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!

Bud Light Golden Wheat - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Bud Light Golden WheatBud Light Golden Wheat

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

600 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 600
Reviews: 304
rAvg: 2.67
pDev: 26.22%
Wants: 5
Gots: 31 | 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:
This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: JohnGalt1 on 07-28-2009)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Bud Light Golden Wheat Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 526-550 | 551-575 | 576-600  | next › last »
Ratings: 600 | Reviews: 304 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of MrHurmateeowish
3.65/5  rDev +36.7%

12oz bottle obtained at Hannaford in Derry. Pours a hazy golden body with a thin film of short-lived off-white head. Smells faintly of lemmon grass, grapefruit, and spice. Tastes (surprisingly) strongly of orange and lemon, with some spice to round out the flavor, and a clean finish. Light-bodied with ample carbonation. I'm actually impressed! This is much better than I was expecting and I'd take this over a regular Bud Light (BL?) any day of the week.

MrHurmateeowish, Oct 02, 2009
Photo of Wetpaperbag
3.55/5  rDev +33%

I saw this for sale in the store for 5 bucks a six pack, so thought I would pick it up and give it a try.

A- Looks hazy with a slight orange tint. The head is almost non existent.

S- A wheaty smell with a slight whiff of orange, but not a whole lot.

T- The taste isn't too bad. It is heavy on the wheat with a touch of orange. Other then that there isn't much else to say.

M- Good feel in the mouth, average.

D- Easy to drink for sure.

Overall I'm not sure what they are doing here. Is it Bud Light brewed with wheat and orange? Did they use ale yeast or lager yeast? So I'm not too sure what their main goal was, a light hefe? Weird.

Wetpaperbag, Sep 30, 2009
Photo of DijonKetchup
2.33/5  rDev -12.7%

Despite the frequent BMC bashing here, I was looking forward to trying the newest creation out of the AB labratory. I wasn't expecting to see this in the stores, but apparantly it was released in quite a few markets.

Pours a nice, light, wheaty looking hue, very similar to a (lighter) german hef, decent enough foam build and retention. Slowly dissipates, though.

Smells wheaty, a bit of the spices come through, but barely. Here would have been a nice area to "shine", if the aroma (oranges?) were a bit stronger. I was expecting - no, hoping - that it might smell a bit sweeter, inticing me to taste the AB nectar.

First sip, then it becomes apparent - you realize that there is only so much taste that can be expected from an AB 4.1% alcohol beer. It's just plain. Actually due to the high carbonation and the wheat additive (or something else to keep the yeast/protein in suspension) the mouthfeel is somewhat decent. But it just tastes normal, almost home-brewish. The bittering (coriander) actually takes away from this beer, as it persists much too long. Despite being a spiced light product, I do not find this as "drinkable" as I had hoped. Maybe it's just me.

Light citurs, the coriander, malty, earthy, but not that refreshing for some reason or another. Watered-down Shock Top?

Needless to say, I should have expected this. Much ado about nothing. Meh. Empty. Avoid this brew. I predict "flop" and by this time next year, it will no longer be found on the shelves. Sad that this will be taking up shelf space for the next 10-12 months. And as far as the October release is concerned, they should have sat on this product until next April/May, as I have no intentions of looking for a lawnmover beer in November. Someone either fell asleep in marketing, or InBev was anxious to release the next BL fruit/spice beer and just couldn't wait.

One thing is spot-on, though: This really has all the taste I would expect from a Bud Light product-line extension.

DijonKetchup, Sep 30, 2009
Photo of Spineypanda
3.35/5  rDev +25.5%

Bud Light Golden Wheat is not a half bad beer.

Even though the name scared me a little at first, it seems that Budweiser is attempting once again to create something "new".

The color is just about what one would expect and it is a little cloudy. The smell has hints of citrus.

This beer has an interesting combination of wheat beer (that is slightly watered down and not as prominent) and Budweiser's classic brew. The combo actually works well and I could see this being a big seller among those who do not like strong wheat beers, but still enjoy the flavor.

Spineypanda, Sep 29, 2009
Photo of alleykatking
2.8/5  rDev +4.9%

Poured from a 12oz bottle gotten from my AB rep.

A- Pours a hazy darker golden orange which lightens up when held to the light. Kind of a hard pour (I sneezed) results in a 3 finger murky eggshell white head that dies pretty fast. Soapy lacing on the sides which tends to stick for a second and begin to fall. Overall this is a good looking beer...kind of surprised to be honest.

S- This is where the beer might begin to go downhill. I get a distinct corny Bud Light hint coming off this beer. This is mixed in with a stronger wheat (bread dough) smell. It covers it up pretty good. Also there is a hint of citrus to this and something else I can't put my finger on...must be some other spice but it is so faint it doesn't even matter. This beer might not have the biggest of aroma it does have a slight one and it's not of an typical Bud Light product.

T- Well this is where the beer falls off big time. Upon first sip I was shocked as there was really no big wheat taste to it at all. There was a lager taste with it being super fizzy. I get hints of wheat here and there on the tail end of the beer but from the first part of the sip it is more or less just a watery version of maybe Bud but not really Bud Light. There is a slight citrus flavor in the tail end of this too. This has turned out to be a very watery and bland tasting beer. I knew there was going to be a catch somewhere!

M- Light mouthfeel. Carbonation is too much for the beer but falls in line with the rest of their product line. Watery mouthfeel while on the palate makes it a easy drinker. Slight wheaty taste is left on the palate once the beer goes down. A light wheat aftertaste is present as well.

D- This is a very drinkable beer. While this is better than well most Bud products I have had this still falls short of their intended mark I would hope. This is a very easy sipper when going out to the bar with friends or just relaxing on a warm day. Although I know this is not aimed toward me I might have one in a bar if this is the closet thing they have to a craft beer.

alleykatking, Sep 29, 2009
Photo of ruckus232
3.55/5  rDev +33%

12 Ounce brown bottle poured into a pint glass

Appearance: Dark orange in color with a slightly cloudiness to it and about 1 finger of foamy head

Smell: Orange smell more then any other citrus smell with a nice sweet scent as well

Taste: There is the fruitiness of the orange flavor along with some lemon/coriander but less of that. There is a grainy taste as well that I am guessing is the wheat but I am not sure. The grainy taste is something I am not used to in a Wheat beer but I suppose that is why it is classified not as a wheat but as a spiced/herbed beer.

Note: I enjoy this beer but I have to say I am a bigger fan of Bud products when it comes to macros. Even so it is a little lacking in flavor but still is surprisingly good.

ruckus232, Sep 27, 2009
Photo of hooliganlife
1.85/5  rDev -30.7%

free on tap at grants farm.

pour was deep murky copper with a slight orange hue. nice fluffy white head

smell wasnt too bad, there was a bit of wheat with a touch of citrus, mainly lime.

VERY slight wheat up front with an artificial lime funk that made its artificial self known. it was overpowering in that it ruined the beer. there was not much of a wheat presence here at all, it was light and slightly bitter.

carbonation was actually pretty decent and it had a nice body.

i had two glasses, the first was just terrible. i figured maybe they had bud light light lime running through this line first and they didnt clean it. i stopped drinking that glass and went for another from the other tap. it was not as bad but there was still a fake lime flavor. i know the kewl thing with that crowd is a lemon slice in the glass so i am curious if AB (piss off inbev) added this citrus flavor to compensate for it. terrible decision.

hooliganlife, Sep 27, 2009
Photo of BeanBone
1.85/5  rDev -30.7%

Appearance: A nicely hazy, golden-amber body with a big white head that features decent retention and lacing. Lo an behold, there's even some sediment at the bottom of the bottle. Not much wrong with the way it looks.

Aroma: A neutered wheat body with some definite notes of citrus and spice. It's a little thin, but that's hardly a surprise.

Taste: Things quickly go south in the flavor profile--there's just not much here. It's predictably crisp, with mild citrus and just a hint of mixed spice. In a bizarre fashion, wheat only really shows up in the tangy aftertaste, and what's left of the malt is extremely watered down. At times, you can't find much of a malt backbone at all--and with the low (or totally absent) hop presence, all you're left with is a little citrus.

Mouthfeel: Medium-light bodied with sharp carbonation and a crisp, clean finish.

Drinkability: Clearly, this beer was built for rapid consumption, and it delivers on that promise.

Verdict: Golden Wheat is almost totally devoid of flavor--imagine drinking a Witbier while you have an extreme cold--which is, frankly, a better result than I had feared. Here's hoping it somehow helps push some more people into exploring the world of beer.

BeanBone, Sep 27, 2009
Photo of drunkboxer1
3.03/5  rDev +13.5%

Out of a pilsner glass. Bright hazy orange color. Doesn't look anything like Bud Light. Smells mainly like citrus. I guess the orange peel they added is drowning out what else is in there, besides maybe a bit of grassy smells from the coriander. Tastes well enough (nearly all spices, fairly refreshing), but the body is really light. I guess it is a light lager afterall, but still the way it presents itself I was expectly a real witbier. Still, not bad for what it is I guess.

drunkboxer1, Sep 26, 2009
Photo of OlRasputin989
3.3/5  rDev +23.6%

Thanks to Mr. T's Riverside in Cardwell, Missouri for the free sample!

A: An old gold color brew with a thin, foamy head. Pretty hazy if you pour in the sediment.

S: Orange peel, coriander, spices, and golden wheat bread.

T: Bready orange peel and spice up front with a dried orange peel, grain, and crisp hops finish

M: Light body with a decent fizz. finishes off dry and a little chalky.

Overall, I wasn't expecting much with this beer, and I don't believe many other fans of craft brews will. The main problem being that the Bud Light name is attached to it. I would be more apt to buy this beer if it was sold as Budweiser Golden Wheat. But for the beer, it wasn't too bad. Not cloying, decent flavors, and good drinkability. Would prefer this over regular Bud Light anyday.

OlRasputin989, Sep 26, 2009
Photo of mwa423
2.83/5  rDev +6%

I'm a sucker for new beers so when I saw this I decided to buy one.

A - hazy amber color and slightly cloudy.

S- fruity wheat flavor, similar to leine's

T - all this tastes like is a marriage of bud light and sunset wheat. Not at all that good. Better than bud but not much.

M/D - All the "drinkability" of bud light

mwa423, Sep 25, 2009
Photo of MikeInIowa
2.8/5  rDev +4.9%

Allow me to preface this review by stating that I am not a light beer basher. In fact, I am a life-long fan of the A-B line, and Budweiser Light (as it was originally entitled) has been my go-to beer for 25 years. And so I believe myself qualified to make the following review.

Now then, let's get into it. And the way I will get into it is by offering a little rhetoric here in the beginning: What in the name of the late Nobel Prize Winner Norman Borlaug (he, the developer of a hearty variety of wheat) does A-B think that they are doing by labelling a new type of Bud Light as "Golden Wheat?"

Ok. I get it. They're still tapping or trying to tap into the craft market. Just not with this offering.

The label boasts "Wheat" and "Coriander with Citrus peels." This is isn't false advertising because there are slight hints of these flavors and aromas in there. But, they are so slight, in fact, that the beer is scarcely different in taste than its root beverage from whence it sprang.

Ok. It's a light beer. And some body might advise me that I was setting my expectations too high because one can only rise so high due to the fact that light beer carries with it a low ceiling of expectation anyway. No, I wasn't overly hopeful . It is called "Wheat" and therefore carries with it the presumption that, at a minimum, it would bear at least some resemblance to the wheat style. However, aside from the select similarities mentioned above, Bud Light Golden Wheat looked little hazier than a lager or pils and was devoid of a sustainable crown of foam. It had the ultra thin mouthfeel of a light beer as well. The one saving grace for this libation is that it's easily drinkable (if your standards for wheat beers is not too high).

In most cases, I prefer St. Louis to Kansas City. Cardinals over Royals (embers still smolder over the 1985 World Series bad call) and Rams over Chiefs. But if A-B wants a good wheat beer in St. Louis, they should go to KC and buy some Boulevard because they are doing it right. Bud Light Golden Wheat: Not so much. I will be really surprised if this label makes it past the trial period (without several tweaks, that is).

With respect for beer,

Mike in Iowa

MikeInIowa, Sep 25, 2009
Photo of secondtooth
1.88/5  rDev -29.6%

A certain pizza company is wise to proclaim the benefits of "better ingredients", and I believe that applies to beer, as well. This one has a decent cloudy wheat appearance, but first taste reveals a soft, fuzzy, fizzy mix of coriander, citrus, and...something artificial? Maybe metallic. I dunno. I do know that this one tastes one-dimensional and cheap. Absolutely horrid.

secondtooth, Sep 24, 2009
Photo of scottyshades
3.13/5  rDev +17.2%

Ok, good attempt by AB, but ALL of their beers are made to appeal to light beer drinkers or people concerned about calorie intake. If they added more body and flavor, this would be excellent...

A: Pours an obviously unfiltered golden/light amber color that produces a pretty nice three finger head that looks really fizzly, but somehow it retains for about a minute. The white cap remains around the beer throughout, leaving no lacing along the pint glass.

S: Not too bad at all. Definitely around average, but it is still more than corn and metal. A slight spice to it; clove, coriander, citrus peel, bubblegum and spearmint! Nice work AB! Really captured the Belgian yeast flavors (whether they are a result of Belgian yeast or artificial stuff is beyond me, but still nailed it). The problem is that it is a little faint.

T: Spicy, but very limited because it is extremely watered down. If it had more substance and body, this would be one of the better witbiers that I've had, but it doesn't, so its not... Big miss on this one, really skimped on the flavor. The notes that I do pick up are pretty quality; bubblegum!, wheat, spearmint, and clove+ some other spices (maybe nutmeg?)

MF/D: Not as fizzly as some of the other AB brews, or witbiers. Light in body (which sucks), and a short wheat finish.

Overall, not as bad as I had expected. Give this beer a chance and you might find SOME complexity in it like I did, but really light and lacks any solid substance. Good try though.

scottyshades, Sep 23, 2009
Photo of rtratzlaff
2.68/5  rDev +0.4%

Pours a hazy orange to amber body with a head that rises welll but fades too quickly.

Aromas or coriander and citrus peel with a slight wheat character

Taste is wheaty malt with a slight citrus character that fades to near nothing.

Mouthfeel is fizzy and light but decent with warms. Not bad for the style though.

Drinkability: sure. Staying power, probably not.

This is no witbier.

rtratzlaff, Sep 22, 2009
Photo of hustlesworth
2.95/5  rDev +10.5%

given to me by my AB distributor as a sample.

A- bright cloudy apricot orange amber, some thin yeast at the bottom of the bottle. foam is white with a yellowish tint, light and familiar looking, it bubbles away leaving some nice little spots of lace. settles to a dense creamy disk and holds strong.

S- prominent coriander is actually quite pleasant and reminiscent of coconut. VERY reminiscent of coconut, and i like that. still with that orange/spice character goin on but without the cilantro soapiness that can often accompany coriander spiced beers. so far so good. im guessing the citrus peels are a mix of lemon and orange as the citrus aroma has no sharpness and very little acidity. underneath all the spice lies a hint of wheat and grassy hop.

T- destined to fall short somewhere, the coconut coriander comes through brightly in the flavor but gives way to a bland cardboard diluted faint citrus water type flavor that is not-so-nice on the back of my tongue. hop bitterness is much stronger than in bud light or bud and seems odd, unnatural, and out of place, grassy, and stale. subtle cake sweetness near the finish, becoming dry with white bread flavor.

MF- feel is soft and somewhat plush. usually for me flavor and feeling kinda coincide with wheat beers but this one has no substantial taste but an ok feel. it rolls on the tongue, slippery and delicately carbonated, with no residual stickiness.

D- this is a tough call. upon contemplation, i keep thinking maybe they should have went for a german wheat beer? perhaps acquiring a good strain of yeast would not have been as cost effective as spicing the beer in the belgian style? maybe wits are more in demand than hefes or maybe there is a specific target market that is being aimed at here? i know that in my bar the sale of witbiers or any spiced wheats PALE in comparison to the sale of hefeweizen (franz) so it would only seem sensible to me... but that's only one bar, i have no idea what's going on across the country. at any rate- not bad, could taste better but we as americans love tasteless beer, among other things. low abv, overall mildness, and decent aroma and feel are enough to keep me on for a few.

hustlesworth, Sep 22, 2009
Photo of Docer
3.38/5  rDev +26.6%

Buddy at The BeerMongers shop threw this in as an extra for me, and said he did a blind tasting with this and some other highly respected craft beer.. results were basically a tie to make a long story short. Here we go...

- Florescent orange and yellow brew... very slight haze.. some quick sparkling head down to nothing in the glass.

- Pleasant balanced smell of wheat, some grain, bit of light alcohol... and real orange... lemon.. citrus zest and herb. Not bad at all in all seriousness.

- Bit grainy and watery.. but overall light and refreshing... some small amount of citrus zest and herb... breadiness... overall not as good as the smell...

- Watery... not very strong, so no real heavy sticky or chewy effect.

- Very drinkable... would be easy to just kill a quick 6-pack of this. Credit to a big firm trying to make something good. I see potential with it.

Docer, Sep 19, 2009
Photo of Bitterbill
2.95/5  rDev +10.5%

Thanks to Mike at Poplar Wine & Spirits for the free sample.

A nice cloudy orange yellow colour with a +1 finger head of foam. This is a Bud Light variation? From the the appearance, I would have never guessed. It is a very nice looking brew.

The smell has some decent wheat notes along with some some bitter tones from hops? and *that* smell of Bud Light. Not a terribly bad nose...

The taste has a light presence of wheat, some slight sweetness, a little bit of fruity tartness and finishes with, first, some bitterness then drops off to a very neutral taste that is very regular Bud Light like. It was ok in the taste department until the finish.

Light bodied with medium carbonation. Head retention is good and it has a little bit of lacing.

Drinkability? This one bottle will do me fine and I won't be buying any when it shows up on the retail level but not bad for what it is.

Bitterbill, Sep 04, 2009
Photo of Indulgence
3/5  rDev +12.4%

Got this as a sample from the distributor... I'm going to make this short and say I wasn't expecting much... something like BLL but with oranges and spices. I'm kind a pleasantly surprised. It actually looks interesting in the glass and hazy, unfiltered orangish amber, carries an intense head, but settles down quickly, but not as quickly as the regular AB lineup... I detect no lacing on the glass. The beer wins on color alone. Aromas have subtle orange, cinnamon and coriander... I don't detect wheat yet, until the beer warms up a little later, then you can detect some of that classic rotten Bud backbone... but if you drink it fast enough, and you will... you won't notice. Easy to down and could appeal to some folks, but I'm too dedicated supporting the craft beer industry, not the big guys.

Indulgence, Sep 03, 2009
Photo of everetends
2.65/5  rDev -0.7%

12 oz bottle a friend of mine brought me as a peace offering. He boosted them from work and that didn't help considering the reason he needed to make peace. Heard this was coming out, glad I didn't have to pay to try it. Served up in a standard pint glass.

A: Well . . . it pours a golden wheat color. Has a macro golden brown with just a light amount of haze to it to squeeze this int a wheat appearance. Held to the light it absolutely has that macro golden color. Tons of carbonation in the look. Got almost a finger of soapy white head, but it doesn't even try to stick around. Gone almost as quickly as it appeared. Nothing on the glass by way of lace. Its underwhelming.

S: Yeah, not a whole lot going on here. Getting a touch of wheat, just barely brings that grains aroma. Being nice I smell a touch of citrus, but I may be reaching. The majority of what I am getting is that very familiar macro smell of nothingness. Not much to talk about . . . at all.

T: Just a light amount of wheat a touch of that wheat beer fruitiness coming across. Its at the very start of each sip and it quickly disappears. Then you get that typical macro sweetness and blandness. This seriously tastes like a watered down Blue Moon. Don't know why someone would be into it but whatever.

M: Light bodied which was of absolutely no suprise whatsoever. Very high carbonation keeps this beer crisp and easy on the way down. ABV is nonexistant. This beer is incredibly clean, leaving absolutely no aftertaste.

D: Well what we have here is what tastes like a 1/3 glass of Blue Moon filled up with Bud Light. Its very thin, very heavily carbonated, and pretty easy drinking. It does help that this really doesn't have much of a taste or nose. Its like drinking a macro . . . or water. Whichever you prefer. Its not terrible, but its not all that good either.

everetends, Sep 02, 2009
Photo of biggred1
2.33/5  rDev -12.7%

Hazed golden with a decent foamy white head that leaves scraps of lace behind on the glass. The nose has a strong metallic note with faint citrus peel and wheat malt. The flavors mirror the nose with a bit of metallic sourness, spice and citrus. The mouthfeel is borderline watery with medium carbonation. While not completely undrinkable BLGW is definately below average for the style. I'm not 100% sure what the point of this beer is or what consumer will be targeted when it hits the market, I would bet the same folks who buy Bud lime will buy this one.

biggred1, Aug 30, 2009
Photo of bashiba
3.2/5  rDev +19.9%

Poured a dark golden yellow with a decent thick white head, some minor lacing.

The smell was light and grassy with a bit of sour funkyness.

Has a bit of a coppery metalic twing to it with a nice bit of spicy black pepper in the finish with some minor citrus notes as well.

The mouthfeel has good carbonation with a good crisp finish.

Overall not to bad, one of the better mass produced AB offerings.

bashiba, Aug 27, 2009
Photo of Blakaeris
3.33/5  rDev +24.7%

Poured hazy dark yellow, head is thick and frothy.

Aroma is sour and has a definite vegetal aspect.

Taste is initially quite metallic, a touch of citrus with a strong peppery aspect. Minerally and crisp. Finish lingers with lemon grass and a bit of orange peel bitterness.

Mouthfeel is light bodied.

Overall, a crisp lager with a surprising amount of pepper. Smooth and drinkable.

Blakaeris, Aug 23, 2009
Photo of brownbeer
2.65/5  rDev -0.7%

Exactly what it says it is: but light wheat with citrus peel and coriander.

Not much nose, a little spice. The flavor is the same, not offensive but hard to taste.

The finish is over before it starts.

I'm not really sure if this is Shock-tops nephew or what but I could see some Bud light drinkers getting used to it. It makes Blue Moon seem ballsy.

brownbeer, Jul 29, 2009
Photo of JohnGalt1
3.2/5  rDev +19.9%

An Idahoan adding an Anheuser-Busch product... I'm as surprised as you are.... A work buddy knows I'm into good beer and gifted me 2 of these bottles... He lives next door to a local distributor big wig and Randy decided he needed to give me a couple of these because he needed a ride home Sunday night before he went on vacation... badass!!

Edit 1: Despite my less than stellar review of this beer, I honestly expect that BA's are gonna give this one a fair shake and my review will ultimately be on the low end of the spectrum.

Poured into a clean and dry shaped SA glass... 1 finger head foams up and drops back sorta slowly... the beer itself is as the label says... sorta pale orange/deep gold with a thick haze to it... no real lace.. and the cap is lite but persistent.

The nose has the advertised lite citrus peel and even less (but present) coriander .. a sorta musty grainy element separates this one from a traditional Wit almost out of the gate.. none of the yeasty components expected from anything using a Belgian Wit yeast... Come on... AB certainly has the facilities to use different yeast strains... someone at least needs to try a bit.

Funny.. I expected more from this from the nose.. the flavors are sorta shallow throughout.. lite malty sweetness has some pronounced "wheaty" flavors with just an edge of citrus and again much less coriander.. the maltiness has a sorta soggy darker bread element in my mind.. the flavors are pretty flat.. I was hoping for a slightly sour yeasty element.

The body is still light but lends itself up a notch or two by a lighter than expected carbonation.. and I swear all the yeast poured into the glass makes it a bit thicker...

I am honestly a little surprised by this one... I did have the Bud Light Lime a time or three after friends leave them in the fridge.... and this is significantly better than the BLL.. but overall, nothing I would ever buy again at a store... maybe a bar if it is the only thing that looked refreshing on a very hot day... however, I would never scoff if I happened upon a bottle... It's by no means a traditional Wit.... but it's still an okay beer and pretty damn drinkable while I'm doing some LNLW (late night lawn watering :-)

Edit 2: looking online.. this one isn't going to be released until early October... and with a $30,000,000 marketing campaign... Jesus Christ.. A tiny fraction of that and I'll tell you this should have been released in late May... These type of brews are summer beers, fishing, barbecuing, lawn mowing, Etc...

Thanks again Randy.. Much appreciated.

JohnGalt1, Jul 28, 2009
« first ‹ prev | 526-550 | 551-575 | 576-600  | next › last »
Bud Light Golden Wheat from Anheuser-Busch
63 out of 100 based on 600 ratings.