppy finish. This is AB’s attempt at a microbrew. Pretty decent, but I bet this scores a little lower due to the lack of pedigree behind it. graham515 (429), Houston, Texas, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 | Oct 19, 2008 Pours a copper/amber into the glass with a very small white head. Aroma is faint but has a little sweetness to it. Flavor is very clean with a nice hop/malt balance. Definitely the middle ground between macro and craft beer. This is a pretty decent beer, however, at the price point of a craft beer I don’t really think I would ever buy it again. nramsburg (202), New York, New York, USA
| 2.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 3/5 | 10/20 | Oct 19, 2008 Well it’s Budweiser so it’s somewhat bland, but this was to be expected. What’s there isn’t bad, a little yeast up front and a hint of malt. Overall it’s clean and has a decent body but really isn’t anything special. Too bad. That said, if it becomes as prevalent as Bud heavy, it’s definitely the better, more palatable choice at bars.
|