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!

Amstel Light - Amstel Brouwerij B. V.

Not Rated.
Amstel LightAmstel Light

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
59
awful

1,293 Ratings
THE BROS
47
awful

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,293
Reviews: 465
rAvg: 2.42
pDev: 28.1%
Wants: 6
Gots: 72 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Amstel Brouwerij B. V. visit their website
Netherlands

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: 1,293 | Reviews: 465 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of alankwak
3.25/5  rDev +34.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

A: Lightly golden. Decent head retention and lacing.
S: Low aroma...low hoppiness.
T: Not bad....better than most American light beers for sure. More towards hops than malt.
M: Very light...but you can actually taste it. OK here.
D: Good. Could throw many of these back. Problem is...low alcohol content. I mean..well..let's keep it over 4% folks. But hey.... did the best they could I guess.


Overall: I liked this beer as far as a light beer goes. Better effort that American Macrobrews I think.

alankwak, Sep 17, 2005
Photo of scooter231
2.5/5  rDev +3.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a pale yellow strawish color with a little bit of white head and very minimal lacing. Smells lightly lemony and grainy. Nothing special. Tastes grainy and there's a bit of bitter hops in there, as well as a hint of lemon. More than your average light beer. Mouthfeel is watery and slightly soapy feeling. Fairly drinkable, a good thirst-quencher in the summer time.

Overall, a decent light beer- not the greatest tasting thing ever, but it has its purpose, and I'd rather have this than Coors.

scooter231, Sep 06, 2005
Photo of buxwheat
3.53/5  rDev +45.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4.5

This is my "work in the yard all day" beer. I disagree with most reviewers: this is a good beer to have when you're having more than one...a lot more than one. It is not the best brew I have ever had, but far from the worst. I was never a lite beer fan until this one came around. Coor's light had been my preferred "beach beer", when all you want is something cold and wet, but not sweet, and water is just a little too, well, watery. So until a better lite beer comes around, I'll always have a case in the fridge.

buxwheat, Sep 03, 2005
Photo of tobyandgina
3.85/5  rDev +59.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

After pour, there was a good head on it, which remained for most of the duration. Good amount of bubbles. A very light golden color, almost too light. Smell was pretty good, malt and wheat are present (also present in taste). A traditional lager flavor. The flavor does not tend to linger on the tongue for very long, though. Very crisp and light. Best served on a hot summer day in a Pilsner glass - very refreshing.

For a light beer, this one is very tastey!

tobyandgina, Aug 21, 2005
Photo of KoG
1.15/5  rDev -52.5%
look: 1 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

Looks almost clear with a slight yellow tint and no head at all.

Smells like a skunk, even with the brown bottle. At least it had some sort of aroma.

Taste is awful. Watered down hops with a strangely stinging mouthfeel. This was not good at all.

At 3.5%, if low alcohol is your aim get a bitter. I will never ever touch this again. Guess the comercials are right by saying the "Lite beer drinkers lite beer." I guess I'm not a lite beer drinker.

KoG, Jul 19, 2005
Photo of palliko
2.53/5  rDev +4.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Why do breweries bother with light beer? I know, for the executive on the go who doesn’t want to feel filled up. Have a club soda instead! Appearance of this Light beer is almost clear water with a drop of yellow, not much foam and no lace. Aroma is that of the usual brussel sprouts and eau de skunk. Initial taste consists of watery malt, some grain, metallic alum in the middle, and a hint of some hops that strayed here accidentally. Way too expensive for the bitter aftertaste it leaves behind.

palliko, Jul 13, 2005
Photo of PBRstreetgang
3.08/5  rDev +27.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours pale straw with a foamy two finger head and decent retention. Noteworthy patchwork of lace. Pilsener malt and euro-hop nose. Husky grain flavor with a solid pilsener malt backbone. Some light grain and skunk in the aftertaste, but still decently balanced for a light lager. Active streaming carbonation gives this light bodied brew a crisp, refreshing mouthfeel. Finishes clean and drinks easy if you don't mind the light-struck flavor. Good choice if you want a low-carb beer with some character; otherwise just an overpriced imported macro.

PBRstreetgang, Jul 10, 2005
Photo of BEERchitect
2.63/5  rDev +8.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A good light lager, and that is saying a lot. It looks golden clear and highly carbonated, like a typical lager. Actually retains a white loosely knit head and laced a bit on the glass. Smelled lightly malty and cereal-like. Slight souring and grainy. Tasted also slightly malty and cereal-like. Exhibited some flavors of butter-popcorn, vegitive, and corn sugar. Body was light and clean. Finish was crisp and clear. No true flavors pronounced themselves, but this beer is good at washing down pizza and nachos.

BEERchitect, Jul 07, 2005
Photo of riversider76
1.68/5  rDev -30.6%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

This beer has a lot of flavor for a light. Too bad its not a good flavor! Nothing impressive at all here. I'm not sure what they are putting in this beer but its not worth the 7.99 they are charging for a six pack. I would recommend Pabst Blue Ribbion over this any day!

riversider76, Jul 05, 2005
Photo of chOAKbarrell
1.3/5  rDev -46.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

If you have ever wondered what liquified styrofoam injected into Budmillercoorslite would taste like, then you should try an Amstel Light.

This is an absolutely repulsive beer. It looks & smells like your average Bud/Miller/Coors clone, but the taste! Dear lord! At first it tastes like the aforementioned macro-filth, but then it hits you - a noxious cardboard-box-complete-with-packing-materials flavor. It blows my mind as to how the brewers of this beer could possibly find it acceptable.

I mean, at least you can swallow other light beers without really tasting anything - just like water down the throat - and then forget about them, but Amstel Light makes sure to rip a blazing trench through your tastebuds, assuring you that you wont forget it's abhorrent "taste" any time soon.

chOAKbarrell, Jun 27, 2005
Photo of BrewMaven
2.1/5  rDev -13.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

Another recent BBQ beer..No, I didn't buy it. Anyway, It would have been inconvenient to go in the house to get a glass for this so off came the cap and I take a slug....I don't know if it was skunked or not but it had the sharp taste I remember beer having when I was a kid and dad gave me a sip of the beer he'd have once every blue moon.

Looked pale and basic. Thin and watery with lots of bubbles.

I really can't call this anything better than just something to drink when you invite non B.A.'s over and they decide to "bring beer".

Also not really bad as an after mowing the grass beer to cool off. At least you won't get too buzzed from it.

BrewMaven, Jun 10, 2005
Photo of Frozensoul327
2/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

The true epitome of mediocracy. What a waste. If I wanted water, I would've bought water. Poured out to a nearly pathetic yellow clear color, with little head, no lace, and rather low carbonation. Scent? I think I smelled corn and hops, but it was so damn light it could've been a dog fart. Flavor was very weak, notes of corn and malt. Finished blandly, no aftertaste or anything. This beer is like a 90 Lb. Halfback. It's just not gonna cut it. Needs more flavor, much more flavor. Could be reviewed lower, but I was not repulsed by this brew (maybe only the inflated price). Not recommended.

Frozensoul327, Jun 02, 2005
Photo of whynot44
2.38/5  rDev -1.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Light bodied, very pale straw color with a small white head that disappears quickly, leaving no real lace.

Aroma is mostly herbal hops, not too bad.

Taste is very light sweet malt and hops with a touch of soap, watery and thin.

Drinkable, but not inspiring.

whynot44, May 29, 2005
Photo of rousee
3.35/5  rDev +38.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Another one that I can enjoy that most BAs hate. I like Amstel mostly for its low abv. Its better than bud anyway. Pours a very golden macro-like yellow. Smell is a little skunky/grassy but it doesnt linger too much. Taste is very thin and watery malt but reasonably clean and fresh tasting. I call this stuff "bird beer" because it wouldnt get a bird drunk. Its still ok in my opinion.

rousee, May 12, 2005
Photo of GCBrewingCo
3.1/5  rDev +28.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

The beer poured into the plastic cup (you use what you have) clear medium golden with a white frothy head which coated the cup from top to bottom.

The aroma was low hop aroma. The hop aroma were not easy to define but most closely approximated Saaz.

The flavor was light with a low malt level and a slight corn flavor (DMS). The hop level was high enough to balance the flavor, but there still existed a slight sweetness.

The finish was dry with lasting no hop and no malt flavors, basically no aftertaste at all. The body was watery and light (it was a light beer after all).

12 ounce bottle with some ungodly freshness dating. Not a bad beer, but nothing exciting. It did wet the old whistle though.

GCBrewingCo, Apr 28, 2005
Photo of ski271
2.85/5  rDev +17.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 4

I used to love this beer but haven’t had it in a long time... and now I’m not sure what I thought was so great about it. But then again, I don’t like light beers anymore either... I feel the US macros are light enough without watering them down even more. This one is very pale yellow with a medium-sized, white, rapidly diminishing head, and very little lacing. The smell is... well... hardly there, typical of a light beer: grain, light malt, and a touch of DMS. Some malt and the smallest dashes of hops among a grainy and flavor with a slightly yeasty yet astringent, short finish. Mouthfeel is thin and watery, carbonation is quite lively. It’s not that great of a beer, and it definitely loses some points for its cost... but there’s still something about it I like. I don’t think I’d seek this one out very often, but I had it after going for a run earlier and then eating a piece of pizza with too much red pepper sprinkled on it, and it was just what I needed. I guess that’s worth something, right? That, and it's not COMPLETELY lifeless like the bulk of the light beers out there.

ski271, Apr 27, 2005
Photo of samsneed
3.95/5  rDev +63.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 5

Good Beer that starts well. Has good clean balance. Clean refreshing finish. Great after hard work. (I am drinking one now...) It is a little weak, but still a good AVAILABLE beer. Also noteworthy, the third beer is as good as the first! That quality, plus the fact it is rather cheeper than other good beers, makes it a staple at any bar.

samsneed, Apr 07, 2005
Photo of Vancer
2.03/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Boy, one of the *premium* beers on American Airlines. Decent golden yellow filtered pour with a white head that doesn’t last long. A small malt aroma can be detected behind a little of the ol’ European sulfur skunk. Taste is weak, thin, bland, unimpressive – but hey, the can lists; *Full flavor – Low calorie 95, low carb .5*. whoop de doo !!

Cripe, just drink lemon water and save yourself 95 calories, if that drives your beer choices.

Vancer, Mar 28, 2005
Photo of sinkr
3.65/5  rDev +50.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

I got interested in light beer again when I got even more health conscious and wanted to augment my weight loss regimen with a lower calorie beer.

Amstel is an excellent choice for those who want to continue drinking beer while attempting to be calorie conscious.

I realize a lot of people do not like this particular beer or light (weak) beers in general, however, you as a consumer need to realize that this beer is attempting to compete in the low calorie arena, and well, there's only so much that can be done there, both in body, mouthfeel, taste, and alcohol content.

Realizing that this beer is not Lucifer or Chimay will go a long way for one to appreciate it's characteristics; I absolutely enjoy the taste of the beer, given it's mildly hoppy, but very beer-like taste and aroma and can almost forget that I'm drinking a light beer, when contrasted to other similar non-light beers (Bud, Miller, etc.)

In the end, I highly recommend this as a choice for those who want to be more sensible in what beer they drink, yet still have a very palateable beer.

sinkr, Mar 23, 2005
Photo of Luigi
1.7/5  rDev -29.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pale yellow with a white lace for a head. Not much aroma. Some grassy grains, very clean. Taste watery, with some light grains. No hops. Very light bodied with a good amount of carbonation. Not to mention it only has 3.5% alcohol per volume. Save your money and drink some bud or miller light! The taste is the same and more alcohol for a lesser price.

Luigi, Mar 21, 2005
Photo of yeagerbm
3.28/5  rDev +35.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours the typical clear yellow color but with a half decent white head and lots of carbonation. The aroma is skunky, like a typical euro lager but worse. The taste is a dry mildly bitter flavor with a sharp skunky tang. Mouthfeel is barely above other watery versions of light lager with a typical amount of carbonation. Drinkability is slightly above the average light lager with a drier, less corny flavor. Not a bad thirst quencher but not the premium classy beer drinker's light beer as it's marketed.

yeagerbm, Mar 03, 2005
Photo of BigRedN
3.15/5  rDev +30.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Last minute decision to add to low carb beer "research". Why not add an import. Although not really categorizing itself as part of the low carb scene it fit my criteria for a low carb beer.

Appearance: In keeping with the trend, clear, golden, foamy head died down to a ring around the glass with minimal lacing.

Smell: Slightly grainy, a little malty with a hint of hops, pretty decent actually for a light lager.

Taste: Flavor is a little better than the typical regular macro American light lagers. Also good flavor for a low calorie/lowcarb beer.

Mouthfeel: Lightly carbonated, light and crisp.

Drinkability: Easy drinking, light beer. Low alcohol content ensures that one can drink these all night. A decent beer, I have seen in cans also. However at a going rate of around $6.99 to $7.49 a six, a little on the expensive side for what you get.

BigRedN, Feb 25, 2005
Photo of euskera
1.4/5  rDev -42.1%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

My brother had these lying around for the NFL games this weekend.

Appearance was OK, simple yellow Lager..

Smell was less than OK, could smell the corn in there..

Taste was abysmal, corn being the main thrust..

Why buy this stuff when you can spend just a bit more for something with actual flavor? Yeeshhh..

euskera, Jan 25, 2005
Photo of TheDeuce
3.3/5  rDev +36.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Appearance-dark golden blond color, fizzy head with a fair amount of foam, the foam does hang arond, ok clarity

Smell-a mixture of grain hops, some corn, hops are present though not that strong but they are there. Light malt on top of it.

Taste-Fairly flavorful for a light lager, decent hop flavor initially, taste is crisp, flavor deteriorates a little on the way down, but not bad.

Mouthfeel-crisp and light, very good actually though because of the flavor, very easy to drink.

Drinkability-among the more flavorful light lagers you could stick down your neck, very easy to have as many as you want, immensely drinkable, especially if you are just starting on beer.

Overall-were it not for the price, Amstel Light would probably be the quissential starter beer for many as it is simply more flavorful than most other light lagers. Obviously not the greatest beer out there, and it is expensive, but I do give it props for being among the more flavorful light lagers. Cheers.

TheDeuce, Jan 23, 2005
Photo of paterlodie
2.65/5  rDev +9.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Appearance is good with a nice head and for a lager dark colour. Smell is for light beer not too bad but litle oxidised and not much malt. Taste is empty and litle oxidised but has quiet a nice maltarome and though there is not too much bitterness for this beer it fits and is pleasant. Don't know if the revieuwed beer is the same cause on my label it say's Amstel Lite; full taste/lower calorie

paterlodie, Jan 10, 2005
Amstel Light from Amstel Brouwerij B. V.
59 out of 100 based on 1,293 ratings.