1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Tap Room No. 21 Lager - World Brews

Not Rated.
Tap Room No. 21 Lager
No picture uploaded.
Have one? Upload it now.
BA SCORE
69
poor

62 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 62
Reviews: 41
rAvg: 2.82
pDev: 17.02%
Wants: 2
Gots: 0 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
World Brews visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
American Pale Lager |  4.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: G2Brew on 04-25-2011)
View: Beers (80) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 62 | Reviews: 41 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of G2Brew
4.03/5  rDev +42.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

This is my second Tap Room No. 21 (from World Beers of Navato, CA.) This time it's a lager, and that's all they call it -- Tap Room No. 21 Lager. I was hesitant, because something that only identifies itself as an American lager could be anything from Bud Light to SA Black Lager. But I was feeling adventurous, so here I am, sipping this brew. It’s not bad, closer to a Sammy than a Bud, at least.

Poured cold (40F) from a bottle into a pilsner glass.

A – A little (1/2 inch) off-white head, with low persistence and almost no lacing. The color is great though – a golden amber with excellent clarity. The color makes this a pale lager, although the flavor tells me it’s more of an amber lager. It’s a toss-up, to me, but I’ll go with pale.

S – There wasn’t much nose here, and I was a little disappointed. There was a nice malty aroma, leaningtoward the caramel/amber malts, but not nearly as much as I would have liked.

T – Generally balanced, but a little malty sweetness. The flavor runs heavily toward amber and caramel malt, with a very noble hop bite, slightly floral, and a little spicy – just a hint of clove, and possibly cinnamon. There is a lot of complexity in the flavor of this beer, but I poured it too cold. You won’t appreciate it all until it gets up to 50F +. There is a lot of aftertaste, both of the hops and the amber malt. It’s not unpleasant though. A strange metallic taste comes through on the palate after a while. Not sure if I like that so much.

M – The mouthfeel is light to medium, but with a LOT of carbonation. I’ll make sure my next one is warmer, with plenty of time to form a good head and maybe get rid of some of that excess carbonation. That may affect my impression.

D – The overall drinkability of this beer is very high. It’s a good lawnmower beer, or a decent session beer, especially for your less zymaturologically attuned friends. The sweetness, spiciness, and carbonation combined to give me a first impression not unlike ginger ale. It improved as it went along, and I suspect that it will be better if I open the next one warmer, then allow it to rest in the glass a bit before tasting. I reserve final judgment until after I’ve experimented with the rest of this six-pack.

Photo of Yourneighborsdog
4/5  rDev +41.8%

Photo of Jonmoore89
3.75/5  rDev +33%

Photo of Nerudamann
3.58/5  rDev +27%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Look - Light straw color, clear. Color of the froth is off-white. Good carbonation, and about 2.5 fingers of foam that dissipates slowly.

Smell - Hoppy in character. Mostly a wheaty smell, but I seem to catch a hint of something fruity..very light and subtle though.

Taste - Very well-balanced...hoppy flavor is only slightly noticeable. Other than that though, not much is flying out at me in the taste. Texture is creamier than I would have thought, but also fairly well-balanced.

Drinkability - This is a good-tasting, but not very complex beer. Still very drinkable in that it just tastes good, but isn't very mind absorbing.

Photo of ericwilson54
3.5/5  rDev +24.1%

Photo of pooogy
3.5/5  rDev +24.1%

Photo of SargeC
3.43/5  rDev +21.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Appearance: Golden color. Quickly dissipating head. Heavy carbonation.

Smell: No standout aromas

Taste: Solid lager flavor. Light malt and hop flavors balance well.

Mouthfeel: Satisfying, medium body. Charged with carbonation.

Drinkability: Decent brew, solid consistency and flavor

Photo of mmmbeer
3.4/5  rDev +20.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

12 oz. bottle with no freshness date. It pours a nice medium gold, well-carbonated, with two inches of head that deposit some decent lace. Lemony and toasted in the nose, and the flavor adds to this a touch of caramel malts, salty minerals, and some green hops that impart a mild bitterness on top of a light, tingly and dry body. Not too bad to drink, especially for the price, but it wouldn't be a mainstay in my fridge.

Photo of JayQue
3.35/5  rDev +18.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Not bad as a session beer. Nothing exceptional that would make me seek it out. Basically a better version of what BMC is putting out. No adjunct crap but still a pretty light beer.

Pours a clear amber orange wiht a slightly off white head. Head retention not bad, leaves some lacing on the glass.

Smell and taste start off with a solid malty presence. The taste finishes up with a slightly harsh bitterness.

Mouthfeel is light but crisp, not at all watery like some macro lagers. Drinkability is good. The abv is low, there is some definite flavor here to make mass quantities worthwhile and there are no nasty or skunky surprises.

Not bad...not great...I wouldn't turn one down on a warm day!!!

Photo of syndelee
3.25/5  rDev +15.2%

Photo of mkbarron2131
3.25/5  rDev +15.2%

Photo of tbeck
3.15/5  rDev +11.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured a pale golden yellow with a thin white head that stayed around. Aroma was of malty cereal grains. Taste waste cereal grains and barley with a hint of barley and a slight metallic taste. The mouthfeel was good, very crisp and refresing. The beer was good, but the taste was a little off for a lager. Not a bad session beer, but on the boring side.

Photo of lkno301
3.05/5  rDev +8.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Clever & appealing labeling and packaging. Lots of info right on the front of the label. "Celebrating the repeal of Prohibition 1933" is an eye-catcher. Great label. Masterful marketing. Looks like some new micro-brew Co. I found this sitting at eye-level at my local QFC (AKA "Kroger" here in Seattle) with a blurb stating "New Item: $6.99."

Appearance: I'm rating this average, as it looks like your "average" Macro-brew. Pale yellow held against a light. Traces of a head. Traces of lacing in my tulip glass.

Smell: I'm rating this as less-than-average, as it doesn't even smell like beer. How did they do that?

Taste: well at least it tastes like "beer."

Mouthfeel: has more substance than you might expect, considering all it's defects.

Drinkability: to give it it's due, not so bad, considering all the dreck out there to compare it to.

NOT recommended. Much better cheap beer available. I'm still learning not to judge a book by it's cover.

Photo of wspscott
3.03/5  rDev +7.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12oz bottle in pint glass

A: Dark golden color, crystal clear, the head is almost non-existent, but there is quite a bit of lace.
S: Bread and light caramel sweetness.
T: Sweet, lots of light malt/bread character, a hint of toast and crackers on the back of the tongue. No hop character at all, it could use a little more bitterness to balance the malty sweetness. Not quite cloying, but getting there.
M: Round, with a high level of carbonation.
D: Very easy to drink, would be better if it was a little dryer. You could easily give this to a BMC drinker. I would not be disappointed to find this in a cooler at the beach, but I would not actually buy it. It is fine for the style, just not my thing. A perfectly average example of the style. Thanks Chris for leaving a couple in the fridge, the rest will probably be waiting for you to come back.

Photo of Mora2000
3/5  rDev +6.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Very excited to try a new beer from City Brewing, home of classic beers such as Earthquake and Evil Eye.

The beer pours a clear light yellow color with a white head. Looks exactly like a pale lager should. The aroma is as expected, with a lot of grain and corn notes. The flavor is also just like I expected. The beer is fairly sweet and has a lot of grain and corn, along with some grassy notes. Medium mouthfeel and medium carbonation. Not too good, but as far as pale lagers go, you can do worse.

Photo of Booner818
3/5  rDev +6.4%

Photo of Kromes
3/5  rDev +6.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: yellow straw color with thin white head. Lots of carbonation in the beer.

S: honey sweetness, yeast and a little bit of floral, earthy hop.

T: The honey and yeast taste is very strong and sweet up front. This gives way to a touch of bitterness and herbal flavor from the hop.

M: Light body. The carbonation is high. The finish is semi dry.

D: This is an average lager. Not bad. Tastes better than your run of the mill american lager, but about the same in all other aspects.

Photo of tubeyes
3/5  rDev +6.4%

Photo of BEERchitect
3/5  rDev +6.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Picked up a six-pack at Kroger Supermarket (of all places). Not expecting too much from this brew, but the bold language that resposes of the prohibition period shows me an attitude of which I can relate. The beer pours a typical straw color with a slight head retention and adequate carbonation. Aromas display a balance of pils malt and raw cereal grains, mixed with a touch of sulfer, vegetables (corn), and a bit of apples and pears. Do I detect a mild estery note? Flavors pick up on the same grain / malt blend found in the nose, but with a residual sweetness that stops shy of a detrement. Apple flavors persist into the flavors along with that mild pesky corn flavor. The body is a common, medium; of which is hindered by the weight of the residual sugars. Finish quite clean and crisp, despite the dms and sweet grain flavors. Not a bad beer, just banal.

Photo of jakehembree
3/5  rDev +6.4%

Photo of Bill235
3/5  rDev +6.4%

Photo of Andrew526
3/5  rDev +6.4%

Photo of Lee45102
3/5  rDev +6.4%

Photo of Beernoisseur
3/5  rDev +6.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

This was a random purchase. It had kind of a cool label, so I thought I'd give her a try.

A - Light, straw yellow with a dusting of amber hues. White head disappeared in like one minute.

S - Very light. All the regulars, and nothing that I wouldn't expect. a little bit of metallic tang.

T - This one was lighter in flavor than i expected. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't great. No real interesting flavors. There might have been a bit of citrus in there.

M - Very watery. The carbonation was on the rougher side of what I like. not the greatest.

D - If you wanted a beer you could slam all night long, this unusual brew would be great. My question would be why not something like a session lager? Lots more flavor, lots less money.

Photo of kornkid8600
3/5  rDev +6.4%

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Tap Room No. 21 Lager from World Brews
69 out of 100 based on 62 ratings.