1. Extreme Beer Fest. March 20 & 21, 2015 in Boston, Mass. Join us!
  2. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  3. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Cascade Pale Ale - Cascade Brewery Company Ltd.

Not Rated.
Cascade Pale AleCascade Pale Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
65
poor

35 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 35
Reviews: 23
rAvg: 2.49
pDev: 23.29%
Wants: 0
Gots: 1 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Cascade Brewery Company Ltd. visit their website
Australia

Style | ABV
English Pale Ale |  5.20% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: brewdlyhooked13 on 06-17-2002)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Ratings: 35 | Reviews: 23 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by the Alström Bros:

  None found.

More User Reviews:
Photo of rastaman
2.4/5  rDev -3.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Very light, slight buttery/oily note, bit too fizzy or something aswell, which takes marks of its drinkability, very light colour aswell, its not bad, but its not good.

rastaman, Jun 17, 2002
Photo of Anonmatel
2.75/5  rDev +10.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

What stareted out as a promising beer quickly turned into something not so.

Apperance is the usual, light ale, what looks like decent carbonation, nice frothy head.

Smells hoppy, hint of fruits. very nice smell indeed

but then comes the tatse, takes too bitter without much hops present (what i like in a pale ale)

It's still quite Drinkable, but it's one of those beers that has a lot of early expectations, then falls short.

Anonmatel, Dec 06, 2003
Photo of Vanz
1.75/5  rDev -29.7%

Vanz, Jan 27, 2014
Photo of MCDub
2.75/5  rDev +10.4%

MCDub, Oct 17, 2012
Photo of Franchise
2.58/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

This offering from Cascade poured a pale yellow with a soft bubbly head. The nose is weak, not much going on, soft hop smells are followed by a sour veggie presence. The taste is pungent, harsh bitterness that dominats with a processed sugar sweetness that finishes again harsh from the high carbonation.

Franchise, Mar 27, 2006
Photo of CrazyDavros
1.88/5  rDev -24.5%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Pours amber with a small quickly fading head.
Nose shows grainy malt with a hint of spicy hops. Very light on.
Flavours show some grainy malt with slight sweetness before a very dry metallic bitter finish (POR?).
Body feels very watery, carbonation is pretty high.

CrazyDavros, May 04, 2011
Photo of Kulrak
2.9/5  rDev +16.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Poured a light golden color with no head. No smell to speak of. The taste is pretty good, slightly sweet with just enough bitterness to balance it out and finish clean. I didn't notice anything particularly good about this beer, but nothing was bad about it, either. All in all, it's an easy drinking beer, but nothing to write home about.

Kulrak, May 22, 2004
Photo of norwichboy
1.35/5  rDev -45.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 1

Ironically the label says it is "pale in name only", which could more fittingly read "ale in name only" - quite clearly this is a lager! Aware that this beer has been around for some time, I initially thought this is one of those aberrations of Australian beer nomenclature that has stuck (like Victoria Bitter), but the reason was clarified by when I visited the brewery. The person I spoke with there said that yes it was a lager - it did start off as an ale, but the alcohol content was rather high - so to reduce the ABV they "changed the recipe", whilst keeping the name. Turning it into a lager seems a bit more than fine tuning to me, but there you go.

So now we've established it's a lager, is it any good? Well sadly I have to say that I find this a dreadful insipid beer, whatever type it is. On the positive side, like most Cascade beers it does produce a good head and lacing, and there's a good balanced level of carbonation. However, it has so little aroma and taste I just cannot get anything from it. I hesitated to give such low marks, but I've tried to give this beer a go a few times and I honestly cannot think of many beers I have been so thoroughly disappointed with.

norwichboy, Oct 16, 2006
Photo of pin
2.5/5  rDev +0.4%

pin, May 22, 2013
Photo of joecast
3.25/5  rDev +30.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

had this beer before and remembered it being fairly bitter and that i didnt really like it. something (aside from the bottle it comes in) must have changed.

clear light amber in color. very fine head doesnt stick around long. lacking aroma however.

this is a clean tasting beer. that is, there isnt much malt or hop flavor to it and has a smooth finish. of course this is better than having a sour taste i almost expected. if this is the intended product, i think its a lot better than what i remember.

joecast, Oct 15, 2003
Photo of aeolianshredhead
1.48/5  rDev -40.6%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

There is no way this is a Pale Ale. I could smell it from the bottle- that typical, bland Australian macro-lager smell.

A- Just as I feared. No different from any other offering by ANY macro Aussie outlet. Little to no head.

S- Very faint hoppiness. Maybe some stale yeast.

T- Oh, god.. What we have here is an offensive, out of place sweetness which blends terribly with a bland, faint grain. There's nothing else to note at all.

M- Far too watery and insipid. This has no real bite of carbonation either.

O- This beer sucks. I am very disappointed to be honest. Nothing else to say, really.

aeolianshredhead, Aug 18, 2011
Photo of Macca
2.3/5  rDev -7.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

So as almost everybody below has noted this ain't no pale ale. It's a lager. Does nobody at Cascade/CUB/Fosters care about truth in labeling? Head meet wall I suppose.

Anyway...

It pours a crystal clear light golden colour with a generous white head.

Reasonably clean smelling with only a hint of that macro lager graininess. Maybe a touch of corn.

And there is the graininess: all over the palate.

Mouthfeel? As expected. Meh.

What an average beer. And you know what makes it worse? Fosters markets it as part of its "craft" portfolio along with Matilda Bay.

Macca, Oct 11, 2010
Photo of WHROO
2.55/5  rDev +2.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A: Golden, 1 finger head, good carbonation, with gr8 lacing...something about Aussie mainstreams: always great lacing.

S: very bland, maybe a touch citrus, little skunky.

T: Typical lagerish aussie macro up front but then a malty finish, clean & dry...with subtle bitterness. All up tho very bland.

M: Medium, with soft carbs across the palate...leaves a coating on the tongue.

D: Typical slam it down hard beer...one of those beers that is not too awful, but definately not very good...just too boring & bland...not too malty, not too bittery, no noble hops...gee, wish it gave me something!!!

Too Boring!!! Maybe a paired with food might be an improvement but doubt it....shame too, cos Cascade ain't too bad.

WHROO, Nov 08, 2008
Photo of Shy5
3/5  rDev +20.5%

Shy5, Jan 24, 2014
Photo of Joel12
2.75/5  rDev +10.4%

Joel12, Aug 24, 2013
Photo of soju6
2.59/5  rDev +4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A: pours a clear straw color with a small head that fades to bits of lacing.

S: Aroma has that musty Euro Lager tinge, with some malt sweetness.

T: Taste of malt sweetness and bit of fruit. Tangy bitterness and and a lingering aftertaste that is a bit metallic.

F: Light body, fairly smooth.

O: Just another Pale Lager in an ocean of lager beer

soju6, May 30, 2013
Photo of magpieken
2.5/5  rDev +0.4%

magpieken, Apr 08, 2013
Photo of mungus
2.5/5  rDev +0.4%

mungus, Jan 23, 2013
Photo of hefevice
3.23/5  rDev +29.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pale is the operative word, light gold with very little head. Nothing much in the way of aroma, a little hop spice with a light malt background. Taste is all in the finish, a pleasant charactistic English biscuit balances a lingering smooth bitterness, by far the strongest point of the beer. Quite drinkable.

hefevice, Oct 02, 2006
Photo of koolk
2.9/5  rDev +16.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A good clean amber colour with a hard head and good carbonation.

Flavours and aromas are straight down the line...malt, hops, malt, hops. Nothing that is really exciting, just a good easy drinker.

A touch of bitterness in the end but only a touch. Good long finish. Nice.

koolk, Nov 07, 2003
Photo of vancurly
3.35/5  rDev +34.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Yellow gold. Thick head, some sparkle in the body. Fades to a ring, but leaves a fair lace.
Nice malty nose mixed with grassy hop and a grainy note. However, towards the end of the bottle, the nose tends to lend itself to fruit, almost sauv blanc-ish...
The taste screams of Pride of Ringwood.... the workhouse of Aussie beers far & wide. Maybe I'm wrong... but I'm certainly having flashbacks of sneaking into pubs before I was of age (I am not condoning such behaviour, kids).
Again, a grainy, almost corn-like hint on the palate....
Nice mouthfeel, medium bodied. It has a refreshing bitterness, which, for mine, makes this an excellent "cleanser".
Mind you, I didn't know that the "English Pale Ale" category included Aussie Lager-clones. Perhaps the late-bottle, fruity nose may lean it towards an ale, but if I was blindfolded, I would swear this was a lager.

vancurly, Jul 25, 2006
Photo of laituegonflable
2.03/5  rDev -18.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Pours a champagne colour with furious, aggressive bubbling feeding a nice white head of pebbly bubbles. Sinking slowly from the top and leaving some impressive specks of steamy lace behind. It looks great, but overcarbonated. A German lager should fizz like that, not a pale ale.

Nose is quite sour, with a bourbon kind of character and a fair hit of vinegar as well. Big whiff of yeast in there contributes to the sourness as well, and malt seems a bit unbalanced, verging on diacetyl sweetness. Not a strong nose, smells raw and off-balance.

Taste is not bad at first, with a slightly tart vinous character. Gets a little sweet and buttery with a mild fruit hit like green apple, and then the guillotine drops when I realise it's primarily a pride of ringworm affair; that dreadful cloying doughy character which just leaves the sensation of unpleasant grit in your mouth. Luckily it's not sharp enough to be undrinkable, but the flavour it reaches and the one it leaves are certainly undesirable.

Mouthfeel is pretty thin, although annoyingly sticky, it feels like it leaves a film inside your mouth upon exiting, just maybe a bit viscous, not very nice anyway. Yeah, I'll happily leave this one on the shelf next time.

laituegonflable, Aug 24, 2009
Photo of BeerNutta
1/5  rDev -59.8%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Simply terrible.

Poured a pale straw colour. From the get go, this beer skunked bad.

Took a gulp. Tasted worse. Slight hop bitterness followed by this dirty malt aftertaste that made we want to bring it all back up.

The worst beer I have ever had. Simply avoid at all costs.

BeerNutta, Jul 10, 2005
Photo of BeerManDan
2.17/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

While visiting Hobart, tried this beer and didn't like it out of the bottle. To bitter and not much of a taste. Then tried it on-tap and thought the same thing. NOTHING interesting here!

BeerManDan, Oct 03, 2002
Photo of MylesMac
3/5  rDev +20.5%

MylesMac, Dec 03, 2013
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Cascade Pale Ale from Cascade Brewery Company Ltd.
65 out of 100 based on 35 ratings.