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!

Shiner 98 Bavarian Style Amber - Spoetzl Brewery

Not Rated.
Shiner 98 Bavarian Style AmberShiner 98 Bavarian Style Amber

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
80
good

75 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 75
Reviews: 60
rAvg: 3.5
pDev: 15.14%
Wants: 0
Gots: 1 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Spoetzl Brewery visit their website
Texas, United States

Style | ABV
Vienna Lager |  ABV ?

Availability: Limited (brewed once)

Notes/Commercial Description:
This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: beeragent on 05-17-2007)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 75 | Reviews: 60 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of jasonjlewis
2.1/5  rDev -40%
look: 4 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Appearance is decent with good retention.

Smell is awful. Must have some adjuncts. Smells almost skunky, but this beer is not skunked.

Taste is shallow and lacks a good hoppiness. Some of the bitterness is no control of tannins.

Mouthfeel is very watery. I find more mouthfeel in carbonated water.

This beer is chuggable, but not something I'd ever make a session out of.

jasonjlewis, Aug 11, 2007
Photo of Commandogeraldo
2.2/5  rDev -37.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Poured a 12 oz. bottle into a pint glass. Decent head retention, nothing fancy in the nose, nor is it a particularly strong nose. Taste is a lot like Shiner Bock, only lighter. Same afterfunk as Shiner Bock too, kinda that "huh, what is that?" sort of taste. Not a strong lingering finish, and not particularly pleasant. I personally did not garner enough enthusiasm for this beer to finish the entire bottle. I did come up with an ad slogan though - Shiner 98 - It's not that terrible!

Commandogeraldo, Jun 15, 2007
Photo of dungaree
2.3/5  rDev -34.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

What a bummer.... not good. After Shiner 96 and Shiner 97, I expected much better.

It looked promising as it poured into the glass. Nice 1/2 inch head retention. Not many bubbles though. Disappointing smell-- "phenolic macrobrew" I'll call it. Sort of toasty, sort of beery. Reddish amber hues make it look interesting but still looks kinda flat.

The taste was equally unimpressive. I'm not sure what style they were going for-- the "Bavarian" part is confusing. I think BA's description is a little more accurate- red ale. Nothing really sticks out in the taste. Definitely has some chemical-like tastes. Very bland, very pedestrian. Not really looking forward to drinking the six-er.

I'm a big fan on Shiner (I've made the pilgrimage) but they missed the mark on this one. Seems they are still trying to appeal to a mass beer market (the marketing, the bland taste, etc). Why not make the beer better and appeal to not only the masses but the beer advocates who are quickly becoming THE beer masses?

dungaree, May 26, 2007
Photo of jujubeast6000
2.58/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Reviewed 7/2/2007 (12oz bottle):

Pours a brown lightish colored body, with a whitish head, average but diminishing. Has a sugary malty aroma, and lots of hops too. Has a clean weak taste, watery, with some malts. Some skunky malt flavor but not much else there.

jujubeast6000, Feb 14, 2009
Photo of TexIndy
2.65/5  rDev -24.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a 12oz bottle into a pint glass. The label was cool - had an old school style to it. It was a clear copper color. It had a decent white head that quickly dissipated. No lacing and almost no carb. The smell was wet grass and some malt. Kinda a mess and not very pleasing. The taste was a mess as well. It was very watery with little taste but what did pop up was not good. Overall, I generally like the Shiner offerings but this is a big miss for me. Not real sure about this anniversary offerings - here's hoping for next year. (2.5, NA, ML, N)

TexIndy, Aug 23, 2007
Photo of HotterThanHell
2.8/5  rDev -20%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Love the Spoetzl Brewery, made the pilgrimage with Ungespundit (drank too much and spilled beer on the floor) and have been drinking their beers since 1991. This one though is just average, I really wish it wasn't but it is.

Everything from the aroma to the taste is just kinda there but not memorable. They've got 2 years to come up with something great for the big 100 years.

To the ghost of Spoetzl, don't let the $ influence the beer.

HotterThanHell, Jul 03, 2007
Photo of Onslow
2.88/5  rDev -17.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Bought at Clear LAke Specs for $6.50, not bad price at all!...

...Pours a bit darker than standard shiner...

..smell is quite nice, more rustic than ole bock...

..some lacing and good head at pour..

..taste is where this lacks, very shy, BUT not offensive...

...the least likeable of the anniversary series....

Onslow, May 26, 2007
Photo of Shafaegalo
3/5  rDev -14.3%

Shafaegalo, Jan 12, 2014
Photo of ROGUE16
3/5  rDev -14.3%

ROGUE16, Nov 17, 2011
Photo of JDV
3/5  rDev -14.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Medium amber colored pour with a bit of white head and a touch of lacing. Smell of sweet malt and a subtle hop presence. Small bit of bitterness up front followed by a malt sweetness. Body is fairly light and watery, and not too flavorful. Ok, but nothing spectacular.

JDV, Jan 31, 2008
Photo of duff247
3/5  rDev -14.3%

duff247, Dec 18, 2011
Photo of ChaosKittyXJ9
3/5  rDev -14.3%

ChaosKittyXJ9, Jan 13, 2013
Photo of barefootbrewer
3.05/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This beer poured a clear golden color with a thick head – small bubbles and light lacing. The aroma is not strong, but is malty with a touch of hops. The taste is bitter and grainy. The mouthfeel is medium. This is a decent beer – I wouldn’t turn down another.

barefootbrewer, Jul 04, 2007
Photo of MrHungryMonkey
3.08/5  rDev -12%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Floral hop, toasty bread malt, tart. Lightly roasted chocolate.

Medium gold. Clear. Very mild head. Toasty bitter attack. Malty light sweet mid. Medium-low bitter finish. Low to medium-low hop flavor. Medium-low malt flavor. Kind of grainy. Medium to medium-high bitterness.

Impressive carbonation. Light bodied.

Always a pleasure to try the new Shiner release. As I can remember though, 97 was better. This is okay. Better the colder.

MrHungryMonkey, Jun 30, 2007
Photo of SkeeterHawk
3.1/5  rDev -11.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: Pours a clear light brown with a small off white head that dissipated within a very few seconds. After the head was gone, there was a really small ring at the top of the beer where it meets the glass. There are a few bubbles rising, but they don't do much to maintain the head.

Aroma: There is some toasty notes from the Munich or Vienna malts as well as a subtle caramel presence. There is a noticeable metallic presence here along with what I perceive as a subtle hop character. As the beer warms the metallic character comes out even more. As it warms even further, there is a little more hops coming out.

Taste: The flavor is really dry with the metallic presence coming out in the flavor as well. I do get some toasty notes in the flavor to compliment the metal. In the finish there is a mild hop presence coming out as some bitterness, but there is very little body or anything to challenge the hops and attenuation. As the beer warms, there is a mild, but unusual, citrus presence coming out.

Opinion: Well, I certainly think that this could be a better beer. The metallic contribution really sets me off. I would much rather have a Negra Modelo than this beer. It would probably do in a pinch, and I would probably take it over the original Shiner...but when up against just about any other beer...I'd take the other one.

SkeeterHawk, Aug 16, 2007
Photo of rowew
3.13/5  rDev -10.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Presentation: 12 oz longneck, twist. Nice retro looking label. No date information, but I guess since this is an anniversary beer you would at least know the year.

Appearance: Clear amber color, white head fades quickly.

Smell: Clean malt, just a hint of noble hops, but very muted.

Taste: Again, clean malt - a bit of bready flavor. Some hops, but they are faint.

Overall impression: Highly drinkable, and it seems well made, but this isn't a very exciting beer.

rowew, Jul 25, 2007
Photo of bboven
3.13/5  rDev -10.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Orangy-copper color; very clear, head that clings to the edges the whole way through.

Very malty, but maybe a little stale.

Sour, malty taste. The sourness is a little over-powering for the style; definitely a detriment to this beer.

Very good for the style. I wish more lagers filled the mouth like this one.

Pretty drinkable on all accounts except the sour flavor. If you enjoy that, though, go for it.

bboven, Sep 10, 2007
Photo of lawman834
3.15/5  rDev -10%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Amber/orange and clear with a thin white head. Fairly carbonated. Pretty.

S: Kinda weak. Sweet and Malty. No Hops.

M: A little thin and light. Nicely carbonated.

T: Malty up front with a decent hoppiness on the finish. There is a little bit of a nasty adjunct aftertaste.

D: Fairly easy to drink except for the adjunct aftertaste.

I have had about 5 Shiner products at this is probably the best, but for me that's not saying alot. I was even born and bred in Texas, but I just don't like Shiner products that much. Out here they love Shiner. I think that they run it through the pipes in some cities instead of water! Anyway, I would choose ths one over thier "Bock" any day.

lawman834, Aug 13, 2007
Photo of russpowell
3.18/5  rDev -9.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Pours an effervescent bronze/amber with 4+ fingers of fluffy eggshell colored head. Below average lacing & head retention

S: Cereal notes

T: Cereal & metallic hop notes with dryness up front. Honey malt, a whisper of caramel, & herbal hops as this warms. Finishes dry with cereal, graint, lemony & metallic notes

MF: Light/Medium bodied with vigorous carbonation

Drinks good, but would've never guessed Vienna Lager, more malt please!! Would do in pinch

russpowell, Aug 31, 2007
Photo of JudgeRoughneck
3.23/5  rDev -7.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 4

Thin, fizzy head, with racing carbonation. Dull amber color. Nose is remeniscent of macro lager with kinda funky hops. Taste is pretty good with a crisp, light, fresh, flavor, but it doesn't quite pop like I'd like. Cracked grain or Vienna malt flavors I look for in the style are suppressed by something. It seems like a hefty body might be to blame. They are eventually taken over by creeping hop bitter. This is a very drinkable beer but I must say my expectations were higher, having loved both Shiner 96 and 97, and being a big fan of Vienna Lager. Mouthfeel is way stingy. I just look for a slightly brighter taste out of these beers.

JudgeRoughneck, Aug 01, 2007
Photo of Beerbuddha
3.23/5  rDev -7.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

The beer poured a copper color with a thin white head and had little lacing. Aroma was of malt sweetness and yeast. The taste was nice. It was a good amber. Similar to others I've had but with more taste to it. The mouthfeel as medium body with medium to high carbonation. Overall not a bad brew.

Beerbuddha, Jan 28, 2008
Photo of hopdog
3.23/5  rDev -7.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12oz bottle acquired in trade with lb4lb (thanks!).

Poured a medum and clear amber color with a smaller sized off white head. Aromas of some breadiness, some caramel, and some roast. Some earthiness too. Tastes of caramel, lighter roastiness, and toasted nuts.

hopdog, Jan 27, 2009
Photo of JamLand
3.25/5  rDev -7.1%

JamLand, Jun 27, 2013
Photo of Melchizedek
3.28/5  rDev -6.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Pours a very nice, perfectly clear golden amber with a substantial, dense whitish head.

Aroma biscuity with a bit of leafy hop. In the mouth, light and well-carbonated. Biscuity malts contend with mineral hop bite and bitterness. Pretty straightforward, with a bit of honey-sweet undertone that lasts into the finish. Sweetness lingers enough to become a bit cloying and hurts the drinkability a bit, but definitely not bad all around.

Melchizedek, Aug 05, 2007
Photo of blakesell
3.33/5  rDev -4.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured from the 12oz bottle into a standard pint glass.

Appearance- A clear amber with a 2.5 finger head of foam that quickly dissapates to a thin layer over the top. Lacing doesn't cling to the sides of the glass.

Smell- A bready toasty scent similar to a marzen which technically is mostly a marzen as well, so the scent is up to snuff aside from a big metallic scent at the end that I really don't like. For some reason metal reminds me of bile.

Taste- Lightly malty and again with the graininess, but the metal is once again there in the aftertaste and lingers on. Last year's version of this was not like that. Very bitter with the metallic rusty taste.

Mouthfeel- Once again, thick with that bile/metal problem which is very cloying. Not an enjoyable brew. Thin bodied and highly carbonated.

Drinkability- I suppose this may have chuggability. I won't be pouring it down the drain, but I won't be having another again either. I'd much rather have a Dos Equis Amber instead.

blakesell, Feb 06, 2008
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Shiner 98 Bavarian Style Amber from Spoetzl Brewery
80 out of 100 based on 75 ratings.