1. Extreme Beer Fest tickets go on sale Sat, Sep 27 @ Noon EDT.
  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!

Amstel Light - Amstel Brouwerij B. V.

Not Rated.
Amstel LightAmstel Light

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

1,234 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,234
Reviews: 464
rAvg: 2.42
pDev: 27.69%
Wants: 6
Gots: 59 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Amstel Brouwerij B. V. visit their website

Style | ABV
Light Lager |  3.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 02-07-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Amstel Light Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,234 | Reviews: 464 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of ADR
2.03/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Pale and clear yellow color, middling head at best, laces in two incomplete rings. Some sulfur to the aroma, some of cream corn aspects, malt dominates. Mouthfeel is light, along with carbonation and an overall graininess, the malt impression is fairly impaired. Hopping is decent and the finish is crisp, better than the beginning. Some metallics in later sips. Weak upfront and a little strident at the close, I can't say its very good even for the category.

ADR, Nov 19, 2003
Photo of flaminghomer
2.05/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

color is a light golden yellow with a white head. the head on this actually isn't too bad considering the beer is blah. i take that back, the head sucks as well.

aroma is mostly slight skunk, and a slight metallic smell.

taste is not very good but not overly disgusting, such as a cheap american light beer.

i hate myself for buying this beer. this beer ruined my evening, well almost, i guess i should just be grateful to have beer at all.

flaminghomer, Oct 24, 2003
Photo of kunzbrew
2.88/5  rDev +19%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This brew pours a clear straw with no head but a lace is left behind. The hops are low to moderate.

The pale flavor and light hops make this beer a little week. The beer in Europe taste much better there than here. I would like to try this one in Holland.

kunzbrew, Oct 15, 2003
Photo of SixpointJMH
2.3/5  rDev -5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

not a very good beer overall, but one of the top light beers available, probably only bested by sam adams light. pours a light, light amber colour and pretty much lacks any and all characteristics. there's a minimal grainy, malty smell and taste, but it's mostly just a watery brew. carbonation is low so it goes down smooth and is rather easy to drink, but that's not necessarily a good thing. boring. if i have to have a light beer, i guess an amstel will do.

SixpointJMH, Sep 17, 2003
Photo of putnam
2.38/5  rDev -1.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Ah, "the beer drinker's light beer."
Has color.
On the nose it offers steamy, sweaty cereal aromas.
This is not combining well with the Red Seal Ale I just drank. The two together are creating a distinctly fecal impression. An evil transition. I swallow several times to clear the former beer from my palate. This beer smells and tastes exactly like a box of Rye Crisp crakers. Watery, sunny mid-palate impresions of honey and dried grass give way to dense, rye craker, wax paper and cardboard.

Husk water.

putnam, Aug 25, 2003
Photo of granger10
1.73/5  rDev -28.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

People drink for two main reasons: 1) to enjoy a high quality brew or 2) to get drunk. Which leaves me to question who would drink this crap? It would take a whole lot to get drunk off this super light beer. Also there is no real taste. Their ad says "the beer drinker's light beer." Well maybe that's true, if the beer drinker normally drinks Coors. Very expensive. Ripoff!

granger10, Jul 20, 2003
Photo of bierman2000
3.68/5  rDev +52.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Probably the best light beer available in the US.. it is smooth and maltier than any other Lite beers and has a nice malt finish and balance throughout... if you want to drink a light beer without sacrificing taste than this is the one. Very well made for a macro but being an import Henieken seems to push this beer and with good reason..Low ABV makes this highly drinkable as well as the well rounded taste.

bierman2000, Jul 15, 2003
Photo of Reidrover
2.42/5  rDev 0%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Ok home from a hot days work..and grabbed a single of this to go with the 4 pack of 16 oz Becks cans.
Gave this beer the best chance of all , as I drank it when I was really thirsty.
Comes in 12 oz brown euro-style bottle ..nice simple label.
Beer is I suppose ok to look at in the glass..its a pale limid yellow with some carbonation visible..small white head dissapears faster than snow in the Sahara Desert .
Smell is not too bad loads of hop aroma..its ok
Taste though is very weak and subdued..not as bad as some lights I have tasted though..it actually resembles Haake Beck..the Becks non-alcoholic beer.
to watery for me in the mouth.
Average drinkability and this is with me dieing of thirst!!..but if in some horrible twighlight zone world were i was faced with this or a whole array of American lights..I would take this.

Reidrover, Jul 14, 2003
Photo of TheDM
1.2/5  rDev -50.4%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Another weak pea colored brew with a white head of small to large bubbles that leaves very little lacing. It has a low quality aroma that reminds me of getting sick to my stomach. Oh not another one of these brews! It has a very small hoppy flavor smooth and with no fore or after bite. Its low alcohol content is also not a plus for me. Can I have a stout please! GF rating said it smells like cheap beer, looks like cheap beer, so it must be cheap beer! LOL.

TheDM, Jul 11, 2003
Photo of Mustard
2.4/5  rDev -0.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Presentation: 12oz. brown bottle with no "bottled on" or "best drunk by" date.

Appearance: Pale, gold and clear; moderate sized head -- if poured roughly; light lacing.

Aroma: Faintly earthy; hints of spoiled vegetables.

Taste: Ever so lightly grainy and bitter; traces of a flavor I call "macro-skunk".

Mouthfeel: Crisp, clean and watery; lightly carbonated.

Notes: Best thing about this beer is the lack of calories. My rec.: walk an extra ten to fifteen minutes and treat yourself to something with flavor.

Mustard, Jul 08, 2003
Photo of hotstuff
1.4/5  rDev -42.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

This beer poured a large white frothy head with small bubbles that quickly diminished. The lacing was fair with this beer. The body was clear and had a straw yellow hue. It had a light hoppy aroma. The carbonation was lively in this beer. The flavor was bitter tasting from start to finish. The mouthfeel was light to medium, thin and watery.

hotstuff, Jul 01, 2003
Photo of FranklinPCombs
2.05/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

This beer is the perfect example of pedestrian swill. I have been drinking various IPAs and stronger ales lately. I had an Arrogant Bastard the night before drinking this, and i happened to enjoy it very much. the only way to describe this beer is as follows: someone slipped me this beer, and by the time i realized it wasnt really bad seltzer water, i was finished with it. it pours with all the characteristics of ginger ale, with heavy carboatoin, a large-bubbled head, and no lace. the color was yellow, nothing else. No smell, no taste besides the worn inside of an aluminum can. Not much pleasing about this beer, but i suppose if you're on a budget... well, I wouldnt even reccomend it for that situation. at least its still alcoholic.

FranklinPCombs, Jun 29, 2003
Photo of Beastdog75
2.17/5  rDev -10.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

Amstel Light, the "Beer Drinker's Light Beer," so they say. I have found nothing within this beer that could substantiate that corporate claim, as I would place this beer in the same category as any other boring light beer that you would find on the shelf.

Amstel Light pours a light yellow straw color with a decent foamy white head that lasts for around a minute. The smell is typical of light beer: light grains, some corn, and definately husks. Somewhat of a soapy/musty smell that I have found in many light beers. The mouthfeel is not surprisingly thin and watery. The initial taste is of very light malt and light grains, and altogether the flavor reminded me of toasted grass (?!?!). Toss in the soapy taste too. Add water, and plenty of it. There is a hop bitterness present and is somewhat noticeable in the finish. This beer has just about no aftertaste, and no alcoholic warmth either. A no frills import.

Amstel Light might have a little more taste than some domestic lights, but it fails to offer anything that would put it above that class as it is still quite watery. The flavor seemed very grassy to me for some reason. I guess this is a somewhat safe beer to drink for those new to beer, but altogether this is a very forgettable beer.

Beastdog75, Jun 27, 2003
Photo of beerguy101
2.3/5  rDev -5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Light gold Color, large head. Aroma is grainy. Hoppy light tasting, with some malt flavor. Kind of thin mouthfeel, but it is a light beer so it sort of excueable. Not to bad, not to good. Typical pilsner taste. Finish is clean. Aftertaste is slightly bitter.

beerguy101, Jun 15, 2003
Photo of clvand0
2.73/5  rDev +12.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I didn't like this beer upon first taste. It pours yellow with a small white head like most american standard beers. I didn't like this beer after my first pint. It wasn't bad at all, but it just wasn't as enjoyable as some other lite beers I've had. After a few pints, I found that I still didn't even have a buzz - come to find out, this beer has only 3.5% abv. No wonder. I wouldn't recommend this beer to someone who thinks they can get drunk off of it nor to someone who is looking to enjoy their beer.

clvand0, Jun 12, 2003
Photo of au1sec
2.58/5  rDev +6.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Heineken light, err, Amstel light pours a slightly amberish yellow (for a light beer) and the head dissipates quite rapidly. There is no real aroma...at least not that I could detect. Mouthfeel is a bit thin, but the taste is not bad at all. Its pretty crisp, well balanced, and fairly drinkable. I've had this numerous times, and it seems like there is an odd metallic taste to the first few swallows of this one, but it seems to mellow out the further down the bottle (or I just get used to it). I prefer this one over its big brother with the red star, but still not one I would seek out regularly.

au1sec, Jun 01, 2003
Photo of 86MonteSS
2.2/5  rDev -9.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

So the bartender comes up to me and says "would you like a little nastiness in your water?" and I'm like "sure, I'm always up for something new."

Normally I'd apply that kind of criticism to shitty American macro's but hey, at least they don't paint themselves as totally superior light beers. American macro's know their places and they're content. But no, "we're from Amsterdamn. We didn't know light beer was supposed to suck." Well don't worry, fella's... your beer sucks just fine. In fact, you've got American light beer drinkers all over the place saying "damn this sucks!" Congratulations!

By the way, at 3.5%abv, you can't even get the average fat American beer drinker like me drunk. Just what are you trying to pull here, you crazy Dutch bastards?

As far as I'm concerned, the Netherlands can keep Amstel. And Heineken too, Goddammit!

86MonteSS, May 23, 2003
Photo of DESTRO
2.88/5  rDev +19%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Went out drinking with a friend who says this is his favorite beer. Personally I tend to drink heavier beers and love sitting in the beer isle at Lee's for about an hour before making my desicion. But we had just worked out and I was thristy and something light sounded pretty good. Plus i need to keep my girlish figure. I didnt bother pouring it in a glass, well, because i wasn't given one and didnt think this beer really needed it. It smells like a basic macro. Taste is nothing to write home about but i was suprised. It had almost a little sweetness to it. mouthfeel was crisp, light and refreshing and you could easily drink a few of these. It is basically is a typical light macro, but it's at the top of the list as far as those go.

DESTRO, May 22, 2003
Photo of OldFrothingSlosh
2.42/5  rDev 0%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Appearance: Virtually identical to any macro-lite beer produced. Poured a thin, fizzy yellow. Minimal white head. No lacing.

Smell: Barely detectable. Grainy, "husk-like" aroma.

Taste: IMHO, a little better than any of the domestic macros available. This beer had become the semi-traditional post-game beer for my D-league softball team. It's not elegant and not terribly good (despite the claims to the contrary made by Dennis Miller), but can act as a semi-tolerable thirst quencher good for tackling a thirst induced by playing bad softball. Bland, non-descript flavor. Slightly on the bitter side at the end. Somewhat unpleasant metallic flavor lingers on the palate.

Mouthfeel: Fizzy...and the finish is crisp and dry.

Drinkabilty: Perhaps my review is slanted towards the positive side based on the fact that I am usually parched when I drink this beer. It isn't horrible, but they usually disappear quickly. I just don't see the hype. Why pay more for a bad import when you can have bad beer cheaper by buying American crap?

OldFrothingSlosh, May 18, 2003
Photo of brewdlyhooked13
3.03/5  rDev +25.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I lucked out and scored a ticket to a luxury suite for Reds vs. Dodgers last night at Great American Ballpark. Nice suite, and a quick inspection of the mini fridge showed 3 choices: Bud, Bud Light, and Amstel Light. Being a good American, I started off the evening with a Bud, then before my taste buds got too anesthetized I wanted to see what the Amstel Light was like.

To my surprise, I rather liked it. After tasting micro beers and specialty offerings, it's important to ratchet down the expectation for a mass-produced beer. I did and was not disappointed.

I didn't pour it out of the can, but the red and gold was attractive enough. Faint smell, nothing offensive there. The taste is very light, obviously, and kind of magnified by the carbonation. But then this hop character comes through, and I'm thinking 'not bad for a light beer!'. It's actually got a little character and personality! I decided to make a session of it and through half a dozen of these babies, I could still taste the light bitterness, enjoying the beers with metts, chicken tenders, chip and dip, chips and salsa, even a few cookies. It tasted fine with everything.

If I get another chance at a luxury suite, I think I'll go with Amstel Light.

brewdlyhooked13, Apr 24, 2003
Photo of Andreji
2.78/5  rDev +14.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

An openly light beer. You pour this one anywhere and it could pass off as something else. a faint, yellow colour and a very small foam head. Youd expect some smell to be perceivable but you can notice <<something>> after a while. The taste is no better: a poor taste where the most perceivable factor is a faint bitterness. Heck, i had to buy this to get change to pay for parking my car. i sure won't buy it again.

Andreji, Apr 21, 2003
Photo of allboutbierge
2.48/5  rDev +2.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Extremely grainy fragerance--smells much like it looks--straw water. No noticeable hops, malts, or any other flavor. Watery and thin. If you are one of those people who pay 1.25 for a bottle of water out of a pop machine you'll probably like this. If ever offered this, Im passing.

allboutbierge, Apr 17, 2003
Photo of Redrover
2.85/5  rDev +17.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

12 oz brown bottle no freshness date

Beer pours a very pale yellow with a large head. Head fades quickly and leaves some lace.

Smell is very clean, hints of corn and perhaps some hops. Beer needs a little more to smell, this is bland.

Taste is good for a light beer, but thats faint praise. Beer has corn instead of malt sweetness and a hint of hops. It is very carbonated which seems to help the taste. Don't let this one get warm! Some slight skunkyness sneaks in as well.

Mouthfell is somewhat thin which is expected for a light beer. If I was forced to only drink light, this would be an ok choice. Luckily we are free to choose!

Redrover, Apr 04, 2003
Photo of rastaman
1/5  rDev -58.7%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Bland, a bit corny, a bit adjuncty, may have some hop flavour.... i couldn't tell. A touch bitter i suppose. Tastes like sparkling mineral water. Just an even lighter version of Amstel (the normal stuff), which sounds dissapointing, and it is dissapointing, but, to be truthful, i wasn't expecting much in the first place, its hard to right something about it in detail, boring.

rastaman, Apr 01, 2003
Photo of Shiloh
2.63/5  rDev +8.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

This offering poured a medium golden hue with a mid range crown of light fluffy foam. The body was medium/light and the mouthfeel quite pleasant.
Unfortunatley, this brew came with that nasty skunk odour that also penetrated the taste, and leaving a slight bitter after taste.
Not a bad brew, Amstel just needs to address that aroma/taste issue, but not a good brew either.

Shiloh, Mar 27, 2003
Amstel Light from Amstel Brouwerij B. V.
58 out of 100 based on 1,234 ratings.