1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Red Dog - Miller Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Red DogRed Dog

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
51
awful

589 Ratings
THE BROS
51
awful

(view ratings)
Ratings: 589
Reviews: 171
rAvg: 2.03
pDev: 38.42%
Wants: 9
Gots: 21 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Miller Brewing Co. visit their website
Wisconsin, United States

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 08-14-2001)
View: Beers (28) |  Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Red Dog Alström Bros
Ratings: 589 | Reviews: 171 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of Rumpole
Rumpole

Massachusetts

2.1/5  rDev +3.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Most of Miller’s lineup is a touch on the slow side, with both MGD and MHL checking in at 4.7% abv according to the brewery website. Enter Red Dog. At a full 5%, it represents an attempt by Miller to compensate this somewhat and at a good price to boot, and for that reason alone I hesitate to fault this brew overmuch. But the good intentions actually served to point up the reasons the earlier brews were pegged slower; Miller’s adjunct recipe seems to work best when not pushed too hard.

I have not seen bottled Red Dog in a long time; in fact, these days even the cans apparently are available for sale only in 30-packs ($16 in glamorous Worcester, MA). The label itself, however, has not changed since it first came out in the early 90’s. The red, white and black cans catch the eye at first glimpse but after that the label looks crude and brutish and isn’t too much fun to look at. The beer itself looks just fine, never having claimed to be a red brew even in the first television spots in which the straight gold lager was in plain view; the color is a touch richer than most macros.

Red Dog’s scent, alas, as many before have already mentioned, does not help Miller’s cause very much. It is an off tanginess with an underlay of sourness which frankly isn’t too encouraging, and which I quickly trained the Rumpole schnoz to ignore.

The taste and texture fares somewhat better. There’s some maltiness and some body, and that tangy sweetness thrown in about midway through the tasting. The finish, never a Miller strength, is not too smooth but not the worst either, and disguised easily enough when served cold. On the whole, it’s not too bad – at first. But as you work through the case, you notice the overall roughness of the brew more and more, and drinking it gets laborious. That tangy sweetness becomes harshness and somehow the flavor elements seem to be fighting each other rather than working together. Sometimes a good smoke helps a rough beer out, but in this case there wasn’t much difference. I directly compared it to Coors Extra Gold - another effort at a macro with a bit of oomph - and the Extra Gold won easily.

It’s too bad. Red Dog has the desired strength and at a decent price, but in this case, Miller’s good intentions were outstripped by its execution. At that, however, it’s still better than ice beers and with its 5% delivery, it beats a surprising number of other cheap stuff.

Serving type: can

03-08-2006 17:37:16 | More by Rumpole
Photo of Mebuzzard
Mebuzzard

Colorado

2.53/5  rDev +24.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Yes, I found this on tap the other night in Denver. Very surprised and would not have usually ordered it, but i had to.
Looks like a Killian's Red without the red. Tinge of pink in the light golden hue. No head.
It was very cold, which hid most of the smell and taste. Picked up some malt, grain and caramel in both. A refreshing drink, but I hesitate to call it a refreshing beer. Nothing special, can't imagine how it is warmer.

Serving type: on-tap

02-11-2006 17:12:39 | More by Mebuzzard
Photo of DogFood11
DogFood11

California

1.48/5  rDev -27.1%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Keeping with my American tour of Macro's I picked up some red dog from miller brewing. I'm in search of the finest from our big brewing monopolies and this one I hope is not it.

Golden in color very similar to its sister macro lagers. Has an off type smell ....this is a fresh sample. seems skunky but this is how I remember it so I doubt every sample I've tried is oxidized. Tons of medium to large sized carbonation give it a bit of a sizzly mouth.

What you would expect. Maybe a touch more malt presence than usual in this style. Ehhh this could be the last time I confront the red dog.

Serving type: bottle

01-19-2006 06:39:09 | More by DogFood11
Photo of ski271
ski271

Pennsylvania

2.88/5  rDev +41.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Pours a clear, pale gold with a medium-sized, white, fizzy, quickly diminishing head. Some very spotty lacing. The smell is very mild of grain and corn. The taste is, well, not great, but not as horrible as I was expecting. Corn and cereal with some hay and a slightly crisp finish. Not disgustingly sweet on the finish either. Thin body, watery texture, and oddly a rather low carbonation, like it’s fizzed it all out on the pour. No real prize here, but far from the bottom of the barrel. Oh dear god, taking style into account, I’m actually giving this a thumbs-up rating? Nope, can’t bring myself to do it.

Serving type: bottle

01-17-2006 22:07:20 | More by ski271
Photo of jasonpeckins32
jasonpeckins32

Michigan

1.63/5  rDev -19.7%
look: 1 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Nasty. A really awesome example of a horrid attempt at making a red beer. It tastes like sour funky bread. Terrible. I cannot understand how they thought a "red" beer should be pale yellow in color, grainy and astringent in smell, and sour and bready in the taste. Not impressed, and will go out of my way to not try this one again.

Serving type: can

12-27-2005 06:35:56 | More by jasonpeckins32
Photo of kbnooshay
kbnooshay

New York

1.73/5  rDev -14.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Holy crap this is bad. Just figured i would try it cause a huge can was $1.29, knew it was gonna be bad though. This poured a very pale yellow color. People mock the beer because it isn't red but who the hell bought a red dog thinking it was going to be red? This is is a piss swill beer. Lots of carbonation and a unhealthy looking head. Typical macro smell of ass and grains. The chemical smell is there. The taste is fairly harsh, lighty sweet but disgustingly sweet and corny. Light but dirty tasting. Light body fizzy and prickly mouthfeel. Not drinkable!

Serving type: can

12-01-2005 04:16:02 | More by kbnooshay
Photo of nekronos
nekronos

Mexico

3.63/5  rDev +78.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Well, I expected more from this beer, since I wanted to try it in 1999, and just this year I was able to do it. Very pale, almost green, the beer, foam as a lager, but just a few. But what is great is, the dog, actually it looks like welcoming you and like showing you a bottle of the beerm but below the picture.

Serving type: can

10-24-2005 14:30:38 | More by nekronos
Photo of rpgman456
rpgman456

Connecticut

2.33/5  rDev +14.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

If Alf was a beer, he would be an ice cold Red Dog. Let me explain why... Miller brought this adjunct into the world in the early 1990's when red beers were a fad...remember that? Oh yeah and that "Plank Road Brewery" thing yeah that was a fad too.. having macro conglomerate companies make virtually the same product under a different name. Now that the red beer phase has sadly come and gone (I miss my Red Wolf, Anheuser Busch) this beer is without a home. From the days when my older brother picked up 6packs of bottles at premium prices to the days of "on sale" 30racks, this beer is past its prime. Pours a light amber color with a robust scent of barely malt and corn. Taste is also of malt with a hint of bitterness left in the palate. Not an impressionable beer at all, especially when trying to get the most of your money. For now this beer will live on in college frat house basements with all loss of the prestige it once had.

Serving type: can

10-03-2005 05:58:19 | More by rpgman456
Photo of BeerBeing
BeerBeing

Pennsylvania

1.23/5  rDev -39.4%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Presentation: 12oz brown glass US-generic longneck bottle, red and brown on white label

Appearance: pale yellow color, medium head, a little lacing

Smell: sweet malt, grain

Taste: medium body, watery mouthfeel, grainy, minimal maltiness and hops

Notes: not a good one

Serving type: bottle

08-27-2005 16:46:57 | More by BeerBeing
Photo of BuckeyeNation
BuckeyeNation

Iowa

1.9/5  rDev -6.4%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

This review is part of Macro Smackdown VI, my ongoing attempt to make the consumption of macro lagers more interesting. This edition pits Red Dog against Michelob in a no-holds-barred grudge match between two of the Big Three. Miller has attempted to give this beer some cachet by putting Plank Road Brewery on the can instead of SABMiller. Same old dreck in new clothing or good beer? Let's find out...

Medium amber with slightly more vigorous carbonation. I like the color of this beer better since it's darker and richer looking, but the head is a mess. It's a ghastly shade of grey with a mealy texture, falls to near nothing in minutes and leaves the glass clean. Red Dog has the slight edge on color, although it's more than wiped out by the miserable looking cap. Advantage: Michelob.

The nose is below average, even when taking style into account. The graininess borders on spoiled and there's no hint of hops. I can also appreciate an underlying, chemical-like nastiness that can't be ignored... and is the reason why Michelob wins this round.

Given the smell, I was expecting the full monty of foulness from Red Dog. To its credit, that isn't the case. It's as grainy as its competitor, but is less harsh. It's also a little sweeter (as are many Miller beers), which makes me like it a bit more. Not sweet in the corn syrupy malt liquor sense, but still modestly sweet. Edge to RD in the most important category of all.

The mouthfeel is light and is enthusiastically bubbled. That makes it more interesting in the mouth, even as the flavor is supremely uninteresting.

I'm not sure how the final tally will come out since I haven't put in the scores yet, but the only score that really matters to me is taste. In the end, Red Dog is the slight winner over the more highly heralded Michelob Lager. I could drink a can or two of this stuff if I absolutely had too. Ice cold and accompanied by tongue-numbing spicy food ideally.

Serving type: can

08-27-2005 13:32:37 | More by BuckeyeNation
Photo of tgbljb
tgbljb

Pennsylvania

3/5  rDev +47.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

poured a pale yellow color with abundant white puffy head. Smell is minimal with only a slight sweetness noted. Taste is very mild with little hops or malt to be found, only wetness. Finishes refreshing, but not much more. Good thirst quencher. Spacer beer.

Serving type: can

08-27-2005 00:26:14 | More by tgbljb
Photo of PBRstreetgang
PBRstreetgang

Ohio

2.1/5  rDev +3.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Pours pale amber with a one finger head. Fades to abundant lacing in a few seconds. No detectable hop aroma, but strong with malt. The lack of hops gives an unbalanced flavor, tastes like low- alcohol malt liquor. Adjunct is present, possibly corn or rice. Naturally, bad tasting beer is one that is difficult to drink. Even the high carbonation does not smooth out the lingerng aftertaste. A bad choice for a cheap session brew.

Serving type: bottle

08-01-2005 23:13:03 | More by PBRstreetgang
Photo of Hunter
Hunter

Arizona

1.7/5  rDev -16.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Appearance: typical of an American Adjunct - fizzy, pale gold, frothy white head with no stamina.

Aroma: You need to ask? Corn.

Taste: Actually worse than others in the style, if you can believe it. Brackish, metallic. They recommend drinking it ice-cold. Probably to numb the taste buds.

Empty aftertaste sitting on a watery mouthfeel. Not the worst of the style I've had, but...

I tell myself the reason I review these types of beers is so I have a firm appreciation for what a GOOD beer is when I taste it. This 'aint it.

Serving type: can

04-30-2005 01:02:54 | More by Hunter
Photo of RushLimbmalt
RushLimbmalt

Minnesota

1.48/5  rDev -27.1%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

The mighty Red Dog. It's never bad when it's free. It pours the typical golden macro color and has no head. The aroma is bitter, a chemical bitter so it is wise not to smell it before you drink it. The bland corn flavor is not terrible when ice cold, but can become quite gross if allowed to warm up. This is not the worst beer made, but it is by no means worth drinking if MGD or Bud is available.

Serving type: bottle

03-28-2005 05:52:02 | More by RushLimbmalt
Photo of TastyTaste
TastyTaste

Minnesota

1.65/5  rDev -18.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

A refugeee in my fridge, came from I don't know where. Clear light gold color, with about 2" of foamy head. Lots of visible carbonation. Smell is not very prominent, but when you get close enough smells like skunky corn. Taste is bland, but whatever flavor it has is fairly off. Not a lot of hops presence. A cheap, nasty macro, which I'll recommend a pass on.

Serving type: can

03-23-2005 00:18:52 | More by TastyTaste
Photo of walleye
walleye

Michigan

1.1/5  rDev -45.8%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

from the 22. cheaper to buy this than a 12oz. poured a yello with a white head. aroma metallic, corn, straw,hints of malt and hops. flavor, corn husks, wheat, light malts and hops. the only reason I bought this that bieristgut said I should rate this I’ll get even with him

Serving type: bottle

11-26-2004 21:34:16 | More by walleye
Photo of moocey
moocey

Alabama

3/5  rDev +47.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Red Dog. Big surprise, it's not red. But that's okay because this is only three dollar macroswill. In fact, it's the most tasteless macroswill miller has to offer. This is even more tasteless than Budweiser products. Not a bad job for a cheap macro adjunct lager. Not bad at all. If I want a "crisp, clean, refreshing" beer that doesn't taste like anything to speak of, I'll drink Red Dog instead of paying two dollars more for a Budweiser.

Serving type: bottle

11-14-2004 05:11:35 | More by moocey
Photo of Redrover
Redrover

Illinois

2.45/5  rDev +20.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

32oz brown twist off, lots of numbers on the label, but no apparent freshness dating.

Beer pours a light, bright gold with a fast fading head and shards of lacing.

Beer has a distant aroma of fresh malts/bread. Not bad smelling, just very faint.

The taste is slightly sweet and grainy. The beer has a slight metallic twang (or is that the hops?). Not offensive in any way, not really very good in any way.

This mouthfeel and the beer is under carbonated for this style. Drinkabity is fine for what it is. The beer is better than Bud & Coors, but pales next to some of the good regional brews (think Point, Old Style, etc.).

Serving type: bottle

09-16-2004 16:09:43 | More by Redrover
Photo of Gagnonsux
Gagnonsux

Texas

2.53/5  rDev +24.6%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Spent $3.59 on a sixer of "tall-boy" (16 Oz.) cans.

Appearance- On the dark end of the pale spectrum, but definently not red.

Smell- Typical macro smell, honestly no need for elaboration.

Taste- Better than a lot of macros I have tried. No nasty after taste, and pretty smooth going down. Still, not much in the way of flavor though.

Drinkability- I'd have this again when I'm low on money and still want some beer. Better drinkability than "light" macros, but still not the best of all macros.

Serving type: can

07-04-2004 02:00:09 | More by Gagnonsux
Photo of benmiliron
benmiliron

Ohio

1.8/5  rDev -11.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Paid $5.99 for a 12-pack.

As you might expect, this stuff is pretty ass. Drink it for the novelty, or because it's cheaper than Bud. Either way, for beer in this price range, it's tough to beat the Red Dog.

We used to call our diet "Body by Red Dog". For good reason.

Serving type: bottle

05-11-2004 04:32:04 | More by benmiliron
Photo of GreenWBush
GreenWBush

Oregon

1.6/5  rDev -21.2%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

When at a party (to a slight degree) you must do as the party-goers do. While my friends have accepted the fact that i'll more than likely bring a sixer to their house with proper glassware in tow, acquaintances and strangers still wonder what the hell i'm doing.

So this particular night I decide to go cheap and drink whatevers being served. And it was the wonderously horrible "beer" Red Dog. From the can.

Basically this is a ghost of a beer - the pale appearance is almost eerily white when compared even to Budweiser. There are so many adjuncts on the nose you don't know if you're sniffing the glass or the beer.

The mouthfeel is pithy and watery. I can't even really taste anything going on here but adjuncts.

When it got warmer major rice or corn flavors appeared. Thumbs down.

Serving type: bottle

05-08-2004 02:23:30 | More by GreenWBush
Photo of GeoffRizzo
GeoffRizzo

Texas

2.7/5  rDev +33%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Ah yes, the dog's red, not the beer. Light golden color, slightly bubbly, champagne like presence. Tender sweetness, combined with the ever-present adjunct offerings, yet they mask themselves well, mainly behind some malty sweetness; crisp and slightly carbonated, a tiny notch above the standard macro. A mid-90's staple that has since disappeared, a dear old friend with many memories, a friend that I may see again.

Serving type: can

04-11-2004 01:22:37 | More by GeoffRizzo
Photo of CBFanWish
CBFanWish

New York

1.8/5  rDev -11.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

The name is Red Dog. The colour is transparent yellow. Do you see what I'm gettig at here? Red. Yellow. Anyway, this is a lackluster, poor showing for a beer. It pours a weak yellow colour with a thin, quickly disipating head. The smell was all skunk. It was absolutly dreadful. Looking past the smell, I took a taste. Light malts with a healthy dose of corn. That's right. Corn. The same stuff you eat on the cob. You know, goes well with a burger? That's the one. This beer won't go well with anything. One good thing about it. The dog on the label looks cool.

Serving type: bottle

03-16-2004 15:48:32 | More by CBFanWish
Photo of cypressbob
cypressbob

United Kingdom (Northern Ireland)

2.33/5  rDev +14.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

I bought this in a six pack, a) cos it was cheap b) because i'd heard it was good

ok, so i found it its not particularly good, its made by the miller corp for a start

Drank from the bottle, very plain dry taste, kinda malty

Similar to bud or any other macro pale lager, easy enough to drink but its very dull

An all round crappy beer

Serving type: bottle

03-10-2004 11:02:24 | More by cypressbob
Photo of WesWes
WesWes

New York

2.55/5  rDev +25.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

The beer pours a very pale gold color with a spotty white lace head. The aroma is less than average. It boasts of pale malts, rice, and lager yeast; simply awful. The taste is awful as well. It is light and without flavor. It has zero malt character and finishes with a musty aftertaste; very watered down. The mouthfeel sucks. It is a low bodied beer with less than adequate carbonation. This was my beer of choice when I was 16, but now I wouldn't drink another if I was paid.

Serving type: can

03-08-2004 00:19:28 | More by WesWes
Red Dog from Miller Brewing Co.
51 out of 100 based on 589 ratings.