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

4,736 Ratings
THE BROS
80
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 4,736
Reviews: 1,458
rAvg: 2.33
pDev: 33.05%
Wants: 27
Gots: 416 | 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: 4,736 | Reviews: 1,458 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of cyrenaica
1.55/5  rDev -33.5%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

I have had two versions of this beer, the Anheuser-Busch brewed version in the bars of Memphis, Tennessee, and the "brewed in Canada by Labatt under license...." I'll take the Canadian version hands down. Sadly, the Canadian version sucks too. For a beer that is as heavily advertised as it is, and sells as much as it does, the rating here says it all. This is America's finest pisswater (Labatt Blue is Canada's finest pisswater). It amazes me when I go out with friends, there is always one who orders Bud. Take a gamble people, try one of the beers on tap you've never heard of....they're great (with all due respect to Tony the Tiger). This is one of those beers I will go out of my way to avoid. Having it in your fridge is a great way to get taken off my Christmas card list!

cyrenaica, Jun 29, 2007
Photo of brendan13
2.45/5  rDev +5.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

A - I've never seen a beer so light in colour. Pours a small white fluffy head from a hard pour.
S - Light sweet malt and metal.
T - Pretty much the same as the smell with a earthy aftertaste.
M - Lifeless and watery.
D - The only reason this gets an extra .5 is because you theoretically could drink 12 of these. Personally I'd rather drink 4 of something that actually has some character though.

brendan13, Jun 28, 2007
Photo of CJfromPhilly
2/5  rDev -14.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

16 oz can left over from an after-work cookout. Born on date 25May07. Looks like the urine sample I submitted for my last drug test, only fizzier. Very weak sweet malt aroma, very weak sweet malt flavor, very weak watery mouthfeel. Budweiser is the beer equivalent of carbon monoxide: colorless, odorless, tastelss, lethal in large doses.

CJfromPhilly, Jun 26, 2007
Photo of frankbro
2.25/5  rDev -3.4%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 4

I only give it a 4 on drinkability because you can chug it like there's no tomorrow. The appearance is pale yellow like a discharge we know. The taste is thin because they use very little malt and use rice syrups to boost the alcohol, Strohs is not really good, but it's way better than Bud. Bud has an eerie similarity among all its breweries. Quality control, or what. Only drink if you have to. Compliment the host.

frankbro, Jun 25, 2007
Photo of musicjustintime
3.1/5  rDev +33%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

I know, I know. Budweiser. Well...it's the King of Beers for SOME REASON, right?! Here goes...

It's smoother than hell....HIGHLY drinkable....and very light in flavor and mouthfeel. I think they spend more on advertising and their fancy cans than they do in the product itself, but still...a decent American classic that, I wish, wasn't going up in price like it is. I've been drinking it regularly for several years now, and I DON'T get the headaches or the poops like soooo many people have claimed to from Bud. I guess you need to suck it up, and build a tolerance to this swill??!! OR, if you have enough money to buy all the yummy micros out there...then just do that, and skip the Bud.

Again, I like Bud, and it's an American classic that is not offensive whatsoever to me, in smell OR taste, and is also very consistent in it's flavor. They make so much of this stuff, someone's drinking it!!! AND, that adds to the freshness factor, too. Very little shelflife. I really DO wish they'd lower the price...I mean, I'm sure AB can afford to sell it cheaper, but it's like $22/30-pk right now where I live. AND, for $5 less...I usually buy Miller High Life over Bud....but switch between the two when I'm running low on funds. (Which is often, I must say!)

I'll always like this beer for what it is. Don't be too harsh on the King. He's got the crown for some damn reason! (Oh, and after several of these ice cold...who the hell really cares what you're drinkin' anyway, right?!) Take care and happy sippin' my beer-lovin' friends. Ciao for now! This Bud's for you!!

musicjustintime, Jun 24, 2007
Photo of shadow1961
1.85/5  rDev -20.6%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Budweiser pours out a big stiff head over a clear, pale yellow brew. Carbonation
is pretty steady, but not steady enough to maintain that big soapy head for long.
The nose is corn, lager yeast, and aluminium can. The flavor is slightly sweet up
front, with a ghost of a suggestion of some kind of hop off the back end. Mouthfeel
is thin, yet also slightly oily. For best effect drink up fast- corn lagers do not gain
charm or complexity as they warm. The only positive I've noted is that the can
proclaims that the King of Beers is one of the world's biggest recyclers- probably
because it helps their bottom line. At this price point, the container is worth more
than the contents, so do recycle.

shadow1961, Jun 23, 2007
Photo of ncvbc
3.1/5  rDev +33%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Clear and golden. Fair amount of carbonation and thin white head. Smell is mainly of malts, somewhat grainy. The smallest hint of hops is present as well. Taste is of sweet, somewhat tart malts. More flavor than other macro lagers. Mouthfeel seems light as it should be, though too much carbonation isn't its best match. Drinkability is close to good as it is extremely light and admittedly refreshing on a hot summer day. Yep, there are plenty of other beers I'd like to drink, but this is probably near the top among macro lagers.

ncvbc, Jun 22, 2007
Photo of slargthorb
3.33/5  rDev +42.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

I've been looking for an affordable 'regular' beer to soften my weekly beer bill. Pabst almost did it but so far nothing worth drinking if not my favorites ( Paulaner, Spaten, Samual Smith, anything from Anchor, etc.).
This Bud, however, is coming in with enough taste (barely!), to be the budget stretcher I've been looking for.
Most importantly, I'm not getting the 'off' tastes that make so many macros useless. I don't pick up any of the metallic that others have mentioned. There's definitely no skunk - which would totally end any consideration . And while I know they're using rice, I'm finding the flavor good enough - even enjoyable! Also, I'm tasting the alcohol in good balance.
I've enjoyed this 24 ouncer and have decided further investigation is in order.

slargthorb, Jun 22, 2007
Photo of AlexLMS
1.4/5  rDev -39.9%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

With more than 650 reviews there is nothing more to say about Budweiser! Anyway, for one more point to my beer karma here I go:

Appearance: clear with a pale gold color. White head, very low. Poor retention.
Aroma: almost no discernible aroma. Metallic if I have to pick one.
Taste: very little malt and no hops. Most adjunct flavor.
Mouthfeel: light body, kind of dry, very gassy (like a barley soda), low alcoholic strength.
Finish: clean finish. Very short.

Overall: watery, bland, characterless and no personality.

AlexLMS, Jun 19, 2007
Photo of jcdiflorio
2.15/5  rDev -7.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Found a can of this beer somebody left in the fridge,figured i'd give it a review been so long since i had a Bud. Poured the 12oz can into a pint glass.

Light straw color with a tall creamy white head with good retention leaving a decent amount of lacing. Large soda like bubbles cover the sides of the glass with some tiny bubbles rising not a bad looking beer.

Faint aromas,clean, bready,grainy with some light sweet malt notes with a bit of grassiness.

Clean,light sweet taste,some fruittiness,doughy,with light syrup notes. The aftertaste is hard to describe kind of a yeasty almost mold taste not enjoyable gets worse as the beer warms. This is a beer to be drank at cold temps.

Light mouthfeel with some slight grainyness. Would be a bit more drinkable if not for the strange aftertaste. Best when cold and very thirsty. Not a beer i would keep in my fridge.

jcdiflorio, Jun 13, 2007
Photo of scooter231
1.98/5  rDev -15%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Pale straw yellow with some head that quickly disappears. Smells... metallic, highly highly metallic, dig deeper and you find some maltyness. Dig deeper if you dare, anyway. Taste is also metallic, very light and barely malty. Mouthfeel has a bit more to it. Overall, this is what it is- a Bud. Many drink it because it's light and goes great with food at a bbq, and it's refreshing on a hot day. Can't blame them, but... I'd still rather have a PBR, or something else similar. Cheaper, and tastes better.

scooter231, Jun 06, 2007
Photo of rayjay
3.65/5  rDev +56.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4.5

Out of a can, paired with Italian sausage at a bbq. Honestly it was a very good pairing. I gotta hand it to Bud: they know how to move beer off the shelves, and therefore, it's almost impossible to get an old, skunky beer from them. This one was no exception, clean and fresh tasting. Delicate and mild hops, paired with a delicate malt/adjunct backbone, this is a very unforgiving beer to make, and they seem to have it down to a science. I enjoy rice in beer from time to time (35% in this one), as it makes the body very crisp and refreshing. This was a good beer on a hot day like today, out by the river, something non-challanging and thirst-quenching. Some DMS, but it's a lager so it's not really a defect.

One complaint is that the mouthfeel is a bit too thin for the amount of carbonation, bringing on a soda-pop appeal I don't like. I also wish it was a bit drier, as there is a bit of sticky sweetness that lingers a bit longer than I'd like it to.

The more I learn about how beer is made, the more I can appreciate beers like this. 10 years ago I would have scoffed! Cheers!

rayjay, May 29, 2007
Photo of beckscrusader420
2/5  rDev -14.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

It is what it is Budweiser. I tried three new single bottles tonight Harp, Bass, and Peroni. Reverting back to this crap is the worst. Like I said its a budweiser. A watery, piss colored, standard domestic redneck beer. Thumbs down for this bottle of pee water.

beckscrusader420, May 28, 2007
Photo of BretSikkink
3/5  rDev +28.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Good old tall boy at three in the morning.

Sickly clear yellow color, weak soapy head is bubbly but vapid. Some stickage.

Very light aromas, adjunct grains with some distant malt. Slightly fruity.

High carbonation and the palest of malts, very crisp and light on the tongue. Hops are barely present, but provide something to think about. Big on non-malt grains, very thin, clean and watery finish.

We've probably all had too many of these. Overall it's palatable, as is tap water.

Note: Somehow, on the golf course, this beer is transformed into a heavenly thirst-quenching brew - that's miraculously worth the $3 for a can. Seriously, something about the outdoors and maybe not ice ice cold brings out a fullness in the underdeveloped fruit nose and a nice sprightly taste. I read somewhere that AB uses 9 hops for this one..at least a few of those show up in the right setting.

BretSikkink, May 10, 2007
Photo of jeortizrubi
1.75/5  rDev -24.9%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Es una cerveza gringa, sin cuerpo ni sabor ni nada, de las peorcitas que he probado, aunque se vende mucho y tiene muchisima publicidad, y tiene la exclusiva de los mundiales de futbol. El envase es ambar con etiqueta de papel. Hay ediciones especiales de esta cerveza como la conmemorativa al mundial lo unico que cambia es la etiqueta.

jeortizrubi, May 09, 2007
Photo of Cyberkedi
2.15/5  rDev -7.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I drank this at a party because there wasn't anything else available. Appearance is typical of an American macrobrew lager. Aroma is malty and better than I expected, but not wonderful. Taste is malty and rather wan. Though it is zingy and jazzy in the mouth, it is not a memorable beer. Well, I had to try it after drinking craft beers for so long.

Cyberkedi, May 08, 2007
Photo of tempest
3.1/5  rDev +33%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I'd call this one a little underrated. Almost as good as PBR for a macro. The color is a little to dark to look like urine, as some people like to say. Th taste has a hint (all the flavors are hints) of grains with a slight tang. The drinkability is decent and the overall experience isn't offensive. Still, this beer is one I'd only drink if given or free.

tempest, May 06, 2007
Photo of BeefyMee
3/5  rDev +28.8%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Appearance: Poor head, no lacing, and almost no pigment.

Smell: Not much to speak of. Some grains...that's about it.

Taste: Surprisingly not bad. A light malty taste with a nice sweetness makes for a good pairing with the pizza I'm eating. Virtually no aftertaste but a bit of a weird feeling in the back of my throat.

Mouthfeel: Watery and tingly, but I guess that's what they were going for.

Drinkability: I wouldn't really want to drink a lot of these, but it wouldn't be too hard.

Beef Notes: I needed something to drink with my pizza and this did the job. Not nearly as bad as Bud Light and actually quite serviceable in a pinch. Don't be afraid to crack one open if there's nothing better.

BeefyMee, May 03, 2007
Photo of Clockwork420
1.25/5  rDev -46.4%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

I do hate to bash, but again, KING OF BEERS? Whattt!

It isnt the worst thing I ever drank. But it does get you really drunk. Its a good beer to start off your evening. Sets the buzz right up.

The appearance is golden, and kinda bubbly. Smells alot like a stronger Bud Light. Taste would be if you licked a sweaty sailor. Well its not that bad but its not pleasent. Stronger.

Mouth feel is not a great one.

Reminds me of my alcoholic deceased grandpa, in everyway.
The drinkability is okay. The first one is always the worst. Especially with Bud.

Next please... PLEASE!

Clockwork420, May 03, 2007
Photo of BeerDreadz
2.68/5  rDev +15%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer being a macro lager , still is a very good beer,is nothing to be impress about,This beer have a light gold color with a little bit of head.Very easy to drink ,not a hard taste or a hard feeling on the mouth. Does'nt have a lot of smell. Good beer if you want to have more than one.

BeerDreadz, May 02, 2007
Photo of GratefulBeerGuy
1.8/5  rDev -22.7%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

O.k i've rated the can now it's the bottles turn. born on: 3/28/07 consumed on 4/30/07.

AP: pours out a totally clear, anorexic pale gold color with big carbonation creating a bubbly, thin and light pure-white head.

nose: mildly bready malt, herbal yeast, wheat, a slight lemmon scent and a metallic-like under current.

flavor: This is basically a hearty but very light and watery malt flavor that has some minor bread and butter attributes and a herbal yeastie effect. There is a slight and almost non-exsistant green hop profile with a wheat and corn flavor way down. The real down side to this flavor is the fact that it's sooo light and watery, I'm convinced this stuff would not be terrible if it wasn't for the fact that it's just plain lies there dead as a door nail. The sickly-sweet after taste doesn't help either.

feel: Light, crisp (to begin with), thin and watery...and it only gets worse the longer this thing sits in front of me.

DA: I had a hard time finishing this bottle, but it was slightly better than the canned version.

GratefulBeerGuy, May 01, 2007
Photo of 1fastz28
2.88/5  rDev +23.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Pours a straw yellow with a pure white head, which dissipates quickly. Smells of light hops, corn, and water. Tastes average really, nothing good about it but nothing bad, better than most american macro brewed lagers, especially the light ones, i think it gets a bad rap but it isn't THAT undrinkable. Mouthfell does leave something yearning.

1fastz28, Apr 28, 2007
Photo of mandarin
1.88/5  rDev -19.3%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1 | overall: 2.5

Years ago I thought this was the greatest beer on the market. However, I grew up and tried other kinds of beers, and my opinion of Budweiser has changed immensely. It had been a while since I tried Budweiser, so I picked up a 12 pack that was on sale the other day. What a waste of money. I don't know what I ever saw in this swill. It has to be ice cold in order for me to drink it. It's actually not too bad ice cold, but once it warms a little - forget it.

mandarin, Apr 28, 2007
Photo of SaltyLime
2.25/5  rDev -3.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Appearance - Light honey. Barely a bubble floating on top.

Smell - It had one smell to it. Not complex at all. Slight barley with lots of can.

Taste - Tasted bland and watery, very light body.

Mouthfeel - Tiny carbonated bubbles, almost like a champagne.

Drinkability - Felt like I was wasting my time. Hurried the beer so I could go on to the next drink.

SaltyLime, Apr 24, 2007
Photo of tzieser
2.75/5  rDev +18%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

I'm in college, so we drink this stuff alot (much to my dismay). It's your stereotypical macro beer. Doesn't smell very good, doesnt look very good, but you can pound them very easily. Cheap beer means you can share them when your on the college budget (like myself), but if you want to buy some cheap beer you might as well by keystone light or somethin (10 bucks a 30 pack haha), cause when you start drinking beers that are this dull they all start to taste the same.

tzieser, Apr 24, 2007
Budweiser from Anheuser-Busch
56 out of 100 based on 4,736 ratings.