Crown Lager - Crown Beverages

Not Rated.
Crown LagerCrown Lager

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
57
awful

75 Ratings
THE BROS
31
awful

(view ratings)
Ratings: 75
Reviews: 41
rAvg: 2.2
pDev: 32.73%
Wants: 3
Gots: 4 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Crown Beverages visit their website
Australia

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  4.90% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 04-04-2002

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (3) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
to view more.
Ratings: 75 | Reviews: 41
Photo of pagriley
2.98/5  rDev +35.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Clear straw with white head
Faint hop and malt on the nose. Some fruitiness
Light and crisp, not much going on, but a slightly off taste on the finish as it warms
Light and refreshing mouth feel. Fairly heavy carbonation

Overall a sub-par Adjunct Lager. You could do a lot worse, but given Crown's "premium" status I expect more. The flavor profile is innocuous enough until it warms above fridge temp, and then there a definite off flavors

Photo of SmashPants
2.5/5  rDev +13.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Format: that nice old crownie 375mL brown bottle with a classy macro label. Always thought it looks pretty decent.

Appearance: poured into a tulip glass - mid-yellow in colour with limited visible carbonation. A very thin white head breaks up to a thin film and ring almost immediately.

Aroma: a sweet aroma of yeasts, grain and some sugar. A bit awkward at best.

Taste: and even more awkward here. Very skunky with a vegetal fug and some cheap adjuncts. I remember Crownies being better.

Aftertaste: some metallic flavours with a touch of grain. Still not brilliant, but at least the vegetal fug backs off.

Mouth feel: quite light in feel - almost watery - with a moderate carbonation.

Overall: an okay Australian macro lager, but really not up to scratch compared to others - even the standard macros. It is only AU$41 a case, but there are better around.

Photo of Andrewziggy
2.13/5  rDev -3.2%
look: 2.25 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.25

Can't see why so many people drink it

Photo of mpatto
1/5  rDev -54.5%

This has to be the worst beer in Australia by far! Was given a case of this for Christmas, couldn't give it away so down the drain it went. Rubbish

Photo of BucBasil
2.01/5  rDev -8.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.75 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.25

Poured from the 375mL bottle into a pint glass.

The beer is a nice pure golden color with lots of carbonation coming through. Head dissipated almost immediately and was foamy and offwhite. Typical.

S: The smell coming off of this one is noticeable right upon opening and that's not entirely a good thing. Typical grainy smell but also some sort of sour and vegetal note. Not skunky, but not very natural or pleasant either.

T: Watery and very light on flavor but what is there isn't even your normal beery flavor. There's a sour note in the middle with a light bitterness covered up by an unnatural sweetness. Not undrinkable, just not that good.

This reminds me of a second rate Euro Pale Lager and seems like that's what they are going for as those are hugely popular. Even so, I've had better even for the style. Not even very refreshing due to the weird flavors in the beer.

Just go for a Bud or Fosters.

Photo of wordemupg
2.09/5  rDev -5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 2

375ml bottle poured into pint glass 15/3/14

A clear straw yellow with plenty of bubbles but just a short lived finger of foam that leaves a partial ring and a few random patches

S sweet grains and some wet cardboard, very little going on, a little hay maybe

T tastes much worse, chemicals and pennies, not quite skunky but a little musky, some cooked veggies, and soggy cereal

M thin and watery, soft carbonation, about what I expect from a macro but the aftertaste is awful and lingers

O not horrible until you taste it, doesn't really improve after that

this ones a wolf in sheep's clothing, looks good before you open and drink it, well and truly overpriced avoid this one boys and girls

Photo of Aussie69
1/5  rDev -54.5%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

A - Just like VB

S - Just like VB

T - Just like VB with more carbonation

M - As Above

O - This actuallly IS VB with a slightly modified brewing process and a outrageous mark up. Yup my best friend works for CUB.

AVIOD LIKE THE PLAGE AND NEVER BUY THIS SHITE SO THEY MIGHT STOP SELLING IT AND RIPPING UNSUSPECTING PEOPLE OFF!

Photo of Everydayoff
1.79/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

375ml bottle poured into a pils glass by freshness date.

Gold/yellow color with lively spectacular carbonation showcase which twirls in circle during upwards way to the top. The white head is rather small but well retain and leave good amount of lacing stick.

Soft grain and sharp metallic hit the nose with some yeast pinch, dry malt note reveals when warm. Grain upfront in taste with harsh metallic follow in the middle, finish with somewhat sour that leave quite unpleasant aftertaste. Hop bitterness is very faint. The body is between light to medium, smooth with low carbonating in palate.

Quality is so contradictory with its appearance that looks promising. Awful taste and very low drinkability, finally the crown is just a clown.

Photo of mulder1010
1.78/5  rDev -19.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

355 ML at Qantas club at Sydney Airport. It was free and my GF surprised me with this.

A-- Clear light straw gold color. White film for head, lots of carbonation bubbles. Some lacing left through drinking.

S-- Sweet stewed cabbage and corn. Borderline repulsive.

T-- Sweet corn, sweet bread, a little bit of cardboard.

M-- Light body, high carbonation. Bloating feeling very quickly. Metallic corn finish. Clean and boring.

O-- A few sips was enough and thought a cappuccino was a better option. It was free and a tick. Could not finish the Michelob of Australia.

Photo of aeolianshredhead
1.23/5  rDev -44.1%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

Well, here is another foray into the abyss that is the Australian macro-lager industry. Come to think of it, I could probably accurately review this without ever trying it.

A- Plain, plain, plain. There is no character at all to this beer. It looks like every other Aussie macro. It's that generic piss colour with a superficially well-retaining head. Big. Fucking. Deal.

S- Awkward moment when you think you have a cold, then realise you're smelling an Australian macro. Seriously, there is very little at all here- I could be an idiot and try to discern individual scents, but doing so would make me even more stupid than I already am for drinking this shit.

T- POR. Self explanatory.

M- Strikingly similar to mineral water. Pathetic.

O- I had to drink this garbage at my mate's birthday party. It should be a criminal offence to sell this to ANYONE. Even the downability on this sucks ass. It's just too repulsive to drink quickly.

Photo of tai4ji2x
2.12/5  rDev -3.6%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1

from notes, tasted mid to late june 2009, kro's nest, beijing, china

best by date of oct09. importer label says bottled in 2009, jun 5

poured into mug

clear golden straw color. 2-finger head, slowly fades to relatively stable, thin wispy layer. splotchy lace at first, but then improves later.

aroma: some euro hops upfront w/ touch of bready malt. hints of weird esters or fusels, plus a metallic whiff.

taste: mildly toasted, bready malts and euro hops giving a crisp, moderate bitterness, but w/ weird, astringent chemical note. from fusel or phenols? makes the bitterness unpleasant.

light, not TOO thin, but still a touch watery. some smoothness, especially with the carbonation. weird chemical notes continue the uncomfortable astringency.

hard to finish. appearance is the only thing good about this beer, as the bros noted.

Photo of BeerAdvocate
1.06/5  rDev -51.8%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Review from BeerAdvocate Magazine May 2007.

Crown Lager touts itself as being the best of Australian beer since 1919. Personally, we highly doubt that, but let's give the beer the benefit of the doubt and try it.

Pale golden, lively carbonation and an ultra-tight and creamy head with a stick to the glass that puts many Double IPAs to shame--very appealing. Musty aroma, with some cereal grain and soft metallic notes. Thin-bodied and watery in the mouth. The carbonation showcased in the glass is barely noticeable on the palate--meaning the expected crispness is not present. No real hop bitterness to speak of, but there's something resembling a watery sourness that tastes a bit forced and contrived. Quite sweet--actually, it's too sweet. It's more of a corn-based sweetness that tastes processed. Mouthful of straw in the finish, drying and unpleasant.

Brewed by the Foster's Group, Crown Lager is merely a fizzy, yellow, bland beer with nothing going on other than looking pretty in a Pils glass. It doesn't even come close to standing up to other beers within its genre. One of the worst beers we've ever had from Oz.

Photo of philphilphil
1.4/5  rDev -36.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

awfful, just awful, totally over rated.

A - not good, not quite terrible though.
S - metallic nasty unpromising, but no indicator of its true revoltingness.
T - yuck, just yuck. Metalicly fruity, truely feral.
M - over carbonated.
D - i couldnt drink this if i was wasted. had to hold my nose to finsh one bottle.

Photo of benclimbs
2.1/5  rDev -4.5%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

£2.29/4 pack at Sainsburys - cheap cheap lager.

pours clear yellow with no head, no lacing and just a bit of fizzy carbonation - a really unappealing looking brew.

Smell is just a bit so light, almost non-present, but a bit of soapy, light perfumy and skunky notes.

very watery taste, but just a hint of bready goodness in there that saves it from being absolutely disgusting - but still pretty gross.

mouthfeel is like water that is slightly carbonate.

drinkability - eh, not so good as its not a good beer, but i guess you could put away a lot of these if you dont know beer at all - worst beer i've had in a long time, i'll wait until i'm drunk sometime to finish the 4 pack - or i can cook with it!
GREAT COOKING BEER!

Photo of DIM
2.08/5  rDev -5.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

a: This was a very, very pale golden color. It poured with a fizzy white head.

s: A little corny sweetness, not much else to say.

t: Same as the smell, just a little corny sweetness. It actually got kind of obnoxious by the end of the bottle.

m: Fizzy and wet.

d: At least it was free.

Photo of ADZA
1.73/5  rDev -21.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

This beer pours a pale golden colour with decent carbonation and average lacing,it has weak grainy,hop aromas with an average mouthfeel,the taste an overpowering malty,fruit driven taste that doesnt taste as nice as it sounds and has a offputting aftertaste,overall because ive seen the micro light years ago i sit back and laugh at this lager considered to be australias best macro,i just hope the crown ambassador ive put away doesnt resemble this at all.

Photo of laituegonflable
1.19/5  rDev -45.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

Pours gold, with marshmallowy gelatinous head, very dense, with mega streaming carbonation that seems to be unending. I've spent a long time with this just sitting here and it's still fizzing away like a motherfucker. Looks over-fizzy. Well it looks like it should, but I just don't trust it. The head's still there, the carbonation is unending. There's something artificial about a beer that looks so much like a quintessential image of a beer. It should be natural, and have flaws.

Very unpleasant chemical aroma, smells like maybe some grassy hops, or more correctly, grass when you've just sprayed your backyard with pesticide. Very weak, what's more, and very simple. Really, genuinely bad smell.

Taste is weak and bland, with a syrupy corn sweetness that creeps up on the start and reaches you by the mid, and then a grisly pride of ringworm dankness, creating that signature CUB bread yeast character. Very unpleasant bitter hang, nothing fresh or organic about it at all.

And that mouthfeel? HOLY SHIT. How can you have so much carbonation in the glass and such a pitiful, weak feel? Where are the bubbles when I could use them, to add some texture? What a crown turd of a beer. Yes, it wins the crown. The crown for being an utter shit beer. This is so bad it's destroying my ability to write witty comments.

Photo of CrazyDavros
1.37/5  rDev -37.7%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

Standard pale lager appearance, although the head shows some persistence...
Aroma is pretty horrible. Dirty, grainy aussie malt, no hop aroma (guessing isohops is used).
Flavours are equally boring, if slightly more palateble. Sweet grainy malt and some weak plain bitterness.
Pretty high carbonation.
First beer that's made me feel sick after half a glass.

Photo of Buebie
3.13/5  rDev +42.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

My buddy picked this up in Australia for me. As well as a fe others I plan to review today.

Poured a michelob style brown bottle with twsit off, into a grain belt premium, lager intended tulip.
Off the pour a white semi foamy head takes shape, 1'' on the head. The color is asemi darker then normal, transparent gold. Plenty of champagne resemblent carbonation rise.
The head slowly receeds leaving a thin cap of retention and plenty of thick lace rings all the way down the glass.

Aroma's of corn, grains and a bready yeast aroma that is actually pretty strong.

The taste up front is somwhat sweet with a carbonation presence providing plenty of creamy thicker mouthfeel without all that carbonation sting to the toung. Corn is prevelant as is some cereal grain taste. Becoming a bit more sweet into the swallow. Thats when things take a turn for the worse though. A metallic tin flavor dominates into the finish and leaves an ill aftertaste.
Some mild grassy hops hang out with the tin, but man, thats a gnarley aftertaste that really ruins the beer.

Minus that metallic flavor, this would be an A-class brew.

Photo of Macca
1.83/5  rDev -16.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

This poured a pale golden yellow with a good head including some lacing.

How boring and predictable this stuff is! Just the same as everything else they produce.

Graininess and that bloody metallic taste. Where is the fresh florals that so many other brewers can get in their lagers?

I would rather drink VB.

Photo of Lancair
2.48/5  rDev +12.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

This beer looks good out of the bottle. A clear warm, golden orange. Not much head. When it hits your mouth, your impression changes. It has a sort of "before-taste", a bitter twang that attacks your mouth when you first down it that mellows as it goes down. Obviously, this hurts the drinkability of it.

I didn't like this one, and wouldn't drink it again.

Photo of LittleCreature
2.83/5  rDev +28.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Appearance - 3.0
Poured a finger of loose white head that quickly reduced to a thin layer over a pale, golden yellow body.

Smell - 2.5
A slightly sweet aroma of grain, husk and grassy hops

Taste - 2.5
Pretty typical Australian lager flavour, a little pale malt, grain and metallic hops. A moderate level of bitterness in the dry finish.

Mouthfeel - 3.5
Carbonation is fine and quite lively.

Drinkability - 3.5
Quite easy to drink and sessionable if you like the taste. Off flavours are there, but not enough to the extent that I would turn one down.

OVERALL - 2.8
I believe this beer is better than the majority of its reviews indicate. However, it is certainly not as good as its premium price and packaging would suggest. Average beer, poor value, undeserved reputation.

Photo of WHROO
2.44/5  rDev +10.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Poors very clean with 1 finger head / golden colour..
But seriously...its the same ole same ole with your mainstream Aussie Lagers...
Just because this is a 'premium' lager doesn't mean it tastes any better...
I still get the metallic lingering (iron/tin) on the tongue (& this is from a bottle)...a hint of florally malts. touch fruity, but quickly killed off by that metal stale off putting taste that is so evident with other mainstreams like VB/Melb etc.
Just not a nice beer & waaayy too carbonated for mouthfeel.
A sulphury aroma as well with a hint of egg.
Over the years I have noticed the only beer drinkers that reckon this is the bees neez are the ones who only drink a VB or Melb, or Carlton. This is maybe not as off tasting to finish but still has all the taste/aroma/mouthfeel that make it such an average drop...drink out of sufference.

Photo of Cs1987
3.2/5  rDev +45.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Appearance - Light gold. 1 finger of head, which reduced.

Smell - A little stronger than average for a macro lager. The scent is pretty much what you normally expect from an Aussie macro lager.

Taste - Fairly good quality grainy tastes, with less metallic and other off-putting tastes than most Aussie macros.

Mouthfeel - Very good carbonation and texture, poor and metallic aftertaste.

Drinkability - Another typical easy drinking lager.

Overall - Yes, it is overpriced and overrated by many, but I still enjoy a Crowny. There are much worse lagers out there.

Photo of vancurly
2.4/5  rDev +9.1%
look: 4 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Drank this on a domestic flight.
Choice between Crown and VB....mmmm... decisions, decisions... at least I get a chance to review a beer I normally avoid.

a) Pours nicely. Golden honey, good carbonation, white 1cm head, which persists. Foamy lace. Surprisingly good start.
s) Aromas of salada biscuit, sulfur, boiled cabbage. Back to form....
f) Typical Aussie macro. Pride of Ringwood metal, sulfur, wet dog in a hessian sack. Finishes very quickly.
m) Foamy & light, but not thin. Refreshing, with a medium bitterness.
d) Quite drinkable, if a hot hot day, with nothing else in the fridge.

It irks me that most Aussie blokes consider this the beer to drink on a special occasion... it's no wonder we BA's have such a hill to climb in this country.

to view more.
Crown Lager from Crown Beverages
57 out of 100 based on 75 ratings.