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.
BA SCORE
49
awful

1,448 Ratings
THE BROS
43
awful

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,448
Reviews: 418
rAvg: 1.98
pDev: 36.36%
Wants: 6
Gots: 100 | 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 (78) | 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: 1,448 | Reviews: 418 | Display Reviews Only:
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.
Cheers!

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.

Eric

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.

Photo of CrazyMike
2.2/5  rDev +11.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Wow, this fits all the bad stereotypes of American beer. Very watery with little content. I thought I tasted a small hint of something (suger? corn?). Worthy enough to be labled a Light beer.

The appearance is pale yellow, wasn't very appealing. Although bright yellow would be worst. Smell is skunky.

A good side about this beer is that it doesn't have heavy additives to it, and despite the lack of taste (literally), it is kind of refreshing. If you want to chug down a bunch to get drunk, and it will take at least 10 of these, for super cheap, here you go.

Photo of bignick
2.63/5  rDev +32.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

On tap many times at Moogy's on Chestnut Hill Ave in Brighton. I would rather have this for $1 than a Redhook or a stale Harpoon IPA for $3.50. Whatever.

This beer is pretty much average for the style. It pours a straw-yellow with a bit of a head into my clear-collored platic cup. There is not much a smell, to speak of. The taste is what I would expect...a bit of adjuncty corn, with a slight skunky, hoppy finish. This beer is pretty crisp, and finishes clean, so it works well for inexpensive session drinking.

Photo of DogFood11
1.23/5  rDev -37.9%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

Another brew that I pick up once in a while to keep things grounded. Why? We would need a psycotherapist to determine that. Typical pale yellow, fizzy white head fades quickly, no lacing, champagne like carbonation.

Cooked vegetables, corn husk, grain, adjuncts. Sizzles a bit in the end and grinds on the back of my throat. Nothing truly offensive about this beer other than there is nothing of interest. Compared to its big daddy Budweiser it is very similar although I think this comes across weaker and more corn husk type flavor.

Notes: Ehhh I can drink these no problem, If your forced I could see this being used as a golf course beer if you must.

Photo of Sosh
1.65/5  rDev -16.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Only drink this beer ICE COLD. Most people only drink this beer to get wasted, and if you open a warm one while already a bit tipsy, it may cause you to vomit all over your buddy's couch. If ice cold, however, it shouldn't be a problem.

I think I rated Bud Light higher than this, but if I'm going to actually drink shitty beer, I would probably save my money and buy this over Bud. I mean, the only reason to drink these beers is to get wasted so why spend more than you have to?

Photo of ski271
1.85/5  rDev -6.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pale yellow with a medium, white, foamy, quickly and fully diminishing head. Smells of cooked veggie and weak grain. Taste is quite lame. A little crisp with a short lightly yeasty finish. It has a thin body and a soda-like texture. Even when compared to other cheapos, this stuff still sucks.

Photo of akahn
2.35/5  rDev +18.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

As far as American macro lagers go, this isn't a very good one. Have it cold and it's not too bad. Let it warm up and taste the non-barley "cereal grain" (hey, at least they're up front on the label -- natural indeed). Watery, yet manages to have an unpleasant corn syrup flavor as well. Honestly, I prefer Busch Light.

Photo of palffyfan
1.3/5  rDev -34.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Appearance - Pale yellow with about a 1.5" of foam, along with carbonation bubbles.

Smell - Corn and skunky.

Taste - Watered down and disgusting like its Light counterpart. Avoid at all costs.

Drinkability - Gave me a headache after drinking it. Spend an extra 2 bucks and buy some Bud or Natty Lite instead.

Photo of sockeye101
2.17/5  rDev +9.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

So, if I were to head for the mountains of Busch Beer this is what I'd find, eh? Well, if that's the case, I'm heading to some other mountain. And what's up with the statement on the can "Natural Aging - Natural Carbonation"....what the f'ing hell is that supposed to mean? Ohhhh boy, I can't wait to get my hands on some of that Busch Natural Carbonation, oh yeah. And what the hell would unnatural aging be? Would it be a freakin' time machine? Anyhow, enough of that.

My 24oz can born on Nov 8, '05 is remarkably blah. Big fluffy white head that lasted about 2 seconds and a smell the reeks of cheap beer, lots cereals, and a mish mash of odds and ends. Tastes like a mega-cheap beer but is actually barely palatable yet very watery.

Bottom line: You know what you're getting yourself into when you buy Busch Beer...a means of intoxication.

Photo of nicksta
1.38/5  rDev -30.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

Busch Light sucked, so I shall see if big brother can be any better.

Appearance: It pours an absolute, crystal clear, light gold with a big head that quickly leaves with a lot of lacing. It gets a 2 simply because of how clear it is. I was really surprised.

Smell: Plain, boring, everyday, cereal malts. Luckily nothing funky disgusting.

Taste: Um, I gotta try it again, I felt my mouth get wet but it came without taste. Okay, sugar water, just like the light version. But wait!, this comes with an alcoholic, slightly metallic, burn to finish it!

Mouthfeel: I had some water at dinner, it reminded me of this.

Drinkability: Easy to pound down, but with the slight, bad taste I don't want too.

Overall it is a waste of your time.Exactly like little brother but for pennies more.

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

Poured a very pale yellow and crystal clear. Head was largish and white, and escaping carbonation bubbles were plainly visible. Adjuncty/corn in the nose and not much else. Didn't smell *bad* to me, but I don't think there are a lot of beers that do. Not much by way of hops or malt in the aroma.

Body was light and almost entirely devoid of character. Leaned a bit to the sweet side, but no malt flavor at all. Nothing really offensive about it, but nothing to recommend it either. Quite watery. You could drink a lot of it, but why would you want to?

Meh. If you want cheap American beer, Schlitz or High Life are the same price and much better tasting.

Photo of masikon
1.86/5  rDev -6.1%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 4

This is pretty much the beer that I cut my teeth on as an underage youth. Cheap, easy to find, and sold in 6 packs of 16oz "tallboys", this was alsways a highschool party favorite. Pours the traditional macro dehydrated yellow with a fizzy head. Smells vile, really doesn't even smell like beer to be honest, more like just stale or hard water that comes from a really old dug well. taste about how it looks, watery and fizzy with nothing I would really call a flavor, more just a feeling of liquid in your mouth. After 2 or 3 of these they go down really easy and do the job for a cheap highschool buzz. The main redeeming factor of this beer is that it's cheaper than Bud and I think it actually is less offensive tasting and easier to drink. If you make more than 5 bucks an hour you should really be ashamed of yourself for buying this stuff.

Photo of KALIKGOLD
1.98/5  rDev 0%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Horrible, I can't really think of anything to say except...well nevermind. Anyway it pours a pale weak yellow with head that leaves instantaneously. The carbonation is ok I guess. It smells like a bag of ass. However you can drink them rapidly. It tastes like corn a handful of corn. They are very cheap and you can find them anywhere. Better than Natural light/ "Fratty Light"

Busch Beer from Anheuser-Busch
49 out of 100 based on 1,448 ratings.