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 - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
BudweiserBudweiser

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
56
awful

4,835 Ratings
THE BROS
80
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 4,835
Reviews: 1,461
rAvg: 2.34
pDev: 33.33%
Wants: 28
Gots: 457 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Brewed using a blend of imported and classic American aroma hops, and a blend of barley malts and rice. Budweiser is brewed with time-honored methods including “kraeusening” for natural carbonation and Beechwood aging, which results in unparalleled balance and character.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 11-21-2000)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Budweiser Alström Bros
Ratings: 4,835 | Reviews: 1,461 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of rednrag
3.85/5  rDev +64.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

Budweiser is a great beer for what it is. Definetly not for beer snobs, but sometimes i think people bash it just for being so popular and because it comes from a huge corporation. So what? Sure, theres a time and place for a good pale ale,dopplebock ipa or stout,but there are times i really crave a good American macro. Open your minds,people!

rednrag, Nov 30, 2009
Photo of plaid75
1.83/5  rDev -21.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Poured a pale straw hue with a three finger foamy white head. There was good retention and lacing.

The smell featured a light sweetness and what I guess is hops.

The taste was shallow and bland with a slight sweetness.

The mouthfeel was toward the fuller side of the style.

Overall it is what I expected it to be. I consumed this beer a bit warmer than suggested - which did not help the drinkability.

plaid75, Nov 29, 2009
Photo of heissebier
2.25/5  rDev -3.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 2.5

I drank this to celebrate being alive after an interesting night getting lost in pheonix....

Appearance- Sickly pale yellow in color with a moderate head that dissipates quickly.

Smell- Not a whole lot here, mostly grains...

Taste- The grainy malt is about the only thing distinguishing this from carbonated water. Almost no hoppiness at all and a weak grainy flavor. Despite a weak taste, it's inoffensive and I've definitely had worst.

Mouthfeel- Light and watery. Finishes with a sticky flavor that clings to your mouth...ewww

Drinkability- It's fairly drinkable in the sense that you can throw down huge gulps, but you won't necessarily enjoy it. Not really any better tasting than the light beers, either so it doesn't have the "College students drink this to get hammered" niche either.

All in all a terrible macro thats probably not worth drinking. Has a bad combo of bad taste and a few too many calories.

heissebier, Nov 28, 2009
Photo of robbyc1
3/5  rDev +28.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Hazy light gold, head meh, just ok looking.

From the bottle a grainy nose, nothing special, maybe some hops there.

The adjuncts of rice or corn or whatever they use make this light on malts, needs more, but very clean husk and raw grain taste.

OK mouthfeel, drinkable in the sense it is balanced, that's about it. In a pinch, take this over Miller.

robbyc1, Nov 27, 2009
Photo of kegger22
2.88/5  rDev +23.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 4.5

Budweiser is crystal clear, yellow in color with a modest white head that fades very quickly. A fresh Bud doesn't have a great deal of aroma, but that's better than skunk. The taste is somewhat bland, a little grain sweet and a bit of a bite due mostly to carbonation. Feel is very light but there is plenty of carbonation. From past experience, I can attest drinkability is very good.

Alright, here's the disclaimer. Before getting into craft beers I was a Bud drinker. I haven't had one for about a year and decided to buy one for reviewing purposes. I know its popular to bash the BMC's, but IMO, Budweiser is decent for a lager.

kegger22, Nov 27, 2009
Photo of TheSarge
1.93/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Budweiser American Lager makes a thin pinky sized head that vanishes quickly without a trace. There is very little lacing, and... This beer is a total fail. There are no fragrances I detect, and the taste is of corn and booty. This is okay for mindless partying and working in the yard, but yields no respect at my dinner table.

TheSarge, Nov 25, 2009
Photo of Eldalonde
1.9/5  rDev -18.8%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A - This beer pours a straw color with minimal to no head and no lacing left.

S - There isn't too much in the way of aroma, but some straw and perhaps a small hint of hops.

T - Extremely watered down. Very simplistic and one dimensional. However, there is a nice grainy characteristic with this beer that I enjoy.

M - Rather thin bodied and light on the palate.

D - I guess this is fairly drinkable, given the right circumstances.

One of my first beers, ever, and thought it was good then. But my taste buds grew up and now I will only drink this if there is nothing else available. It will do in a pinch, but considering how tasteless this is, I will choose a craft brew any day over this.

Eldalonde, Nov 18, 2009
Photo of dpnelson1978
1.73/5  rDev -26.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

24 oz. can into glass pint.

$2.99 / ea.

S: Sweet corn scent, not much hops, and not much scent period.

A: Big rocky head with great retention. Bright light yellow body, and nice lacing.

T: Corn, rice (whatever that means), but definitely not barley. Very little hop flavor, and what little it has sticks on the back of my throat. Not pleasant.

M: Light body with low carbonation. Almost a greasy feel that I really don't like.

D: It is decent in terms of drinkability mainly due to its light body, cheap price, and general lack of flavor, but it isn't good (or fun).

O: Not "The King" of beers by any stretch of the imagination. I honestly prefer Miller Lite over this. I had forgot how bad this beer can be. Lowest rating I've given to date.

dpnelson1978, Nov 08, 2009
Photo of dbossman
2.55/5  rDev +9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

A: Straw-yellow color with a nice billowing head that dissipates quickly leaving a fingernail head with little to no lacing

S: a little bit of hops but mostly subtle grains; really not much going on here; not offensive but not really anything good either

T: This really isn't as offensive as most people make it out to be; it's watery and grainy but there are some subtle things going on that are okay--although very subtle, I like the graininess . . . as far as adjuncts go, the rice surely doesn't offend (although it doesn't add anything interesting either)

M: Too carbonated and thin

D: Well, it's drinkable, but so is water; this beer doesn't offend like may others, so for it's style, you can handle it; like most people on this website, I'm not a huge fan of this style, but on a hot day, this beer goes down easily and, although watery, doesn't kill the taste buds.

dbossman, Nov 06, 2009
Photo of ProudGreen89
2.13/5  rDev -9%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

I went to a halloween party and this was all they had, took a few home to review for the hell of it.

Poured into a snifter from the can.

A-very clear, watered down lemon juice yellow color, i wouldnt even call it straw colored, its too light. Virtually no head (unless you pour it as roughly as possible) no lacing, lots of bubbles and effervescents.

S-wet grassy smell, cereal/weak grains, if i really take a hard and long sniff a miniscule hop aroma is somewhat there...and i thought it was impossible, but i can actually smell the rice, thats how cheap it is.

T-Not a whole lot there, theres definitely lots of filler (rice, cereal, cheap grains.) Maybe some hops in the background but it all gets drowned out by the carbonation.

M-Extremely light, a little dry, not very smooth, bubbly, over-carbonated.

D-If i could stand the taste and smell i would find this beer highly drinkable, its the closest you can get to drinking water without REALLY drinking water. I had 3 at the party and felt full from all the cheap filler this beer has in it. I wont be buying this but if its offered i wont turn it down.

ProudGreen89, Nov 02, 2009
Photo of womencantsail
2.25/5  rDev -3.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A: I poured this from the can into my Arrogant Bastard pint glass (which reads: Fizzy Yellow Beer is For Wussies) just for the sake of doing it. Like many other beers of this style, it's about as close to water as you can get.

S: Ah, the all too familiar smell of corn, rice, and a bit of grain. Absolutely no hop aroma.

T: There is a sweet corn and grain taste to this. There is a complete absence of hops. To be honest, it's bad, but it's not as bad as I remembered.

M: This is very bubbly, and light bodied. That's the point, I suppose, however.

D: The drinkability of this beer is in the sense of the ability to drink massive amounts of it. The taste is incredibly bland, and that's the point, unfortunately.

womencantsail, Nov 02, 2009
Photo of rfgetz
2.4/5  rDev +2.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Was at a concert and plopped down $8.25 for a pounder can cause it was either this, Bud Light or soda. the first thing i had in mind was how crappy it was going to taste, my second thought was i finally get to review it because it has been a really really long time since i had it.

Pours a bright golden yellow with bubbly carbonation, frothy white head. Minimal retention and lacing. Smell is standard watery, light adjunct and light grain wih hints of sulfur. Taste follows smell with a watery blend of adjuncts, grain and a minor sulfury taste. Light bodied, thin and watery, over carbonated. Its drinkable, yes, because it only has a minimal amount of "of tastes", just too light to be enjoyable.

rfgetz, Nov 01, 2009
Photo of Fizzlybear
1.9/5  rDev -18.8%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

L - Poured a golden colour with what looked like a lot of carbonation, but didn't show on the head.

S - The smell was weak at best, I picked up a bit of burnt citrus and wheat.

T - A wheat flavour with a slight bit of hops in the aftertaste, the taste lingers around (in this case it isn't good).

M&D - Too watery and due to its nasty lingering taste I wouldn't buy it.

Overall meh...

Fizzlybear, Oct 31, 2009
Photo of cbutova
2.38/5  rDev +1.7%
look: 1 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Lost this review, the words at least. Remember the rating and the overall review well. Poured a clear golden color with a head that disappears completely from the beer and leaves no lacing. Smell and taste are of watery malts, only points given are in comparison of much worse Adjunct Lagers I have had. The malt backbone is better than some other Adjuncts I have had. The mouthfeel of this was not too bad, a pretty decent body with smooth carbonation, best aspect of the beer. Drinkability is weird. I could drink a ton of these but at the same time they taste so bad that I would not want to. The price is very good but the quality is not.

cbutova, Oct 26, 2009
Photo of BBri
2.35/5  rDev +0.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A side note... Budweiser gives me a SCREAMING headache whenever I drink it. I think Bud is about as average as you can get. It's made for mass consumption and designed to be everything to everyone. Appearence is average, a little bit light but golden. Good head, smell is a little malty and crisp. Taste is completely unremarkable, not too bad but not very good. Given the headache factor, I avoid Bud at all cost. Even so, it's sort of bland and basic so I wouldn't choose it anyway.

BBri, Oct 22, 2009
Photo of FloppyDog
2.38/5  rDev +1.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Pours a pale pale yellow with carbonation constantly rising from the bottom of the glass. Very little head to speak of.

Aroma is of slight maltiness with hints of DMS. Not very pronounced aroma all around.

Taste, is the same. Hint of maltiness with a finish like bad water.

Mouthfeel is light and airy due to the carbonation.

Overall, a beer meant for really hot days when you will be consuming large quantities very rapidly.

FloppyDog, Oct 21, 2009
Photo of jrallen34
2.42/5  rDev +3.4%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 4.5

I drank this from a can.

This beer pours a very light clear gold with little head, retention or lacing.

The aroma is light light hops and some skunkiness.

The taste is light hops, mostly watery. Mouthfeel is non-existent. On the bright side you crush about 20 of these and keep drinking.

jrallen34, Oct 17, 2009
Photo of AmberMan22
2.33/5  rDev -0.4%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

There is almost nothing to this beer, but that kind of makes it better than actually bad tasting beers...since there's nothing bad to taste.

This garners an average drinkability rating and a mediocre taste score. The beer is pale straw yellow with a small fizzy head. It smells like old grains. Mouthfeel could be worse (think bud light), and ironically the same goes for drinkability. Who the hell came up with that marketing campaign anyways?

I guess on the bright side, since 'drinkability' isn't easily quantifiable, it might confuse or just bludgeon people via overadvertising that this beer and its family are in fact, drinkable.

Wouldn't recommend it. If you want an Amer. Adjunct Lager, buy Coors.

AmberMan22, Oct 16, 2009
Photo of woosterbill
2.55/5  rDev +9%
look: 4 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

12 oz can born on 7/20/09 into a Duvel tulip.

A: Pours a clear pale straw body topped by an inch of pure white, highly active foam; surprisingly decent retention and lace. As much as I want to attack this beer, I can't really say anything bad about its appearance relative to style - the color is even lighter than I might like, but the carbonation is spot on: solid without being ridiculous.

S: Just nasty. Flat, medicinal, ricy, with more than a bit of urine. Gross, even for an adjunct lager.

T: Far less disgusting than the smell; clean grain up front followed by a rather appealing sweetness. A fairly sketchy aftertaste keeps this from being one of the best tasting adjunct lagers I've encountered - overall, not too bad, but not good at all.

M: Light and prickly - not my cup of tea.

D: As we all know, these can be pounded and pounded and pounded - hence its popular title, Fatweiser. To me, though, it's a bit too sweet to be truly chuggable.

Notes: The King of Beers deserves its title only in the context of a postmodern world where monarchy is nothing more than a kitschy anachronism.

Cheers!

woosterbill, Oct 09, 2009
Photo of wordemupg
2.65/5  rDev +13.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

473ml can poured into pint glass oct5 2009

A one of the lightest beers I've ever seen not even a straw yellow its almost impressive how light this beer is

S sweet grains and some adjuncts

T It kinda tastes like bubblegum too me with some rice cake perhaps

M thin with fair carbonation

D not anything special, but not offensive either

not something I would suggest you drink, but its hard too avoid forever

wordemupg, Oct 06, 2009
Photo of ShogoKawada
2.78/5  rDev +18.8%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4.5

I guess I should review this one, no? I must admit, I but some tall boys of this every once in a while. To me, this is "BEER" as generic as possible... nothing flashy, but you could do a lot worse. 12oz can into wide snifter.

A- paler yellow than I thought possible. Not appealing in the least, although not too much lighter than your standard Am. Ad. Lager.

S- Corn? Malt? Grain? Sweetness. As inoffensive as you can get.

T- Like seltzer water. Seriously. Mild grain... and that's about it. Nothing in this beer wows me.. except for the drinkability.

M- Crisp, good carbonation.

D- Insanely high. I can drink like 15 of these and still be up for one more. Of course, I haven't since high school.

Easy to drink, this is The King Of Beers like McDonalds is the King Of Food. Everywhere, cheap, and processed.

ShogoKawada, Oct 06, 2009
Photo of spartanfan
2.1/5  rDev -10.3%
look: 4 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

The beer pours a bright straw color with a fluffy white head from the can. It smells of grains. It doesn't have much taste, but it is crisp with a strong bite of carbonation. It finishes clean, and I could drink these. all day, not that I would want to.

spartanfan, Oct 02, 2009
Photo of Flightoficarus
2.8/5  rDev +19.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Serving type - can/bottle/draft (have tried them all)

Appearance - Yellow and clear, with a fairly thick foam head on the pour.

Smell - Not so much going on there. Adjuncts are somewhat noticeable.

Taste - Pretty basic, but it does the job. A corn sweetness, with some rice notes in there as well. Pretty much nothing the purist will enjoy, but it is refreshing on a hot day, and goes pretty well with BBQ type food.

Mouthfeel - Light, fizzy beer, with a fair amount of carbonation going on.

Drinkability - Most definitely sessionable, but not as much as some of the other marco-lagers.

Overall - This is a pretty standard marco-lager, in case you were curious. It's not bad, but it's not great either. There are several better options out there if you like marco-lager. It's still better than the really bad stuff though, such as Natty Ice or Milwaukee's best.

Flightoficarus, Sep 23, 2009
Photo of buschbeer
3.48/5  rDev +48.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

I poured into a nonic fresh out of the tap to a large, white, foamy head. It is yellow and clear. As with most macros it has a sweet smell to it. It actually tastes good after mowing the lawn and needing a drink of water. Macros get a bad rap by beer snobs. It is what it is. A tasteless alcoholic beverage for the masses. I keep it on tap because my keg fridge only holds 1/4 barrels, so my options are limited here in BFE. It'll wet my whistle.

buschbeer, Sep 20, 2009
Photo of shanecb
2.53/5  rDev +8.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

A - Incredibly pale yellow color. Actually had a nice white head when poured, but this quickly left. There is a nice stream of carbonation while in the glass, which looks okay.

S - Not much of a smell at all. There is a little bit of sweetness to it, so it's not a particularly off-putting aroma. There's just nothing there particularly pleasant.

T - Sort of a sweet grain/corn flavor. A little bit of malt but almost non-existent. The taste gives way quickly to the taste of water. A VERY thin flavor. Aftertaste to me really just consists of a light sweet corn flavor.

M - Not too bad. Sort of thin but it doesn't have a bad mouthfeel. Some light carbonation in the mouth.

D - Pretty good. It's low and thin flavor makes it pretty drinkable. I don't find any of the flavors off-putting even though I don't find them enjoyable. It's the kind of beer you'd probably enjoy best after doing a lot of work, because it is sort of crisp and refreshing.

Overall, I don't find it enjoyable or good, but I don't find it off-putting.

shanecb, Sep 08, 2009
Budweiser from Anheuser-Busch
56 out of 100 based on 4,835 ratings.