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
68
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 (82) |  Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Raters
Ratings: 62 | Reviews: 41 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of G2Brew
G2Brew

Kansas

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.

Serving type: bottle

04-25-2011 19:48:14 | More by G2Brew
Photo of Jadjunk
Jadjunk

Georgia

2.85/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

#85. This runs under $6 for a 6-pack with the other varieties in tow when the price is right. Found at a well stocked grocer in town, but haven't seen it anywhere else.

Poured from a 12 oz. bottle to a glass mug at room temp.

(Appearance) Pours a very fizzy 2 finger depth head that recedes at an alarmingly quick rate, slowing as it approaches a thin sheet of foam, but subsides within about 2 minutes of the pour. Color is a pale peach-amber and is very clear with little clarity imperfections. Carbonation is spritely and can be seen everywhere throughout the glass. The combination of the uninteresting color and consistency plus the disappointing head quality give this beer a very lackluster appearance. 2

(Smell) Quite the lager aroma, but with no notable characteristics aside from some crisper cheap grain malts, bready tones and perhaps a hint of corn which gives the beer some very noticeable sweet highs. Hops are nowhere to be found, and any other complementary flavor in spices or caramel are also nearly indiscernible, although caramel presence is not out of the question. Hardly potent enough to excite me but it's stronger than some of the weakest aromas I have experienced. 2.5

(Taste) At first comes a subtle arrangement of malt flavors, none too strong and the first taste is light and balanced. Barley malt, some bread and slight yeast notes and yes, a touch of corn on the back burner round out the flavor. It's not very exciting but it's flavorful enough to be defining. Very sweet, perhaps too much so, and it would be nice to have some appropriate bitter to complement the flavor otherwise, but it's not terrible. 3

(Mouthfeel) Slight tongue tingle from the notable carbonation presence but the rest of the drink remains an airy smooth. It's got quite a light body and there's little distracting taste to slow the drink down. It's noticeably thin. Alcohol presence is locked down well and the finish is sweet and slightly dry. Not bad. 3

(Drinkability) It's quite drinkable as none of the malts in here are overbearing on the tongue and it's flavorful enough to separate ever so slightly from the average macro. My biggest concern with the drinkability is the draining sweetness which is just too over-the-top for my palate. No doubt the existence of corn and cheap grains helps bring this character to the front, but aside from that deterrent, this remains a decent lager with an above-average drinkability. 3

Verdict: I don't feel quite so taken advantage of due to saving several dollars on a sixer that is normally close to the $10 range, but otherwise it's a pretty average lager with nothing special. Balance of the malt is nice and subtle but the sweetness is just too much to keep me going back for more. I'll expect better things from the other two varieties I found at the store. C- (2.7)

Serving type: bottle

02-07-2011 04:46:05 | More by Jadjunk
Photo of Mora2000
Mora2000

Texas

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.

Serving type: bottle

01-29-2011 02:10:43 | More by Mora2000
Photo of wspscott
wspscott

Kentucky

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.

Serving type: bottle

01-09-2011 17:45:19 | More by wspscott
Photo of Nerudamann
Nerudamann

Oregon

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.

Serving type: bottle

11-17-2010 05:22:32 | More by Nerudamann
Photo of Andrew644
Andrew644

Idaho

2.75/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A- light gold with a nice white foaming head.

S- a slight malt smell but little else.

T- a slight malt and hop flavor but not near enough. For a regular lager this doesn't have enough taste and is more like a light beer.

M- needs more carbonation.

D- its average, nothing better.

Serving type: bottle

11-11-2010 03:19:45 | More by Andrew644
Photo of JohnQVegas
JohnQVegas

Tennessee

2.6/5  rDev -7.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Bottle into Sam Adams sensory glass.

Pours clear straw color, with a thin, creamy white head and waves of bubbles sweeping up from the bottom of the glass. Decent amount of foamy lacing, and the creamy cap left after the head settles lasts for quite awhile.

Nose is light, just a bit of grainy malt and just a tiny bit of corn.

Taste follows the nose - not a whole lot going on in this one; very light notes of corn and grainy malt, with the taste just dropping off the map after a few seconds of light corny sweetness on the finish. Nothing lingering on this one, it just goes from not much to nothing in a heartbeat. Clean is an understatement; this one is hermetically sealed. No hop presence whatsoever.

Mouthfeel isn't bad - light bodied and with a crisp, light carbonation. Again, crisp but not at all dry.

Drinkability is mainly hurt by the stark lack of any real flavor. It doesn't really taste bad, it just doesn't taste like much of anything. Not a whole lot of different from Bud or any other BMC product.

Serving type: bottle

09-19-2010 21:41:56 | More by JohnQVegas
Photo of WVbeergeek
WVbeergeek

West Virginia

2.38/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

This beer package says brewed in Rochester, NY, this website says it's brewed at City Brewing, and the website says Novato, CA. Either way this is standard pale straw colored lager bright quckly fleeting white head. Speckled lacing down the sides of my mug. Aroma has some biscuit malts, grainy husk notes, a touch of honey and some metallic character to it. Flavor has a sweet slight citrus and fruity tone for a lager, no real hop bitterness this beer is a put your training wheels on craft brew. Some husky grains throwing a bit of offness along with a metallic edge to some apple fruit juice tartness a bit weird. Mouthfeel is light bodied semi fizzy carbonation nothing substantial for me. Drinkability this will be a one time spot I have one of each of the three varieties, I wishI liked them.

Serving type: bottle

07-19-2010 07:03:29 | More by WVbeergeek
Photo of Kromes
Kromes

Georgia

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.

Serving type: bottle

04-04-2010 19:29:06 | More by Kromes
Photo of feelmefoam
feelmefoam

South Carolina

2.5/5  rDev -11.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Pours a light apple juice color with lots of carbonation and a finger of white head pushing up off the top of the liquid. The head doesn't last long at all though, and there's only a minimal amount of lacing.

The aroma is prevalent, but not too complex. Some slight floral aroma, but mostly a cheap, kind of boozy graininess.

The taste is also unimpressive. A light sweetness up front chased away by a slightly musty grain flavor. Not much hoppiness at the end, either, but you can tell there's something there.

The mouthfeel is pretty decent for a lager, just not much to back it up. Medium bodied with a moderate amount of carbonation for a crisp feel.

This is a pretty standard beer that needs a lot of improvement. I could maybe drink two at the most, but I would certainly search for something with more character to it.

Serving type: bottle

02-06-2010 02:22:33 | More by feelmefoam
Photo of PintOHops
PintOHops

California

1.58/5  rDev -44%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Poured from a 12oz bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance/Smell - Appeared an ultra clear golden/yellow with lots of carbonation rising to the top, produced a 2 finger head, and left soapy lacing. Looked a little fresh but overall average. Smelled of a big grainy aroma upfront, there's a bit of fruity grape & strawberry as well, and I got a bit of metallic aroma which was a little off putting. There was no real malt or hop aroma that I could detect, just a dominant grainy aroma that reminded me of Coors.

Taste/Mouthfeel - Tasted of grains & corn through & through with no real malts or hops that I could detect. A bit of citrus along with some bitterness on the finish, but the bitterness wasn't like hop bitterness, again, this reminds me of a Coors but a little better in my opinion. Mouthfeel was smooth & crisp like any lager should be, average feel but good.

Drinkability/Final Thoughts - Very drinkable of course, but why buy this when you could get any BMC lagers that taste pretty much the same! I personally prefer a Bud over this supposed Craft Lager, this just isn't worth the 8$ bucks a 6pack that I paid for, and there certainly wasn't any craft in this beer, just another money making, cheap beer to pump out. Save your money folks. Not recommended.

Serving type: bottle

01-04-2010 02:09:49 | More by PintOHops
Photo of Cyberkedi
Cyberkedi

Georgia

2.35/5  rDev -16.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Pours a rather uninspiring clear straw-yellow, very typical of a lager, but at least it has a nice, thick, somewhat persistent white head. Aroma is crisp, malty and a bit weak. Flavor is better than the aroma, but not much, being typically malty and having just a soupcon of sour fruit. Texture is smooth and only a little tingly. Not great, but it was worth trying.

Serving type: bottle

10-22-2009 23:13:43 | More by Cyberkedi
Photo of RoyalT
RoyalT

Ohio

2.5/5  rDev -11.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance - This is a light yellow in color with a modest head that went down quickly.

Smell - The light, sweetish grain is a bit gross. It has that putrid moldy corn aroma that a lot of bad American lagers seem to relish.

Taste - The grain comes out just a tad better at the taste but this is still liquid corn.

Mouthfeel - This is light-bodied with some sprightly carbonation that showed a bit more depth then the usual American macros. The finish was crisp and clean with no bitterness IAW the style. Nicely done in this department.

Sinkability - City Brewing makes a few mass-market malt liquors and this one has that flavor but without the booze. If I'm going to drink sub-par beer I at least when to get drunk while doing it.

Serving type: bottle

09-23-2009 00:47:17 | More by RoyalT
Photo of ChainGangGuy
ChainGangGuy

Georgia

2.25/5  rDev -20.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Appearance: Pours out a clear, light golden body with a small-sized, wispy, white head.

Smell: Just a humble, unremarkable nose of low-grade cereal grains and some vague, transient floral hints. Smells like little care, craftsmanship, or even thought went into this beer beyond the simple thought of "hey, let's just whip out a quick, cheap lager."

Taste: Light pale malts with a slight sweetish quality to it. Mild, unpleasant vegetal tones slip shamelessly into the flavor. I'm constantly being told I need to take in more vegetables, but this isn't the way to do it. Merest hint of floral hops and bitterness. Sweetish, somewhat unclean finish.

Mouthfeel: Light-bodied. Medium carbonation.

Drinkability: As was the case with the pale ale, this is unenjoyable and wholly unrewarding. It's pretty understandable this horrid thing rolled out of the doors of a major malt liquor producer. It's a case where I'd rather have a macro lager over this. So, please, pass the Michelob! And let us not forget there's still the amber ale to try.

Serving type: bottle

08-22-2009 20:34:29 | More by ChainGangGuy
Photo of theopholis
theopholis

California

2.75/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Appearance- Very clear, bright golden bpdy. Very little head, and no lacing. Continually but slowly effervesces for a long time.

Smell- Light floral hops with a very thin malt background. Aroma is rather subdued, but does smell inviting.

Taste- Nice, light refreshing. Not much taste overall, but what there is is quite pleasant. Nice malt sweetness well-balanced by the bittering hops. Taste gets kind of funky as it warms.

Mouthfeel- Good CO2 level. Medium body. Basically what you would expect out of a lager.

Drinkability Not great, but not bad.

Serving type: bottle

07-21-2009 04:54:30 | More by theopholis
Photo of berserker256
berserker256

Michigan

2.45/5  rDev -13.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance is pretty terrible. The beer is completely see-through and dark yellow with a soapy head that totally disappeared before my first sip. I haven't had a drink yet and now it looks like applejuice. About seven carbonation bubbles per minute rise to the top of the glass. Smells like sweet metallic corn. There's a touch of sweet malt aroma but not much. No hop character at all. There's a semi-sweet malty flavor and perhaps an old banana is detected in there as well. There's a decent sort of creamy texture but carbonation is terrible. Pretty lousy overall.

Serving type: bottle

06-03-2009 21:29:58 | More by berserker256
Photo of mralphabet
mralphabet

Virginia

2.9/5  rDev +2.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12 Oz bottle poured into pint glass

A: Nice looking lager, clear golden color. Very little head with no lacing.... Lots of bubble from lots of carbonation.

S: I'm getting a steeliness and maybe apple with a little breadiness... nothing to crazy.

T: Very lager like... there is a little steeliness, with a bready yeast flavor with a little pepper in the aftertaste... but it fades quickly. Nothing to crazy... pretty ordinary.

M: Pretty smooth, light to mid bodied. The carbonation not as high as I would have thought.

D: Got this brew on the cheap.... so not bad for cheap beer.... It reminds me a little of Bud, just a little more flavor.... I would not run out looking for this one, but if offered I would not turn it down..

Serving type: bottle

04-23-2009 03:47:38 | More by mralphabet
Photo of bilyboy65
bilyboy65

Colorado

2.7/5  rDev -4.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

There's a funny story about how I came to drink this beer...It all starts in a grocery store with coolers and coolers filled with craft beers. Then I turn around to see this sitting on a shelf marked clearance $0.99. It was such a low price I had to see if it was that bad. Well as it turns out it's not horrible, but not all that good.

A: Very good for a lager, crisp clear golden color. White thin head that is fed by a lot of carbonation. Gotta love those bubbles. Nothing stays on the glass. It's almost like there was nothing in it to begin with.

S: Pretty much like a lager. A little bready, but nothing out of the ordinary.

T: A little metallicy, but nothing overwhelming. Yeasty taste overall.

M: Smooth, medium body feel. The carbonation visual doesn't let you down here.

D: I could have a few if they were handed to me. Wouldn't be a first choice though.

Serving type: bottle

04-07-2009 00:21:32 | More by bilyboy65
Photo of Beernoisseur
Beernoisseur

Utah

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.

Serving type: bottle

12-09-2008 04:43:22 | More by Beernoisseur
Photo of JayQue
JayQue

Virginia

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!!!

Serving type: bottle

12-06-2008 01:20:48 | More by JayQue
Photo of SickBrew
SickBrew

Washington

2.05/5  rDev -27.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

This beer pours a pale straw color with a bit of head retention. Aroma is bland, rice/corn like with a slight fortified aroma. Taste is very grainy and corn like - not good. I don't detect any hops and the malts associated with an all American Lager are absent - I'll take a Bud any day over this. Mouthfeel is watery with low carbonation and plain - blah. Overall this beer is not really worth trying. If looking for a good or new lager look else where.

Prost!

Serving type: bottle

10-07-2008 01:10:23 | More by SickBrew
Photo of jushoppy2beer
jushoppy2beer

Tennessee

2.75/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

If you are in the mood for a very light-bodied lager to quench your thirst on a hot day, this is not a bad brew. It has a classic light lager color. The head is slight, with little retention, and no lacing to speak of. The nose has a reasonably nice maltiness, but the taste is a bit weak. It's slightly malty on the palate and on the finish, but without a gratifying complexity. The carbonation is pretty darn good, and the mouthfeel is a bit light, but refreshing. Okay as a session beer if you're not bothered by the low level of flavor.

Serving type: bottle

08-13-2008 23:17:44 | More by jushoppy2beer
Photo of cvstrickland
cvstrickland

North Carolina

2.85/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

12-ounce bottle poured into a shaker pint glass yields a clear pale golden body with a thin cap of grainy white foam that is gone before I finished typing that it was there. A few freckles of lacing attest to the presence of an anorexic ring at the perimeter of the glass.

The smell is faint, with a notion of sweetish cereal grains and a touch of musty malt.

The taste of the drink is mild and pale-malty with an herbal note in a bitter finish. A bit of dry, sourish grain arises deep in the aftertaste.

Thin-to-medium-bodied, not bad (or good), and actually pretty refreshing as long as you don't scrutinize it too closely.

Serving type: bottle

08-12-2008 23:45:37 | More by cvstrickland
Photo of tbeck
tbeck

Washington

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.

Serving type: bottle

08-09-2008 00:07:17 | More by tbeck
Photo of mmmbeer
mmmbeer

Massachusetts

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.

Serving type: bottle

02-14-2008 19:15:08 | More by mmmbeer
Tap Room No. 21 Lager from World Brews
68 out of 100 based on 62 ratings.