Budweiser - Anheuser-Busch
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 4,603 | Reviews: 1,447 | Display Reviews Only:
3.68/5 rDev +57.9%
This is truly the Rodney Dangerfield of brews!It gets no respect. In fact, it is a decent thirst quencher that is ok for a night in the sports bar or when you are low on funds! It pours a nice clear yellow, it has no scent to speak of, it is not offensive to the taste being very neutral and has no aftertaste. Mouthfeel is sodalike, pleasant.
09-18-2011 22:32:19 | More by CaptJackHarkness
1.65/5 rDev -29.2%
Budweiser pours a clear pale yellow with on finger head that vanishes quickly, with no lacing to speak of. I doesn't really have too much of a smell. At most a touch of grain in the nose. This beer is just offensive tasting to me. I have to say this is the most unpleasant of the macro beers. The others are light enough to be non offensive, this one sits poorly. It has a similar mouthfeel to seltzer water with slightly less carbonation. This is a beer I would not even crack open in an emergency. I find it strange that with so little flavor, I still find it so offensive.
09-16-2011 18:58:04 | More by FunkyFibes
1.93/5 rDev -17.2%
355ml can poured into a 16oz pint glass.
A - One finger of fizzy white head. No retention. Pale golden yellow.
S - Musty, stale grains. Kind of like cardboard. Gross.
T - Adjunct grains. Cleaner than I expected. Very bland still.
M - Grossly over-carbonated. Thin, watery body.
D - The king of beers?
09-16-2011 06:15:02 | More by Converge
3.9/5 rDev +67.4%
I have to say, I was biased against Bud and other american adjuncts for awhile. But lately I have come full circle. I just recognize the value in these brews lately. They are refreshing, light, and inexpensive, and accompany a football game quite nicely. Don't get me wrong, I would choose any Sam Adams beer over this. But I can't hate this beer, for the price I think it's pretty darn good.
09-11-2011 20:15:06 | More by CS1971
2.83/5 rDev +21.5%
We've all drank it, and I'm sure, had mixed feelings. In my opinion its not as bad as everyone says. For a macro lager made for mass consumption it has more flavor than one should expect. Typical appearance for a lager and a distinct pretzel flavor. The mouth-feel is crisp and refreshing which is it's best quality. I'm not arguing that its a great beer, just good for what it is.
09-10-2011 20:19:32 | More by LAMAGS
1.83/5 rDev -21.5%
at barneys beanery you cant beat the $3.00 budweiser on tap special. in all reality i prefer this lager over heavyweights as heineken. pours golden yellow slight lace only knock on this domestic is the taste. enjoy it much better from tap than from a can or a bottle.
09-08-2011 17:46:47 | More by ikantspel
2.9/5 rDev +24.5%
"Make way, make way for the King of beers"! I'm not sure how they came to that conclusion but I'm willing to let it slide if the beer is decent. Well I've heard a lot about "Bud", some things good, most things bad, but I'm going to put the blinders on and give it a hit and tell you exactly what I find.
Poured from a 330ml bottle into a 500ml Stein.
A: Clear yellow (almost high-vis!) body with a 3cm white head (I did a bit of a hard pour), that reduced fairly quickly to a thin covering.
S: There's a strong starch aroma along with sweet grain and a note of vegetable scraps. No hops could be detected.
T: A clean and crisp grain driven lager. Quite bland, but generally inoffensive (which is more than I can say for the Aussie macro lagers). The finish is slightly dry with hardly any hop bitterness. The after-taste is a little bit sour.
M: Mid to low carbonation with a watery body.
D: I'm not quite sure why Americans hate this beer so much... they obviously haven't been to or tried Australian lagers, which have all manner of crap going on. Overall this beer is bland and inoffensive, good if your taste buds need a rest but otherwise not something I would drink on a daily basis. "King of beers"? I think not, however you could do worse... much, much worse... *cough*VB*cough*.
Food match: Not much out there that wouldn't completely overpower the taste of this beer... light fare it is then: grilled chicken, with a green salad and a light dressing (light in flavour that is).
09-08-2011 09:24:48 | More by doktorhops
2.42/5 rDev +3.9%
Ok. So i'm not going to shit all over Budweiser because when it comes down to it, it is my favorite cheap beer. I must say that if I'm picking up a 30-rack for a party I always lean towards the good ol' Bud diesels over Natty or Coors; however, that is not to say that this is a particularly good beer. If i had to give it an adjective, I would say that it is a bearable beer. Far from the best, but not quite at the bottom of the pack.
09-07-2011 22:34:19 | More by tajiandemello
1.95/5 rDev -16.3%
"King of Beers" eh? I call bull$hit! Poured from a 12 oz bottle into a regular lager glass. Extremely pale. Even more pale than Rolling Rock which claims to be 'extra pale'. Poured pretty aggressively, causing a 1 inch head to show up, but it fizzled away immediately. Smell was almost nothing except maybe some grain. I couldn't smell any of the 'choicest hops' or 'best barley malt' it claimed to have on the bottle. Taste was almost nothing except maybe some grain and grassiness. There's nothing horrible about it. If your goal is to get drunk, you can slam some Budweiser pretty easy. No nasty aftertaste. So it avoids getting an F.
09-06-2011 06:03:14 | More by jeffbrister
4.4/5 rDev +88.8%
A lot of people say to me, "Come now FootballFan15, your favorite beer is Budweiser, how can your opinion be valid?" Well, the truth is that while Budweiser is a very good lager, I Can't claim it to be my favorite or say that it doesn't have any imperfections.
Initial impressions of this beer are always positive, despite its reputation, and I think that is with good reason. When poured from its very-well designed can (or bottle...if that is your thing...) it makes an impressive fizzy display in a glass or mug and has an attractive head. Anheuser-Busch is to be commended for brewing such an attractive beer.
The taste, admittedly, is where the problem is found (if, indeed, there is a problem with Budweiser). I find the flavor of Budweiser to be a bit strong, particularly compared to its superior sister brew, Bud Light. Still, Budweiser is not a beer I would turn my nose up at ever. If anything, perhaps the flavor is TO GOOD. Once Budweiser assaults my palette with its own irresistible charm, I find that it dilutes the flavor of foods that I enjoy with Bud Light such as hot dogs, chili cheese fries, and cheddar and sour cream ruffles.
Due to its affect on your palette, I recommend reserving this beer for times when you're specifically only going to be enjoying beer (without food) or after a meal has been consumed. Bud Light may be the superior beverage to consume with food but Budweiser is a delicious treat all on its own. I enthusiastically recommend this beer to all of my friends and suggest it here too. Despite its faults, after just one sip, you'll see why Budweiser is America's premier beer.
09-06-2011 02:04:21 | More by FootballFan15
4.18/5 rDev +79.4%
12oz can, poured into a pint glass.
Appearance: Very pale straw color and a white frothy head that doesn't last.
Aroma: Grainy with a very low hop aroma, almost floral with green apple.
Taste: Crisp and dry. Low hop bitterness and sweetness from more detectable malts.
Mouthfeel: Light body and highly carbonated.
Overall: A little more robust than Bud Light. Very light and refreshing beer. Fits the guidelines.
09-02-2011 03:06:15 | More by hophunter
2.42/5 rDev +3.9%
Personally, I've helped polish off several cases of Budweiser, and I must admit, if this was the only beer left in the world, I would still help polish off some more.
The appearance of Bud is about what you'd expect, golden with bubbles and some head. Honestly, I've never really cared for the smell of Budweiser. It kind of reminds me of funk, but not overwhelmingly so. Depending on how long the beer has been in the holding vessel, the taste can be any where from acceptable to bad. If its fresh, expect the lager taste of malt and hop.
All in all, I feel that Budweiser deserves its spot in the convenient store cooler. When you're kicking it with your buds and need something readily available to get wasted on, Budweiser would be a solid choice.
08-31-2011 00:06:26 | More by FUNKPhD
1.25/5 rDev -46.4%
Not a slam but definitely avoid this beer! I don't know why there is so much popularity of it. Maybe mine was skunked or a bad batch but this was horrible at best. The look is a typical American Lager look. Taste and mouthfeel were absolutely horrid. Overall avoid this beer and go for some Coke instead.
08-30-2011 19:47:02 | More by theRooster90
2.98/5 rDev +27.9%
OK, I've put off this one for long enough. This is the Canadian version, though I doubt the AB knack for flavour consistency in their beers stops at national borders. Single tallboy can; pours that familiar pale straw colour topped with a lofty two-finger bone white head. Streams of bubbles zip their way to the surface. The head is mostly gone within a minute, leaving behind a thin cap. The smell is almost undetectable but I'm not entirely sure that's a bad thing. Some rice adjunct, but pretty clean-smelling I guess. Tap water also usually smells pretty clean though.
This is a prototypical adjunct lager. Rice adjunct and grainy, diluted barley malts are basically the only flavours. Sorry but I can't find any hops here, although the can advertises their existence. Absolutely clean-tasting, with almost no aftertaste. Thin, watery mouthfeel with heavy soda-pop carbonation. So far this review probably hasn't seemed very favourable from an unbiased observer's perspective, but to be fair this stuff is perfectly drinkable. Maybe a little bloaty, but it's not that awful.
Caveat: I always rate to style, and for an adjunct lager, this really isn't that bad; it is closer to completely average. A little lighter on flavour than its Canadian competitors, but it probably makes up for this in drinkability. Honestly though, the only reason I bought this was to review it, and I'll probably never buy Bud again.
08-26-2011 04:39:41 | More by thehyperduck
2.63/5 rDev +12.9%
I don't know why I'm bothing to tackle these adjunct lagers, but here I am doing it.
I will say that Budweiser is my favorite of the major American names (Bud, Coors, Miller), but obviously that isn't saying much. I can deal with having these from time to time, especially if my options are Bud and Bud Light (although water would do too, or soda). Sometimes you just want an unassuming, light, no frills beer. Sometimes.
08-26-2011 04:15:02 | More by TheRealBigC
2.9/5 rDev +24.5%
Time to review one of the American "big three". This one has a particularly bad reputation amongst beer connoisseurs. Coming from Australia myself, I am most curious to see how this stacks up with our truly dreadful macro lagers.
A- So far, not bad. It's just a standard lager look with a head that stays around longer than expected. Meh. Seen better, seen worse.
S- Well, straight away the adjucts hit my nose. Rice and starch. At least this has a smell, as opposed to say... Carlton cold.
T- The absolute worst I can say about this is it doesn't have much going on. That's it. Despite what people seem to be saying, it doesn't actually taste bad. It is albeit quite bland and uninteresting. Simply, this is just a (hugely) typical adjuncty taste.
T- Sure it's a bit thin, so what? I expected nothing less from a beer in this style. It's pretty fizzy and a little unsettling but nothing bad in all honesty.
O- Oh you Americans, stop whining please! Be thankful that at least you have this en masse when you could have one of our shitty beers.
08-22-2011 12:36:01 | More by aeolianshredhead
2.65/5 rDev +13.7%
Well.. after going through plenty of good beers, someone dropped off a six pack and well, why not give this a shot. Hey it's here can't hurt having now reviewed some other adjuncts. Let's see how well this stands up poured into a nonic.
Appearance is a red pull tab with a crown (nice cosmetic touch), white two finger head extremely soapy but falling normally. Body color is crystal clear straw and very large carbonation bubbles. Body color is very weak.
Smell is dry malt, some sweetness, but also a little solvent. Very wet smelling with a mild hop.
Taste is, fairly sweet at first with an extremely light body, seems to remind me of corny tasting lager a bit. Surprising light bread on the finish somewhat. Pappery thin and watery texture with a bit of fizziness. Bread taste doesn't seem to come back after multiple sips, replaces with soda like feel and gas solvent tin metal.
Overall your classic lawnmower beer but with perhaps a bad aftertaste.
08-21-2011 02:06:03 | More by smakawhat
1.43/5 rDev -38.6%
Drink enough and it will make you drunk. That's the best I can say for this yellowish fermented water+? To be honest, I can barely tell the difference between Bud, Coors, Miller, and any other American domestic swill. But let's be honest; despite the commercials, they really aren't going for flavor. They want to produce the most beer at the cheapest expense, without offending your senses. So I guess their market share has proven their success at those commercial goals. Good for them...
08-20-2011 03:05:07 | More by dtreindl
3.95/5 rDev +69.5%
Budweiser. The King of Beers.
Allow me to quote a sentence that I have read, respected, and perhaps agreed with as many times as I have enjoyed this beer. Ice cold; from a bottle.
"This is the famous Budweiser beer. We know of no brand produced by any other brewer which costs so much to brew and age. Our exclusive Beechwood Aging produces a taste, a smoothness and a drinkability you will find in no other beer at any price."
Although I cannot say for sure whether the "cost so much to brew" is an accurate statement, I have to agree that the Beechwood Aging does produce a taste, smoothness, and drinkability that I can not find at any other price. For this reason alone, I feel like Budweiser beer has been treated poorly by receiving a D+.
Budweiser beer is truly the king of American style adjunct lagers. It tastes the way it should taste, is priced the way it should be priced, and is absolutely one of the most consistent beers I have had in my few years as a beer drinker.
08-20-2011 02:03:49 | More by flarnrules
1.25/5 rDev -46.4%
A - Fizzy, yellow. The epitome of bad label beers.
S - Metal, skunk. You can really smell how the aluminums
T - Skunky, metallic water. You might be able to pick up on a little rice in this beer.
M - Water.
O - This stuff is disgusting. I won't drink it even if its the only beer at a party.
08-16-2011 03:38:25 | More by unitmonster
2.5/5 rDev +7.3%
I'm 25 and so is one of my good friends. His father is in his late fifties and took us fishing so of course we drank good old bud heavy. Straight out of the can is how this was drank but I have seen many Bud's in a glass so I know there is decent head retention at first but that fades about halfway through the glass. Nose is lightly grainy and almost sour. No trace of hops, only the faint cereal and adjunct regularity. Flavor is bitter and tingly from all the carbonation. Best served ice cold because the sour grains will ravage your palette. No hops again in the flavor just the plain, mildly grainy flavor. Finishes crisp and thirst quenching. This beer serves its purpose in certain situations. Fishing on a boat baking in the hot sun is one of them. Bland overall but will always hold a ground in America.
08-16-2011 01:40:49 | More by DrinkingDrake
2.6/5 rDev +11.6%
Poured as aggressively as I could into my Sam Adams glass, leaving a finger and a half head that - despite my best efforts - dissipates before I can load the review page. I'm trying not to be too hard on it, but the color is a sickly pale straw with a slight tinge of green.
The smell can best be described as "beer". It has vague hints of grains, no discernible hops, and a slight skunky odor.
Not really a lot of taste to taste here. It tastes vaguely of cereal, maybe some corn, and it also has a vague skunky taste to complement the vague skunky smell. It has a slightly bitter (in a bad way) aftertaste. It is not actively bad tasting, like some other beers in its price range, but it certainly isn't good.
Pretty high level of carbonation, feels a little like drinking a coke. Other than that, it goes down the hatch pretty smoothly. It would be pretty easy to drink a lot of these, that - and the low price - are its chief selling points.
Overall, it is really not a terrible beer, and I think the rating should be much higher than it is. You have to judge the beer for what it is, and that is a beer for the mass consumption by a people with the blandest taste in food and drink of any people on Earth. By that standard, it passes with flying colors. For those of us who desire more, than yes, you should look elsewhere.
08-12-2011 23:11:30 | More by JeffMcAwesome
1.63/5 rDev -30%
King of Beers.
Very pale and yellow, big time foamy white head eventually falls to a fizzy cap, spots of lace left.
Poor scent, old cereal, grains, urinals, adjuncty bleh-ness.
Taste is not an improvement...adjuncty to the max, tough to point out any redeeming qualities. Flavors of stale oats, garbage, lemon and astringency. Not a bad mouthfeel for the style, a decent liveliness to it without being overly carbonated.
Like most people I imagine, I've drank my fair share of this, but I find Budweiser to be just plain unpleasant to drink. This to me is among the bottom of the barrel for macros, there are better options at a cheaper price.
08-11-2011 22:51:58 | More by Chico1985
2.05/5 rDev -12%
King of beers? Strong statement. I would say this is a lager that is over priced, and absolutely not the king of beers. Is it drinkable? Sure. If someone offered me one, would I accept? Sure. Would I personally go buy this? No. A- it looks like a beer. S- not very good. T- no hops detection. Only drinkable if it's very cold. M- mouthfeel is ok. O- better adjuct lagers out there, would never buy this.
08-09-2011 18:29:18 | More by bmwfan1987
2.5/5 rDev +7.3%
The beer pours a straw color with a quickly fading bright white head and lots of carbonation.
The smell is of grain, grass and maybe a bit of wood.
The taste is similar to the smell, mainly some grass and corn with a slight woody character. Light body with lots of carbonation, causing the beer to be quite refreshing. There are better macros, but bud is not bad.
08-06-2011 23:35:50 | More by Jerone
Budweiser from Anheuser-Busch
56 out of 100 based on 4,603 ratings.