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!

Budweiser Select - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Budweiser SelectBudweiser Select

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

1,129 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,129
Reviews: 389
rAvg: 2.03
pDev: 30.54%
Wants: 5
Gots: 91 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
Light Lager |  4.30% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Brewed with two-row and roasted caramel malt for a rich color, and a blend of hand-selected premium American and Bavarian hops for balance and flavor. Budweiser Select spends approximately twice as long as regular beers in the brewhouse, which results in lower carbohydrate and calorie content after fermentation.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 11-13-2004)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Budweiser Select Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,129 | Reviews: 389 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of megatron0259
2.98/5  rDev +46.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Not a bad beer, but not a great one either. Best enjoyed from a bottle, bud select is what I'd describe as a party beer. Something you take to a party since I wouldnt care if someone took a couple bottles since its not very expensive at all. Ive had it in a can, which makes it taste bland and frothy. I was lucky enough to actually find a place that has it on tap, but they served it in a chilled, way too cold, mug, which ruins the taste. The best bet is from a bottle. It looks and tastes like any other budweiser beer, but does have smooth aftertaste as advertised. Its smell is practically nonexistant. Its smooth aftertaste makes it an ideal party beer. Not a bad beer, but its still not a superb beer.

megatron0259, Nov 22, 2006
Photo of jmbranum
2.3/5  rDev +13.3%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

(This review is of the Oklahoma 3.2%ABW/4.0%ABV version that is sold in convenience stores)

Very light golden colored brew with 1/2" white head.

Not horrible, but definitely a macro. The idea here seems to be inoffensiveness, with the malt and hop flavors falling into the background. About the only things that stand out are bit of corn and rice and the funky macrobeer aftertaste.

However, I've had worse in macro beers. It is very drinkable cold and would be worth buying if you're going cheap or are on the Atkins diet.

jmbranum, Nov 14, 2006
Photo of Umbra
2.05/5  rDev +1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

We cruised over to a nearby dive bar--the Ponca Bird--to enjoy pit burgers, old stories and cold beer. The Ponca Bird is a place where men are men, women are 20 years past their prime, and the beer is ice cold and crappy. The beer was purchased for me when someone said that I liked "different beer."

Clear, slightly yellow liquid. Barest hints of malts on the nose. Near non-existent flavor.

This is sad, I won't be referring to this as beer. Their attempt to unseat Ultra as the low carb, light lager will probably fail. Hopefully, they will put this swill out of its misery soon

Umbra, Nov 10, 2006
Photo of TheSarge
1.5/5  rDev -26.1%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

A young friend of mine gave me one of these little turds in a bottle. I was of course skeptical, but actually a bit surprised. The brew had an aftertaste I've never tasted before. I suppose it was a mixture of non malted grains, such as extra corn and rice. However, it seems this is really just a marketing ploy by A-B to give themselves a new edge to the masses. A-B has done a lot in the past to keep American brewing alive, so why can't they adapt to what American beer connoisseurs really want? Full flavored beer! Don't feed me any Michelob Hefeweizen crap please!

TheSarge, Oct 24, 2006
Photo of Doomcifer
1.05/5  rDev -48.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

I don't want to be offensive, but this is probably the worst ber I have ever had.

Appearance - Looks like very carbonated light golden lager with zero head retention. The head is more along the lines of soda, as well as the carbonation.

Smell- What smell?

Taste - What taste? Seriously...At least regular Bud has some semblance of flavor. This supposedly is a step up?! Nope. It seriously has ZERO flavor. THE definition of alcoholic water. Zero aftertaste.

Mouthfeel - Soda water.

Drinkability - The drain loves this beer.


Doomcifer, Oct 21, 2006
Photo of Magpie14
1.93/5  rDev -4.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Apperance: thin yellow color...looked like straw stuffed in a glass. Thin soapy head with some lacing

Smell: a grain smell that does not please. Mostly a smell of corn...and more corn

Taste: Oh boy! taste like it smells, some grain and mostly corn. Rather repulsive after a while, a fake unatural sweetness is present. Has a dry crisp and somewhat clean finish

Mouthfeel: it's a light beer very airy and has strong carbonation. I find myself choking it down.

it is drinkable, on a hot warm day or on the golf course? But that is it! This beer was left over from a party and I am not sure what to do with the rest?
Sort of silly really, what do you think the select means? hmmm?

Magpie14, Oct 16, 2006
Photo of afinepilsner
2.05/5  rDev +1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

12oz can

Budweiser Select was very clear pale yellow color with a white head. The head was quick to fizzle away to a thin ring and completely disappeared before I finished the beer. The aroma was almost nonexistant, But there might be a little grain in there. The taste was very light and crisp with a clean dry finsh. The mouthfeel was very light with plenty of carbonation. Drinkability was below average. It's slightly better then Bud Light, but that's not saying much. Avoid.

afinepilsner, Oct 14, 2006
Photo of taez555
2.4/5  rDev +18.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

This beer poured a clear yellow body with a small white head.

Nose has a strong corn/rice grain malt sort of smell. Not overly inviting, but sort of a bigger than normal macro smell.

Mouth-feel is light with a HUGE soft drink style carbonation that really overwhelms the taste buds. Very light but with some nice clean crisp sawdust like, husk and grain malt flavors. Classic macro, but a little more in your face. Absolutely no hop taste with only a slight hop bitterness.

When it comes to Budwieser this is actually one of the best. It's maltier, it's got a better body, it's even slightly hoppier. It's still very mild and thin, but it's not that bad when it comes to macros.

taez555, Oct 13, 2006
Photo of TheBierBand
2.13/5  rDev +4.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

So.... this is the best they've got?? I expected something superior to the standard Bud.... but all they did was take any personality that bud had (which ain't much).... and remove it! This beer is not even as good as their standard offering.

Pours about the same as regular Bud. Rapidly forming head that dissipates immediately. No Lacing.

The smell is bland... nothing there.

The taste is similer to a mass produced lite beer. No hoppiness, no malt.

I expected something a little more than this.... after all it's called SELECT!

Their marketting department must've been trying to sucker in us beer snobs but it'll only work once.... I'll never get it again... anybody need 23 cans?

TheBierBand, Oct 12, 2006
Photo of zeff80
2.31/5  rDev +13.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.75

A -Pours out a pale yellow. Highly carbonated. Small, short-lived head.

S - It actuallt smells like there are some hops. Corn smell is also present.

T - The hop flavor comes through. It isn't great but not bad. The malt and corn flavor is also there.

M - It was crisp and sharp It was light, though.

D - As far as light beers go, it isn't too bad. It actually has some flavor.

zeff80, Sep 26, 2006
Photo of shirfan
1.55/5  rDev -23.6%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Appearance is medium-yellow with a passable head of average longevity.

Aroma: very faint grain and nothing more.

Taste: The label claims this is "distinct and flavorful beer with a bold taste that finishes clean". It would be hard to claim something further from the truth, except perhaps the clean part.

This literally tastes like nothing. It's not a watery, adjunct-tasting bad beer, it is the complete devolution of beer. Mildly alcoholic carbonated water. Zero malt. Zero hops.

I want to give this all ones for being such an abomination, yet it does have an average appearance and is easily drinkable, although not enjoyable.

I would *love* to swap some Arrogant Bastard into these bottles and unleash them on unsuspecting bar patrons. They would probably burst into fire.

shirfan, Sep 15, 2006
Photo of TechMyst
1/5  rDev -50.7%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

PURCHASED @: Hilanders
COST: 5/6pack
HEAD: minimal
LACE: none COLOR:yellow
AROMA: lager
TASTE: how is this different than bud light?
COMMENTS: marketing ploy


TechMyst, Sep 14, 2006
Photo of ghostmech007
1.68/5  rDev -17.2%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Pale yellow, good clarity with a thin bone white lacing.

This smelled vaguely of grain … that's it.

I would say that this is offensive to me, don't even offer it to me. It tasted very dry and very light bodied. A bite at the beginning and a soft grain husk and that was it. I had one sip in my mouth for twenty seconds and still nothing. Even if I thought that there was something there it wasn't.

Absolutely awful. I was very offened that my friends got me this.

ghostmech007, Sep 13, 2006
Photo of jwc215
2/5  rDev -1.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Pours light golden yellow with a thin white foamy head that becomes barely a thin covering within a short time. It does leave some lacing.

The smell is thin - almost non-existant. Some vague grain smell is there, but not easily detectable.

The taste is watery and airy. The is a slight touch of sweet malt. No hops are noticeable. Some vague adjuncts come through.

The feel is somewhat dry despite ridiculous amounts of water.

It is less smooth than most macros. It is a lot of water and with a harsh edge that mysteriously arises. This is a below-average macro to say the least. I would take a regular bud over this easily.

jwc215, Sep 11, 2006
Photo of DrinkinBoy
2.48/5  rDev +22.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

After being poured it had a decent head with little retention. Its a fairly clean looking gold with noticeable carbonation.

The smell was faint, but smelled just like your average beer.

It had a lack of flavor, but was crisp and clean. Had a sweet taste with a slight bite.

The beer was light and watery, with a high feel of carbonation. Somewhat refreshing.

Bud Select is easy to drink. Its has a bit more taste than soda water, but not much.

DrinkinBoy, Sep 08, 2006
Photo of IntriqKen
2.35/5  rDev +15.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Fills the glass with an extremely pale crystal clear yellow and moderate white head that disappears far too quickly.
Aroma is sort of sweet and orange citrus. Extra hops seem present in this brew.
Ice cold taste was immediately refreshing...cooling (It's 100 degrees at the ball park tonight)...bright, bright citrus and lots of tiny carbonation to create a dry finish.
Ohhh, oh...
Don't know what happened...beer warmed...mouth woke up...I don't know, but now half way through the glass and this has become very disappointing. Watery....thin mouthfeel....very little flavor. What happened to the hops I definately saw in the beginning.?
I no longer find this drinkable. Sad...I was really enjoying the first couple of sips as something unusual and unique.

IntriqKen, Sep 08, 2006
Photo of hanco005
3.03/5  rDev +49.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

12 oz bottle, born on 17 Jul 06, poured into a pint glass

A—pale yellow and clear with a 1 inch bright white foamy head, quickly fizzles away, laces like swiss cheese

S—sweet grains, wheat, corn, rice, mild and not very impressive

T—not much for flavor and therefore nothing really offensive, some mild grains, very crisp and clean, a touch sweet

M—thin and watery, crisp and clean, lightest body, good carbonation

D—It is what it is, a macro lager that is lacking overall. However, it’s light and refreshing and probably my choice when drinking a macro brew.

hanco005, Sep 05, 2006
Photo of BuffaloBilly
2.48/5  rDev +22.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I was at a party, and the usual bud light drinking crowd hosted, and I suppose they got caught up in the hype and bought "budwesier select". It's light bodied, crisp and dry. It tastes better than budlight, more flavor, hops and less aftertaste. This is just a marketing beer, not worth it and it seems like its time has already passed.

BuffaloBilly, Aug 25, 2006
Photo of rodrot
1.98/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

This beer poured a very pale yellow color with a one finger head that disappeared quickly. Aroma was slightly malty with a little bit of that vegetable adjunct smell mixed in. Taste was typical for a light macro lager- very light malt flavor, barely perceptable hop character and some corn flavors mixed in. Mouthfeel was very thin, watery and bland. Drinkability was low for me due to the almost total absence of taste. At least I didn't pay for this. I'll take a Sam Adams Light or Amstel Light over this any day. Not recommended.

rodrot, Jul 31, 2006
Photo of beerphilosopher
2.95/5  rDev +45.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Okay, a macro review ... pours a medium/light golen color with a decent stark white head with good retention. Lots of lacing in the pilsner glass. Nose is predominantly of roasted malts. Just a slight hop presence, but nothing to write home about. Palate is a little bit more hoppy than a standard bud and tastes a bit more balanced in it's malt/hop profile. Mouthfeel is light, of course, with just a tad of hop bitterness remaining. Still a typical malt heavy macro overall. Not a topnotch beer, but maybe better by a nose than most light lagers.

beerphilosopher, Jul 31, 2006
Photo of scottoale
1.78/5  rDev -12.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

From a 24oz. can with a born on date on the bottom pours a light yellow straw colored water with a non-lasting thin white head.

The smell didn't really exist when served cold, as it warmed it smelled sweet and corn adjunct-like, more so than malted barley.

The flavor is sweet, sickly and rather horrible. It too sweet and dusty metallic for the most part and as it warms, it becomes very un-drinkable.

Mouthfeel? Water feels much better.

Light, if any body, fair carbonation...regular Bud almost puts this stuff too shame. I opted to "select", throw the last 12ozs. away...seriously!

scottoale, Jul 18, 2006
Photo of cooncat
2.03/5  rDev 0%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Serving from a 12 oz. longneck.

The pour produced a very light gold colored brew, with small white head and minimal lacing (if any). I tried to get a sense of the nose, but could detect nothing .. I had my nose so far into the glass I thought I would be snorting the stuff, but no aroma was detected. My first taste was much like the last .. very disappointing, in that it had no remarkable taste. A VERY light maltiness, typical of lagers was detected, but where are the hops they talk about in the commercials? This is, indeed, a very light lager. Its a 'light' without the nomenclature. To end on a positive note, I will say that it is, in my opinion, better than 'standard Bud', for whatever that is worth. In my opinion, not worth the extra bucks. They'd be better spent on a Micro .. or even a Pete's Wicked.


cooncat, Jul 10, 2006
Photo of maniac
1.48/5  rDev -27.1%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Appearance was a pale golden color with a frothy white head.
Aroma of lightly sweet grain.
Flavor was barely noticable, just some very light honey and hints of grain.
The boring lack of taste is still better than the horrid taste of some of their other products.

maniac, Jun 27, 2006
Photo of palffyfan
2.45/5  rDev +20.7%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Appearance - Pale yellow with lots of bubbles. Succeeded in forming a third-inch head that looked very soapy.

Smell - Soapy smell...is A-B they trying to copy Coors Light?..Leaves a lot to be desired...

Taste - Budweiser, but with a soapy smell. I'll give Taste a 3 as I did for Bud, but I have to lower the grade on the smell, because everytime you try to take a sip, you get a wiff of soap.

Drinkability - Nothing Select about this brew. Stick with regular Bud if you're a fan of that beer.

palffyfan, Jun 27, 2006
Photo of Sosh
1.73/5  rDev -14.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

This beer made me angry. I wasn't expecting it to be good, I wasn't expecting to like it, but I did expect it to be at least different. I didn't care how, or what exactly was going to be different, but just something that distinguished it from Bud or Bud Light. Unfortunatley, I had no idea what this beer was trying to be. Has anyone ever drank this and thought to his or herself "Wow, this is a new idea." No, this beer is all about marketing, they put the same fucking beer in a different bottle, and I see people everyone ordering this crap.

Sosh, Jun 25, 2006
Budweiser Select from Anheuser-Busch
51 out of 100 based on 1,129 ratings.