1. American Craft Beer Fest returns to Boston on May 29 & 30, featuring 640+ beers from 140+ brewers. Tickets are on sale now.

Busch Beer - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Busch BeerBusch Beer

Educational use only; do not reuse.

1,460 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,460
Reviews: 423
rAvg: 1.98
pDev: 36.36%
Wants: 4
Gots: 106 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  4.30% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: Todd on 11-20-2000

Busch and Busch Light are both brewed with a blend of premium American-grown and imported hops and a combination of malt and corn to provide a pleasant balanced flavor. Additionally, Busch Light undergoes a longer brewing process that produces a lighter body and fewer calories.
View: Beers (79) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Busch Beer Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,460 | Reviews: 423 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of scaliasux
1.95/5  rDev -1.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Appearance - Pale, yellow-gold. Short white head that quickly dissipates. Bubbly and crystal clear in the glass. A little light colored for a regular American lager.

Smell - Slight adjunct, but really quite indistinct.

Taste - Also quite indistinct. Principal impression is that this beer lacks flavor. What is there is not offensive - mild sweet adjunct and very mild hops finish.

Mouthfeel - Watery and crisp. Appropriate for style.

Drinkability - Really light for a regular american lager. Not much beer, though, even at the relatively low price. Nothing to really recommend this, but it is, as above, inoffensive.

Photo of pmcadamis
2.27/5  rDev +14.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Another grocery store bargain I couldn't refuse....a whole dollar for 22oz cold beer!

A - Golden yellow and clear with a flimsy white head that's gone in 60 seconds. Tons of tiny bubbles stream up to the top of this headless brew as if making an effort to bring back some semblance of a cap, but it ain't happening. Looks pretty blah.

S - Sweet corn and some Saporro-like ricey aromas. Pretty damn good effort for the style and price. Unlike many macro lagers, I don't really dislike the smell of this one. It's sweeter smelling than most of it's brethren.

T - Well, more of the nose really. Sweet rice-cake blandness at first with some sweet cooked corn at the end. Has a bit of tangy metallic detectable hops on the back end. I'm actually pretty impressed. Goes downhill quickly with warmth, so drink up!

M - Fizzy, light bodied with a syrupy coating sweetness that I don't care for. Finishes clean after a raspy carbonation. Like eating crackers.

D - This is one of the least offensive macro lagers that I've had. It's not really tasty, but it's basically flavorless....so it's hard to like and hard to dislike. Does that make sense? So for those who just want to slake a thirst and get a buzz, this is highly drinkable. But for me, it just doesn't hold my interest. Labatts Blue, PBR, and Stag have much more character.

Photo of nlmartin
1.9/5  rDev -4%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Yet one more daring stop at the gas station. The beer was served in my Arrogant Bastard glass. I drank part of the big can from a glass and finished from the can.

Appearance: The beer has a very clear pale yellow coloration. Any less yellow and this would be clear water. The head was about one finger high with no retention.

Smell: The beer smelled like corn cereal adjunct and little else.

Taste: The beer has a very light malt flavor. This is supported by corn flavors? The hops come in at the end and give a quick a fleeting lemon bitterness. No off flavors noted in the taste.

Mouthfeel/ Drinkability: The beer was watery. I think the active carbonation helped the beer over all. The beer is easy to drink. If you drink your beer fast this will work. It will be awhile before I journey into the gas station. The beer was honestly better from the can than a glass.

Photo of MMansfield
1.9/5  rDev -4%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Picked up a 6 pack of this at the NSLC for a cheap beer party. This is the contracted to Labatt in Canada.

Appearance: Pours more like a sprite than a beer. Very pale pale yellow, extremely clear. Huge foamy head, not much retention.

Aroma: Corn and rotten vegetables.

Taste: Basically nothing at all. Some corn and sourness, but has very little flavour.

Mouthfeel: Standard macro.

Final Statement: Better than I expected in the sense it had no flavour, but still very poor. This is an alcoholic soft drink.

Photo of supercolter
2.6/5  rDev +31.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Ok so I guess, what can I say, It's just a party beer.
Appearance and smell are both flat, no head, no lacing, only corn malt smell.
Taste is slightly refreshing, not something that makes you want to sip but definately drinkable.
Mouthfeel is kinda there but too light in body.
Drinkability is average for the style.

Photo of dedrinker
2.72/5  rDev +37.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 4

I guess I had a fresh one, because it wasn't that bad. It was watery and thin, but no off flavors - just a little adjunct flavor on top of the water, and lo and behold - I actually percieved a mild gummy hop bitterness and aroma! Like I said - I guess I had a fresh one. A really fresh one. I'm used to seeing empty cans of these piled all over my brother's sleeping body when I peak in on him most saturday mornings. Most recently there was still one left in his mini-fridge in his bedroom, so I cracked it open as I wated for him to wake up. That's how I came across this one.

Photo of tesguino
2.52/5  rDev +27.3%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I don't know why but this time this beer actually tasted decent and was drinkable. The appearance was still very pale and looked like piss, but the taste was much better. I think it might be safe to say now that it almost tastes just as good and hits the spot just like a regular Bud does.

i try with fast food only; drink 3 of a six, the other i got for a collection; 60% recommended.

Photo of Jwaks
2.1/5  rDev +6.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3.5

Shows an unimpressive translucent body and pale straw color. A very short lived bone white head entirely dissapates leaving nothing behind. Scant carbonation is almost not worth noting.

Sweet grainy aromas mix with a bit of floral honey and pale malt.

Very smooth and slightly sweet on the entry leading to a grain and malt driven mid palate, finishes with a touch of bitterness and floral hops.

Light bodied, close to water, and very smooth, the twinge of bitterness on the finish makes this beer highly quaffable.

One of the better american macros, it certainly isn't a showstopper but it has it has a good place as a party beer and a way to beat the summer heat.

Photo of zeff80
1.47/5  rDev -25.8%
look: 1 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

A - Pours out a pale yellow color with a high amount of carbonation. Not much of a head and no lacing at all.

S - It smelled of corn and not much else.

T - It tasted somewhat watery and like corn. There was also an uncomfortable bitter aftertaste.

M - It was fairly thin and very light.

D - It could be worse. The aftertaste really got to me. A couple times it made my skin crawl.

Photo of kimcgolf
2.76/5  rDev +39.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

I used to drink this one years ago as a kid. By no means a great beer, but while I’ve had many beers that are much better in my new sampling hobby, I’ve also had some that are worse. Had this over the holidays, poured into an icy cold schooner, served with fried onion rings. Taste and palate were not much, but a smooth, refreshing beer, especially given the price.

Photo of plaid75
2.39/5  rDev +20.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

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

The smell featured a faint corn aroma. Honestly, there was barely any noticeable aroma.

The taste was a light and clean corn with a smattering of floral hop. Not much to speak of tastewise either.

The mouthfeel was thin, yet somehow not at all crisp.

Overall a light tasting easy drinking water-like beer. You could drink these all day, but why would you want to?

Photo of Enola
2.8/5  rDev +41.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

You know it is nearing hunting season when you start buying beer in a Realtree Camo can. The writing on the can is Blaze Orange. How freakin sweet is that?!?!

The beer itself however is boring. The beer is a light color. Lighter than some ciders. There is almost no head. The smell is slightly corny and sweet. The taste is not bad, just not much flavor present. The mouthfeel is fair. Cold it is smooth and drinkable. This beer is good for camping and general late night country happenings. So for drinkability this is actually not too bad. Good for the intended audience. Git-R-Done!!!!

Photo of Rudgers73
2.2/5  rDev +11.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Even the cans are ugly... that yellow/copper looking top. Not a good start.

This was the usual beer in my first years of college. It was rough, but it was beer.

A- Clear yellow, fizzy, nasty looking head after it settles. Gobs of lingering foam floating on the top.

S- Corny, and pungent. Especially after you have cans sitting around for the night and smell them the next morning.

T- It starts out with a decent macro taste, not much character but at least crisp. Then comes the finish: strange metal-like, medicinal taste. Horrible.

M- This isn't bad in the mouth as long as it's cold and fresh, but as soon as it starts to get warm it's hard to even swallow it.

D- I found that after 2-3 of these puppies the horrible aftertaste just gets to be too much. Set it down, walk away.

Photo of FenwaySquid
2.24/5  rDev +13.1%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Presentation: 12 oz can, born on date of Arpil '06 stamped on the bottom, poured into a pint glass. The statement "THERE IS NOTHING ARTIFICIAL IN THIS PRODUCT" is on the side of the can, as if I'm supposed to be impressed.

Appearance: Poured a pale yellow, standard macro color. The head formed 1 finger and faded almost immediately into nothing.

Aroma: Little or nothing, maybe some faint hops.

Taste: Corn sweetness, and that's about it. Some hops in the middle, but it's barely noticeable. The finish is grany, but nothing special.

Mouthfeel: Watery, carbonation detracted from the flavor some.

Overall: It's cheap, and there's a reason for that.

Photo of robocrouch
1.78/5  rDev -10.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: Pours a very pale yellow, with little to no head.

Smell: Cooked corn is predominant. But other then that there is really no smell.

Taste: Very watery followed by some cooked veggies and some malt. This beer has crisp finish to it.

Drinkability: I could drink plenty of these no problem. The taste mirrors the price. I guess you really do get what you pay for.

Overall a very poor beer.

Photo of jwc215
2.12/5  rDev +7.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

"Born on date" 16 July 2006.

Poured light straw yellow with a thin white head that very quickly fizzled to nothing.

The smell was thin - some corn adjuncts.

The taste was extremely watery with a hint of adjuncts (esp. if warmer). Not much else is detectable - claims (on side of can) to have barley malt and hops, but...didn't notice.

It was thin - not far from lightly sweetened water.

Even for style, this is pretty bad. Cheap - but, you get what you pay for in this case. Better to spend the extra money and get something better.

Photo of rhythmguitartz88
1.55/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

appearance was pale...very macro-esque

smell was very faint i had to really try to find it

taste was again very macro-esque...typical min taste

mouthfeel was not very impressive it was rather watery i wasnt impressed

drinkability was pretty bad...i wouldnt really ever have more than one

Photo of Phatz
1.11/5  rDev -43.9%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

This was worse than just a beer that was les than good. This was actually nasty. Really gross. Thanks a lot 'A' you're a great friend ;/ There is a reason some of my friends never got around to getting on BA. Oh well. In all fairness we did go out to the Tavern and drink a Bud light then we came home and smoked a cigar. A friend of mine had these cans in his truck all day. When we got to my house he through them in the freezer to get cold while we smoked a cigar. Now usually I wouldn't review a beer after smoking a cigar but I will never drink this again so here it is. I don't think the cigar is what made this beer taste so awful.

Appearance: I poured it from the can into a glass to see a clear yellow beer that looks like the typical macro. (what a surprise;/)

Smell: It smelled like my trash can after weeding the garden and throwing away a few wet cardboard boxes. I guess you could call that wet sour cardboard malt but it was just a bad smell that made me turn my head away.

Taste: The taste was as bad as the smell. There maybe a hint of grain in that awful cardboard taste that makes me think of dirty laundry. The aftertaste is just strange. ewe

Mouthfeel: Carbonated water; period.

Drinkability: I said I would have one to amuse my friend who brought it for his girlfriend (she won't drink my Fat Dog or SN Porter) but I couldn't finish this crap. I said I was going to dump it and get a real beer she said "oh now that is alcohol abuse you can't dump it." My comment was doing this to beer is the real abuse. Nonetheless, she drank the rest of my beer and I went for a Fat Dog Oatmeal Stout from Stoudt's instead.

Hope this is helpful.

Photo of scottblaze
2.78/5  rDev +40.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Not a lot of color, pale yellow, head disappears quickly. It's smell is almost non-existant, therefore it isn't a bad smell and a fairly pleasant hoppy but not too hoppy taste. This one is made for easy if not mass consumption.

This is one of our (my GF and I) favorite lawnmower varities, it is inexpensive to own and operate. I would buy and drink this instead of its more expensive stablemate Budweiser if they were the same price.

UPDATE 07/12/07: The main thing I remember about this was last summer, it was a regular in the firdge, we went through a bunch while working in the garden, yard etc. I have since lowered my opinion.

Photo of neenerzig
2.51/5  rDev +26.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Got a can of this for free at a party I went to last week. Pours a light clear straw like yellow color with an initially very nice and tall white foamy, full bodied looking head that all but totally dissappeared 2 minutes after being poured, leaving little to no lacing. Light aromas of malt, a touch of hops, and maybe some grains. The aroma comes through decently enough there just isn't enough of any one distinguishable smell in particular. Stronger smell than a lot of macros I have had though, skunked as it may be. A sort of sweet taste with the same characteristics as the smell. The mouthfeel is a bit thin and watery, but not overly bland. Moderate to heavy carbonation. In a ways, this beer is very easy to drink but it is also not very complex. It is easy to drink the same way seltzer water is. Not really a good thing IMO when it comes to beer. Better than some of other American macros I have had, certainly at least slightly better than Budweiser (one of the other line of beers brewed by Anheuser Busch of course) the last time I had it, but certainly nothing special either. I would never spend money on this beer and could never suggest anyone else to either. Only worth drinking when free and nothing else better is available. If you actually want to drink an A-B product I suggest Michelob lager over this brew or any of A-B's other products.


Photo of tallar
2.4/5  rDev +21.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 4

I had this a recent family get together. Not my first choice for beer by any means, but it was free....

Poured, well like a macro. Transparent yellow with a white that disappears quickly. Carbonation was moderate, but boy did it ever disappear after awhile....

The smell was nothing much: very little malt, and maybe a kiss of hops. The most dominant thing, however, were the grains. Reminded me of field corn fresh off the fields in late fall. Just as with the smell, there was nothing much there with the taste. Thin, light bodied and tasting of light corn adjuncts and faint malt with an oh so slight hop finish.

I'll probably never return to this stuff except maybe at family gatherings, reunions and such. About all that's going for it is that it is easy to down.

Photo of sinstaineddemon
2.08/5  rDev +5.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 4

A - pours a transparent yellow color, like old scotch tape, with a thick frothy white head, moderate carbonation

S - what can i say, like a macro? malty overtones with no hints of hops, malty to almost an appley degree

T - weak, but it has its place, one of the better macros, very refreshing when served cold, a malty taste

M - thin bodied and carbonated, as to be expected

D - high, especially on a hot day while the coals warm up for the grill

Photo of Drew966
2.7/5  rDev +36.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Busch Beer pours a typical macro fizzy yellow from a twenty four ounce can. Smells... like cheap beer, adjunct city. Corn is most noticeable to me. In my opinion, one of the better tasting of the macro lagers, not good by any stretch, but very drinkable. I prefer this to most of the macros, if only by a little bit. The story some of my Busch/Budweiser drinking friends tell is that they were at the brewery and they were told that Busch costs more to make than Bud, but they sell it for less than Bud because it's named for the family. True or not, it is decent by macro standards.

Photo of bonbright7
2.15/5  rDev +8.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I came late to my historical society's annual square dance last night and my next stop, after greeting friends and the caterer, was the beer. My first thoughts in the shadows of our great barn was that it was Bud, then as the shadows moved...oh, no...okay, deal with it...it was Busch.

It poured a very foamy head with little body that disappeared quickly as I tilted the solo cup inwards. I tasted the foam and then the rest of it and I noted how much lighter it was than Bud. The strange light taste had a little hops to it and a little Grape Nuts flavor too. Then nothing (as expected) came forward....

I had a another thought that this beer actually might be better served with spicy hot chinese food and dumplings, where the food is primary, though a bottle of Tsing Tsao would be my first choice.

Photo of Rumpole
3.3/5  rDev +66.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Busch was brought to the market by A-B in the 50’s to compete in the ‘near-premium’ beer market, where it still does duty. Today it sells in glamorous Worcester, MA for $15-$16 per 30-pack of cans, enabling A-B to counter the likes of Miller High Life, Extra Gold Lager from Coors, and a plethora of entries from the Pabst Brewery. At 4.6% ABV, its strength is about average for this price level, and at any rate noticeably speedier than light beers.

Naturally the first experience is the label, and quite candidly Busch’s label is nowhere near as impressive or iconic as A-B’s Budweiser. The blue, white and orange color scheme isn’t too bad, but the overall look is far more appropriate to, say, a race car than to a container of beer. Having seen the original 50’s label during a retro revival not long ago, however, I will admit that it’s still an improvement over the old one, so I won’t quibble about it too much.

In the glass Busch is very much the expected gold macro lager. To achieve the lower production costs, A-B had to abandon its practice of confining itself strictly to rice as the adjunct grain, as it does for Budweiser; as a result of the additional grains, the color of Busch is noticeably darker than Budweiser. It is still rather pale by comparison to other macro brands, however, so rice evidently still makes up a significant percentage of the recipe.

Busch’s scent is, like other A-B brands, pretty much a light beerish smell, but instead of Budweiser’s herbal overlay we have more of a grainy note. The flavor is consistent with the scent; light, with a thin body and light maltiness, very slight hop top note, not always present, and in the mid-range of the palate, a pronounced grainy cereal flavor. Finishes very clean, maybe not quite as disciplined as Budweiser but very much within A-B’s usual tidiness levels. The texture is also very characteristic A-B, which is to say quite marvelous; a soft but very lively feel, as if they rigidly specified great numbers of tiny bubbles and used only top-flight spring water. Highly quaffable; one after another in rapid succession has gone into the old Rumpole gullet without any strain whatsoever.

On the whole, a very competent effort at this market level from A-B. It doesn’t have Budweiser’s fleeting fruitiness, and it’s not as super-crisp as Bud Dry, but it does have more mid-palate presence than either. It’s priced similarly to Bud Dry but goes for a mellowness in contrast to Bud Dry’s clean sharpness. I compared it directly with Miller High Life and it did not register a knockout but neither was it beaten; MHL is richer but the Busch finishes cleaner and has better texture. It might not keep up with PBR or Schlitz but it won’t be embarrassed by them either. Heavily underrated owing to anti-A-B sentiment and, I suspect, its redneck image. But the brew itself, particularly given the price, has nothing to apologize for.

Busch Beer from Anheuser-Busch
49 out of 100 based on 1,460 ratings.