Crown Lager - Crown Beverages
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 64 | Reviews: 37 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by zerk:
2.58/5 rDev +20%
Brought to the US by a friend of mine from Australia...
Color is a light clear gold with almost no head. Aroma has some bready malt and light grass notes. Flavor s quite malty with some bread and tooasted malt notes... very little bitterness, but not overly sweet. Has an odd aftertaste... almost like wet socks. Mouthfeel is fairly watery with fizzy carbonation. All in all, not a very impressive beer, but not terrible either.
03-02-2004 20:29:57 | More by zerk
More User Reviews:
1.05/5 rDev -51.2%
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.
09-27-2010 18:39:42 | More by BeerAdvocate
1.65/5 rDev -23.3%
Don't get me wrong, I hate Crown Lager as much as any Aussie with a modicum of taste. Everyone knows that just because it's got a gold label and a cool-looking, unusual bottle, it's not necessarily a good beer. But I'm reviewing this even-handedly and without bias.
I wrote the above while admiring the apt head retention, ubiquitous lacing and perfectly effervescent body of the beer. Slightly too dark amber, but good appearance otherwise.
Smell: Not as bad as the non-premium offerings from Carlton, but there is nothing natural in there to speak of. Apart from a very faint maltiness (so distant it's hardly worth mentioning), there is a smell of preservative/adjunct. I don't recognise the chemical (I'm a chemistry student and have come to recognise the smell of chemicals I encounter regularly). Wait, what is this? This is meant to be a beer to enjoy, not sniffing the glass to determine whether it contains poison. The smell is better than Carlton or VB, but not what a beer should smell like.
Taste is where this beer is really let down. It looks good, it smells... inoffensive, but the taste is rough as guts. A little bit sour, a little bit adjuncty... it would taste better if it had no taste, and was just amber bubbly water with a head. It's been so long since I've bothered to drink one of these that I forgot how shite it was. Basically no different from your ordinary Australian macro, only I'm rating it more harshly because this is supposed to be premium. This doesn't stand up against Boag Premium or Squire Pilsener, other popular macros of a similar price and style. I can't think of any other Aussie macros like this, apart from the cheap Carlton and Tooheys offerings. Still, if you slam it down, drink it cold and out of the bottle at the footy, you won't notice the unpleasant ashy aftertaste. Someone spilt beer in this ashtray! No wait, it's how it normally tastes.
Mouthfeel is pretty crap too. Rough going down, though undoubtedly smoother than its non-premium cousins, the worst aspect is the sticky afterfeel... it doesn't taste like anything except nasty beer aftertaste, but it's sticky on the roof of my mouth.
Drinkability: If it's free, ice-cold, a hot sunny afternoon, and you're doing an activity to take your mind off the taste, and you've been working hard all day, this is fine to drink. Most Australians would be happier to drink this regularly than VB, merely because of its price and 'premium' allure. But it's not great. However, it does contain alcohol.
Attention All Crown Lager Drinkers - set your sights higher. It gets a LOT better than this! Non-Crownie Drinkers - Don't bother trying this, it is a complete and utter waste of time and an insult to our country that people pay $60 a case for this crap.
06-18-2005 15:10:16 | More by Weizenmensch
New Zealand (Aotearoa)
2.42/5 rDev +12.6%
This is a bit of an odd review for me, as I genuinely used to like this beer some years ago, but on a recent revisit I found that either the beer has changed, or I have.
I suspect the latter.
The beer initially pours nicely, with a clean white head which sadly fails to linger.
Flavour and smell are flat and uninteresting with a "sharp" aftertaste I had never really noticed in the past. While I find that I still like Carlton Draught (see review elsewhere), I really wonder if they are in fact the same beer, from the same vat, with only the difference being the packaging.
I haven't had a chance to do a side by side comparison yet, or a blind test - but plan to try this as an experiment in the not too distant future.
This beer really makes me think that a new category is required here at BA - "Value for Money". It would score a 1
09-01-2006 07:23:58 | More by btmo
2.55/5 rDev +18.6%
While Rastaman is right by saying this is not a premium beer, i wouldn't go so far as to say that it's absolute shite. It's not too bad, but these days i can't handle more than 2-3 at a time. While it's a common methid for some people including myself, to not drink a good beer then going to drink a bad beer, it's especially not good to drink a good beer then drink a Crown Lager.
05-01-2002 03:56:41 | More by Anonmatel
1.35/5 rDev -37.2%
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.
06-11-2009 08:51:16 | More by CrazyDavros
1.95/5 rDev -9.3%
Pours a straw color with a lot of head at first, then dies down to pretty much nothing. Doesn't smell like much at all, very very faint yeast scent. The taste is a not so faint yeast taste, some hop bitterness, no other distinguishable flavors, finishes dry and sour at the same time. Mouthfeel is somewhat airy, somewhat creamy, but not enough of either to really stand out. I don't really care much for this beer, seems like a pretty standard aussie macro beer, dunno why it costs any more than the others.
05-29-2005 05:33:24 | More by Kulrak
2.53/5 rDev +17.7%
While this remains an Australian favourite, there are clearly far better options available for flat session beers. The price tag is unjustified and its a mockery of quality Australian brews.
As reviews below stipulate, rumour has it that this and Carlton Draught are brewed in the same vat. They taste strikingly similar, and given the option I would always opt for Carlton Draught because of the slashed price.
Like Cartlton Draught, its watery and has a strange metalic aftertaste, leaving nothing to be desired but despite the less than pleasing taste and overly high carbonation, it is still easy to drink.
01-21-2007 09:50:13 | More by rec
1.83/5 rDev -14.9%
well, "fresh cut grass" aroma gone bad. more like wet grass left in a trash bag on a hot day.
flavor and mouthfeel both buttery. i cant believe people think this beer is so great, even for people that like crap this couldnt be that good.
has a transparent look that oddly enough mirrors the taste.
12-23-2003 11:54:22 | More by joecast
1.2/5 rDev -44.2%
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.
08-21-2011 11:52:53 | More by aeolianshredhead
2.63/5 rDev +22.3%
If this beer didn't claim to be "Australia's Finest" it might not be rteviewed so harshly. Unfortunately, it claims to be "brewed with the malt and hops, true to the traditional premium brewing heritage." Well, true, it might be brewed with the finest malt and hops, but I think 2 or 3 pounds of malt might be all they use in each big fermenter. Crown Lager pours a bright straw color with a fairly thick head, but it unfortunately settles out in quick fashion leaving a thin, white skim on the beer. The taste isn't worthy of more than one sentance. Immediate metallic bitterness followed by a mild malty sweetness, followed again by the metallic bitterness. Are those some sort of zinc-based hops that Carlton is brewing? Mouthfeel is relatively smooth, with decent carbonation, but that's aboput all I can say for it.
09-20-2005 07:34:48 | More by DaveFL1976
1.83/5 rDev -14.9%
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.
01-05-2009 12:02:00 | More by Macca
2.45/5 rDev +14%
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.
10-03-2008 06:23:34 | More by WHROO
1/5 rDev -53.5%
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!
10-19-2012 17:20:25 | More by Aussie69
1.75/5 rDev -18.6%
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.
12-23-2011 02:04:09 | More by mulder1010
Crown Lager from Crown Beverages
57 out of 100 based on 64 ratings.