Dismiss Notice
Subscribe to BeerAdvocate magazine and get 12 issues / year of fresh beer content delivered to your door each month.

Already subscribe? to manage your subscription.

Bud Light Golden Wheat - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Bud Light Golden WheatBud Light Golden Wheat

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
69
poor

303 Reviews
THE BROS
70
okay

(Read More)
Reviews: 303
Hads: 628
rAvg: 2.92
pDev: 19.86%
Wants: 7
Gots: 78 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
Herbed / Spiced Beer |  4.10% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: JohnGalt1 on 07-28-2009

This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (88) | Events
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Bud Light Golden Wheat Alström Bros
Reviews: 303 | Hads: 628
Photo of TheKingofWichita
2.1/5  rDev -28.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Another Bud Light take off -- hooray!
Pours a golden copper color, small head -- dissipates quickly, no lacing.
Smells sort-of like a wheat beer but more like Bud Light.
Tastes like wheat, with some artificial orange flavor added.
Mouthfeel is very thin and sickly.
Very low drinkability. (290 characters)

Photo of VelvetExtract
2.82/5  rDev -3.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

A-Light and fairly clear . A bit deeper than a normal bud light

S-Smells like an actual wheat beer. Orange peel aroma. Pretty faint but not nearly as bad as I was expecting.

T-A bit of citrus. A very, very mild wheatbeer taste. Not awesome but still, better than expected. Don't love it but shit, its better than a regular bud light.

M-Light. A bunch of carbonation.

D-Like most macros, light and watery. Easy to drink but the bootleg taste gets to you for a while.

Overall, I don't like it but I guess its a step up from the original bud light. Would never ever buy this over a local brew similar in price. (613 characters)

Photo of TMoney2591
2.88/5  rDev -1.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Served in a Chicago Bears shaker pint glass.

Stop #4 on the Swill Tour 2010 Express. It pours a semi-cloudy orange juice topped by nearly a finger of white foam. The nose is a rubbery coriander, as though the seeds came from a fake plant. Seriously. The taste is wheaty, rubbery coriander, just like the smell. Unfortunately, it's more pronounced than in the smell. The body is pretty light, with a light moderate carbonation and a dry finish. Overall, a weak beer, but nothing too bad, especially considering the company we've sampled it in. (543 characters)

Photo of route66pubs
1.76/5  rDev -39.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Pours a light, clear, fizzy yellow with lots of bubbles and a full, white head with no lace and no head retention.

Smells of wheat and mushy instant rice.

Taste of bad, mushy Minute Rice with an ever so slight syrupy citrus note.

Very effervescent, but with a soapy coating.

Crispness is a put off, and syrup-like flavor and feeling are very unpleasant. (357 characters)

Photo of Vdubb86
2.75/5  rDev -5.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Served in a pint glass

Beer #5 in the swill tour it's our reprieve beer

Pours a very cloudy orange color with a slight frothy head. The smell is of a hell of a lot of wheat there are citrus-like orange hints in the back of the nose. This has the aroma of a excessively wheaty hefeweizen. The taste is of bitter malts and heavy ass wheat. The flavors are just way to strong to reasonably enjoy this beer. The mouthfeel is rather gritty due to the floating material in the brew, I'm honestly not sure what's light about this at all. It's an OK beer to drink, I think this will suffice as the only one I ever have. (613 characters)

Photo of BeerNinja007
2.19/5  rDev -25%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 2.5

Code 10156BJ79, served cold in a chilled pint glass. It followed me home with some of the left overs from a party... so no, I did not pay for it.

Clear and very carbonated light yellow-orange brew gives a tiny white layer of fizz. Smells like a macro witbier... coriander and orange... seems like AB's answer to Blue Moon, but the marketing/ styling/ image is totally different, so who knows, I don't really care. Mouthfeel is fizzy and watery. Taste is just very bland, a little adjunct sweetness and maybe some very faint citrus, just a fraction of what was detected in the nose. Finishes with a lingering salty soapy taste.

The smell isn't half bad but everything else is pretty terrible. FAIL. (701 characters)

Photo of tewaris
2.4/5  rDev -17.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

12 oz poured into a funny looking glass. I reviewed the infamous Minnesota "3.2" version. Pours hazy orange with a big head as the results of a vigorous pour; the head didn't stay for long, nor left any lacing.

A: Some orange peel, then the typical adjunct aroma.

T: Bad, with a worse aftertaste.

M: Thin, watery, and carbonated.

D: Bad, because of the bad taste. (367 characters)

Photo of Goliath
2.83/5  rDev -3.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a clear golden color with a one inch bright white head. There is little to no head retention and no lacing left behind.

The aroma is simple. A little bit of pale wheat, and really nothing else.

The taste is not great. A bit of pale wheat gives a touch of grain, and beyond that there's nothing really.

The mouthfeel is thin to medium bodied, a little watery, and decently carbonated.

Drinkability is moderate. It certainly is sessionable due to the low ABV and low flavor profile. I mean, it's roughly equivalent to having a carbonated water with the essence of fruit. The problem is that the flavor profile is so boring I don't think I could find myself drinking several of these in a sitting. (705 characters)

Photo of Lemke10
3.25/5  rDev +11.3%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I bought a 12-pack of this when it was on special at Woodman's in Janesville, WI. It was arounf $9 for the 12-pack.

This beer pours a pale golden color with a decent head of foam but is quickly gone. The taste isn't bad but there's just no girth to the beer. The taste is light obviously almost to a point where you can't describe the taste. A much better beer than say MGD64, but no where good as other wheat beers like blue moon.

It's a nice change of pace, but will get old quickly. (487 characters)

Photo of harpus
3/5  rDev +2.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A - Translucent orange body with a 1/2 inch thick head that lasts for a while before fading to a ring.

S - Citrus, some sweet spice notes.

T - Very crisp and mild. More hops than malt.

M - A good amount of carbonation, not watery like other light beers.

D - This one has a bit more density than other light beers. Still, very drinkable. Better then I expected. (364 characters)

Photo of biboergosum
2.81/5  rDev -3.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

This beer pours a cloudy medium golden orange colour, with one finger of dense sudsy white head, which disperses quickly, leaving a thin band of painted lace around the glass. There is also a bit of sediment being eddied about by the rising effervescence. It smells of coriander and orange peel, and a light generic graininess - wow, truth in advertising. The taste is more coriander, and bitter orange, with a diluted wheat chaff character. The carbonation is a wee bit too high, the body medium weight (!), clean, and crisp. It finishes with diminishing returns, the spice and fruit fading abruptly, leaving a watery memory.

Well, I can't complain about any marketing sleight of hand here - you get coriander, orange, and Bud Light, mixed together. While the fruit and spice hold up their end of the deal, in the end it's still Bud Light underneath, and that contributes immensely to the very tenuous hold on my palate when it's gone. (937 characters)

Photo of mikesgroove
3/5  rDev +2.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

And the bottom of the barrel takes a beating again today, got off early and hit up greens and bilo and grabbed what I could, this should be a fun night. Served cold and poured into my pint glass, consumed on 08/23/2010.

so for some strange reason i actually though this was going to be good, and suprisingly it was not terrible. pours out a golden amber with a head of about two inches of white foam that settles down rather quickly into a thin film of lace.

aroma is loaded with grain and wheat, lots of light bready notes, hints of wet hay, and a light citrus touch. very clean, crisp, with little to know aftertaste here at all, not a terrible beer by any means and really quite sessionable.

this may be the one and only beer from the last couple weeks of going through the bottom i could stomach again. (809 characters)

Photo of LuthersMug
3.01/5  rDev +3.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A - Light copper hue with a just a bit of cloudiness. A 1/2 fizzy head that dissipated. Very little lacing.

S - Hints of the spicy coriander, orange peel that are balanced by the wheat.

T - Wheat and a bit of citrus up front, but followed by a bland watery finish.

M - Good carbonation

D - Good. (299 characters)

Photo of emmasdad
3.05/5  rDev +4.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Joined my wife and her friend at a bar for happy hour, and was presented with choice between this one and regular Bud Light. Having never had it, I gave it a shot. Poured a somewhat hazy golden color, minimal head. Aromas of wheat and a bit of orange. More orange on the palate, somewhat creamy and not overly carbonated. Not bad, but I wouldn't go out of my way for another. (375 characters)

Photo of davidaubrey
4.06/5  rDev +39%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

Poured into a pint glass. The color is orange and the taste is sweet. The coriander balances the fruit flavors well and keeps the malt from allowing the flavor from being too sweet. The only criticism I have is that the carbonation was lacking; for a light beer like this I would expect strong carbonation. That said, for a macro brew & a light-beer: this beer is disappointingly delicious. (390 characters)

Photo of ManuelHerrera
2.55/5  rDev -12.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

I'll be the first to admit that it's hard to review anything with "Budweiser" on the label without being harsh. But here's my best effort!

A: This beer pours a hazy yellow with a quickly-evaporating head.

S: Hints of malts, citrus, and a little banana overtone. I can already tell this beer is trying really hard...

T: Awkwardly tangy to the point of being sour. It's like someone crushed an entire orange into this thing and said "Hey! This beer has flavor! Right...?" Right.

Mouthfeel: Carbonated, light, with a very dry finish. The citrus aftertaste lingers an unpleasantly long time too.

Drinkability: This beer is just okay, definitely trying to please the masses without challenging the palate. (707 characters)

Photo of BeerCon5
2.18/5  rDev -25.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured a clear straw yellow color with average white bubbly head.

The scent is largely of wheat, not much else.

The taste is of overbearing wheat, I was not able to taste anything other than wheat. The wheat tasted sort of "cheap" also.

Light bodied, thin and watery, below avergage carbonation.

I didn't really like too much about this beer, it seemed like the wheat taste was all that was focused on because there was absolutely nothing else. (448 characters)

Photo of puboflyons
2.7/5  rDev -7.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I was served this in a restaurant in Montgomery. Alabama on July 22, 2010 because my menu choices were limited. Overall I would declare that it was btter than my expectations, especially after a few oither reviews. The pour was orange-yellow with no head. The aroma had a touch of wheat, no citrus as promised, but it smelled mainly of adjuncts. The taste had a bit of wheatiness over a thin body with a vague hoppy infusion. (425 characters)

Photo of sbegraft
1/5  rDev -65.8%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Commercials on TV got me I bought a six. Only because they did not sell in single bottles.

very light beer for a wheat could see right through the glass. No lacing, poor head, taste like a bud. What can I say did not taste like a wheat beer at all.

very sad attempt at a wheat beer. Bought a six drank half a glass and dumped the rest out left the rest for some other sorry soul. (381 characters)

Photo of Radome
2.52/5  rDev -13.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A - Golden color with an orange cast. Slightly cloudy, but not opaque. It reminds me of a slightly darker Hoegaarden in appearance, with just a little less cloudiness. The head is thin but lasting and is made up of tiny bubbles. Lots of carbonation activity is visible.

S - Not much aroma at all. I get some wheat and malt, but very faint. No hops apparent. I get a slightly vegetal or skunky smell on the edge of my perception.

T - Taste is not assertive, more like a watered down American wheat style. Initially there is weak-tasting malt and wheat, then some light fruitiness, but too faint to determine if it is from hops or yeast. In the end there is a grainy wheat flavor that provides what little aftertaste there is.

M - Light body, again seeming watered down. Despite the visible bubbles, there is very little CO2 "fizz". No alcohol burn, no hops bitterness.

D - Perhaps as expected, this is a well-made but bland and watery beer. No faults or off-flavors, but also no real flavor to speak of. Drinkable? Yes. An enjoyable beer experience that I would seek out again? Nope. (1,086 characters)

Photo of snaotheus
2.57/5  rDev -12%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

12oz bottle poured into a pint glass

The big surprise here is that it's not terrible...it's just not very good.

Pours a clear golden with small, pale, quickly fading head. Medium carbonation. Smell is sweet and wheaty -- too sweet.

Taste is mild and fairly uninteresting, again a bit too much sweetness. Primarily malt, of course.

Mouthfeel is anlittle thick and sticky. Not Abbas beer for a hot day, but definitely nothing special. (436 characters)

Photo of ChrisCage
3.17/5  rDev +8.6%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 5

Well I'm honored to be the apparent 1st Canadian to be reviewing this beer!

A- I was actually impressed by the look of this beer! There is a thick, although fizzy white head that takes a few minutes to settle into a thin layer over the beer. It is a hazy yellowish color that reminds me of wheat, so I can't tell how carbonated it is. There is some modest lacing clinging to my glass so were off to a good start for a BL product!

S- Very light and honestly not all that appealing, what there is....it has very mild grainy and citrus aromas. Other than that, is it kind of skunked and raw smelling...almost kind of like urine.

T- Fortunately, the taste is a notch above the smell. The first thing I notice is some modest sweetness malt. There is also some mild spice from the coriander. There's also a hint of citrus, but it's not a distinct flavor. No real bitterness on the finish and no lingering flavors on the palate afterward. Expected for a light beer I guess.

M- Thin bodied but surprisingly not the watery feel that I was expecting...just not good enough to call medium bodied. The carbonation is plentiful in a moderate palate scrubbing way. Not the worst texture I've felt but certainly not the best.

D- I will give it this, Bud actually came out with a light beer that has some character. Unlike their BL standard or Lime, this has some modest flavor that doesn't taste like either nothing or artificial garbage. The alcohol is well hidden by the sweetness and it's not filling....I'd have no problem spending an afternoon on the patio enjoying these! (1,567 characters)

Photo of LordAdmNelson
2.7/5  rDev -7.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

I'm not going to totally bash this one, but I really didn't like it all that much. There isn't a whole lot that I could say that would add to any discussion of this beer, but here goes. It is exactly like Bud Light, BUT it has dirty clove and wheaty notes to it. Maybe throw some orange peel in there too. And dial up the color a bit. But that's it. It's an improvement over Bud Light, but that is only because Bud Light is terrible. (433 characters)

Photo of DannyS
3.09/5  rDev +5.8%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Had via bottle.

A - Pours a surprisingly nice looking orange amber with little wheat sediment bits and a half-inch head that actually stayed around till the end. Fascinating.

S - The corny BLARGH odor is in the forefront despite the best efforts of the coriander and citrus. Disappointing.

T - It's...pretty good. The wheaty taste along with the spices do a better job here of masking the out-of-place corn taste. dare I say it's actually...good!? Oh god what's wrong with me.

M - Watery. Fizzy. Whaddya know? it's still a light macrobeer.

D - Regular Bud Light, despite it's claims of being 'not too heavy, not too light' somehow succeeds in being both too heavy and too light at the same time, committing two grievous lies in one. This version, however, does a far better job of mitigating the limitations of light macrobrew.

Overall - Not nearly as atrocious as its older sibling, this golden wheat variation is an acceptable alternative that will likely spring up everywhere only the regular BMC bilge is served, like a mediocre life preserver in a sea of piss.

Though honestly, this beer is another sad example of the macrobrew companies looking at the popularity of good honest craft beer and capitalizing on the rabble's inability to tell the difference. we should probably reject this beer on general principle. (1,326 characters)

Photo of bobdelt
2.37/5  rDev -18.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

Honestly.... is there even wheat in here? Or was it spiced to be like a wit through adjuncts? Yes I prefer this over bud light, although it's not a light beer, get a sams light.

Thru spice and flavoring it can fool you into a wheat beer. However, it just doesnt feel right to me. Similar to Sam Summer, so much spice and adjuncts that you question if there is any wheat at all. And I know what a wit bier is, this isnt it.

For example, have you ever seen a true wheat beer leave such little head? It's a drinkable alternative to bud light... I actually do wish I could find it in cans, because itll be cheaper, and great for drinking while mowing the lawn and stuff... (671 characters)

Bud Light Golden Wheat from Anheuser-Busch
69 out of 100 based on 303 ratings.