Batch No. 91406 (Los Angeles, CA) - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
Batch No. 91406 (Los Angeles, CA)Batch No. 91406 (Los Angeles, CA)

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
72
okay

133 Ratings
THE BROS
69
poor

(view ratings)
Ratings: 133
Reviews: 51
rAvg: 3.09
pDev: 18.45%
Wants: 1
Gots: 5 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
American Amber / Red Lager |  6.00% ABV

Availability: Limited (brewed once)

Notes/Commercial Description:
This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: justintcoons on 10-26-2012)
View: Beers (77) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Batch No. 91406 (Los Angeles, CA) Alström Bros
Ratings: 133 | Reviews: 51 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of imperialking
3/5  rDev -2.9%

Photo of ejimhof
2.75/5  rDev -11%

Photo of Stinkypuss
2.78/5  rDev -10%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Budweiser Project 12 : Batch 91406

LOOK: Pours a light orange color with a fizzy froth that recedes to a fine film.

SMELL: Rice, Budweiser house yeast and a little bit of bready malt sweetness. There is also a hint of wood and grass.

TASTE: Sweet malts upfront that come off a bit grainy. Almost no hop character and just a small presence of wood, almost flies under the radar. Tastes like a macro lager with some dignity, but still finishes like regular Bud. Rice, corn and watery caramel. Finishes a bit sweet with a caramel/vanilla like flavor. Fleeting bland bitterness and husky grain round out the finish.

FEEL: Light to medium bodied with a good amount of crisp carbonation. Has a pretty good fullness to it and is not overly watery.

OVERALL: This is a step in the right direction for Budweiser. A beer with some integrity that actually has some flavor. Not too bad.

Photo of chinchill
3.03/5  rDev -1.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

12 oz bottle served in a lager glass. Has a nice clear, medium amber body with a large and creamy looking beige head. The head has decent retention.

A much appreciated but small increase in hop presence over the typical lagers from this macro-brewery is found upon tasting, although not evident in the nose. I believe I could detect a faint spice-like contribution frm the "beechwood chips".

O: flawless execution of a rather lame recipe, with a nice semi-dry finish. Too much like one of their regular mass-produced lagers and not enough like a special small batch craft brew. [3.25]

Photo of Latarnik
3/5  rDev -2.9%

Photo of Tone
3.28/5  rDev +6.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a clear, dark amber color. 1/3 inch head of an off-white color. Good retention and decent lacing. Smells of sweet malt, caramel malt, slight pale malt, hint of hop, and a hint of adjunct. Fits the style of an American Amber / Red Lager. Mouth feel is sharp and crisp, with an average carbonation level. Tastes of sweet malt, caramel malt, hint of pale malt, hint of hop, and hint of adjunct. Overall, good appearance and blend, with decent body.

Photo of Rhettroactive
3.75/5  rDev +21.4%

Photo of johnnnniee
2.73/5  rDev -11.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a deep golden amber color with a quickly dissipating off white head. The aroma is sweet and malty with a grainy honey like caramel nose. I found little to no hop aroma. The flavor is sweet and does have a bit of caramel and light sugar in there. There's just enough spicy hops to keep this from cloying and to keep inbev from spending any more money on hops than is absolutely necessary. Medium body with a moderate to high level of carbonation and a sweet almost sugary mouthfeel. Too sweet and a bit boring.

Photo of Brad007
2.68/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Deep amber what? Here's another example from the Project Twelve.

Pours a mild (not deep) amber with a thin head into my glass. I don't see anything profound here.

Some sweet caramel from the malt. Otherwise, it smells pretty bland. I don't want to sound stereotypical but I was thinking of regular Bud with that smell.

Incredibly thin, almost watery with very little flavor. It passes by so quickly that my taste buds can't keep up.

Cidery mouthfeel would be more appropriate. Sweet? Yes. Full of hops? No. Finished on beechwood chips? Hmm.

Pass.

Photo of bluejacket74
3.24/5  rDev +4.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.25

12 ounce bottle, born on date of September 30, 2012 (Julian Date 12273 stamped on label). A buddy bought me some of the Project 12 beers since he found them on sale recently (bought the 12 pack for just $5.75), so I might as well try them. If what I've read online is correct, this is the brew they picked to be their new Black Crown beer. Served in a pint glass, the beer pours a clear amber color with about a half inch off-white head. Head retention is good, and there's a decent amount of lacing. The brew smells like sweet and grainy malt, and some caramel. Taste is similar to the aroma, but there's also the addition of some nuts. Mouthfeel/body is light/medium, with a good amount of carbonation. Truthfully, this is better than I expected it to be. Worth a try if you can pick up a single somewhere.

Photo of RBorsato
3.75/5  rDev +21.4%

Photo of ZAP
3.73/5  rDev +20.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A-Deep gold/amberish....minimal lace..

S-Nice clean malty aroma....light caramel...

T-This one has something unique going on. Couldn't identify it at first but then it came to me. Pistachios. Seriously. No doubt about it. Pistachios. I really like it and the flavor overall. Not so overally sticky sweet like the vanilla one. Just a nice nutty, amber lager...

M-Clean...borders on crisp I would say....medium bodied to the light side of medium bodied.

O-I like this one. Really a unique flavor and an enjoyable beer to drink. I'd buy this one if offered at decent prices (think Killians or Amber Bock)...

Photo of puboflyons
3.08/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

From the 12 fl. oz. bottle marked 12273-WA95. Sampled on November 12, 2012.

The color is not as dark as I might have hoped. It comes in at a medium amber-copper color with no head.

The aroma is pretty straight forward grains, pale malts, and crisp hops. But nothing jumps out as extraordinary.

The body is about medium and creamy.

The taste is also fairly grainy with a crisp, clean finale. Really it tastes like a slightly more boisterous Budweiser American pale.

Photo of atlbravsrno1
3/5  rDev -2.9%

Photo of mrfrancis
3.05/5  rDev -1.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A: Pours a clear golden amber with a lingering white head.

S: Aromas of grassy, lemony hops, caramel, biscuit, and beech chips make their presence known.

T: Notes of caramel, nuts, biscuits, crackers, grass, straw, and lemon are very evident in the mouth. The finish is quick and clipped with a combination of woody notes from the beech chips, caramel, and grassy hops.

M: Medium in body, firm, and dry. Carbonation is crisp. Easy to drink and very refreshing with just a touch of malt heft.

O: Not bad, but not great either. This one at least has a little more flavor than the Virginia brew. It's not exceptional by any stretch, but it is a pleasant, simple, straight-forward brew.

Photo of thatoneguymike
3.5/5  rDev +13.3%

Photo of Darkmagus82
2.9/5  rDev -6.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured from bottle into a pint glass

Appearance – The beer pours a golden amber color with a off-white yellowish two finger head. The head has a decent level of retention fading over about 4 min to leave a moderate level of lace on the sides of the glass.

Smell – The aroma is largely of sweet corn with some caramel complementing this. Along with these aromas are some lightly roasted malt smells.

Taste – The taste begins with flavor of a bready and corny sweet taste. As the flavor advances some lighter caramel flavors come to the tongue with the corn sweetness becoming more intense in nature. A bit of a lighter herbal and woody flavors later come to the tongue. A bit of booziness and a somewhat off cardboard taste then come to the tongue at the end. While present these more off flavors don’t take too much away from the brew and leave a bready and sweet flavor to linger on the tongue.

Mouthfeel – The body of the beer is on the average to above average side with a carbonation level that is the same. A moderate carbonation is quite appropriate for eh style and drinkability of the beer, although a lightly less thick body may have been better for making a more easy drinking brew, as this should be.

Overall – It was alright with malt and sweetness but as it lacked a good hop and complexity profile. OK, but nothing really worth the added price (as it is more expensive than the average malt/standard American adjunct) over something of a more standard, cheaper drinking brew.

Photo of mynie
3.03/5  rDev -1.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Smells very similar to that other batch; the blonde one, not the other amber one. Big flowers, medium malt, not much by way of the hops.

Tastes similar to Budweiser, only with a more pronounced back end. (Is that the beechwood?). It's very malty wiht enough hops to prevent the malt from getting icky sweet. The finish is quite clean, and really this is like something they probably would have gone nuts for in the 60s. Right now, though, it ain't all that interesting.

Photo of EgadBananas
3.01/5  rDev -2.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 2.75

Pours a muddled amber color, with a white head, dissipates to a foamy collar. Light lacing. Aroma is grainy, lightly sweet, with a nutty quality to it. Taste is sweet, caramel, light wood, nuts and no real hop notes. Sweetness lacks balance, really. The feel is light in body, mild crispness, somewhat oily and slick.

There's nothing about this that really stands out. The unfortunate and unnecessary aspect of these "contest" brews is that they're all just marginally differing from th base beers that they brew day in and day out. What's the point?! Two amber lagers and an effing pilsner does not scream diversity!

Photo of barczar
3.05/5  rDev -1.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I feel all kinds of icky just for buying this. But I consider this reconnaissance.

Pours a brilliant light golden copper color with a solid 2 inch cream head that dissipates rather slowly, leaving moderate lacing.

Aroma is predominately caramel malt with notes of floral hops. There's a bit of corn adjunct. , grain, and alcohol.

Flavor is heavily malty, caramel, lightly toasty, and I guess it's that beechwood age thing going on. Unfortunately it's not terrible.

Body is moderate, with carbonation on the high side. There is a note of sourness and I don't know if that the Budweiser thing or what.

The sourness definitely a detracts from the beer I don't hate it as much as I want to.

Photo of allengarvin
2.6/5  rDev -15.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Grabbed one at the grocery store in a make-your-own-six-pack. Poured into a 12-oz mug, this is an amber-gold beer with a slight airy head atop it. The nose is rather grainy, and offers no hint of hops or anything else. Flavor is just... bad. Sweet malt with almost nonexistent bitterness, no hop flavor, nothing but grainy, sweet malt. The "beechwood chips" are totally undetectable.

I'm assuming the "91406" was just a randomly generated number. It's hard to imagine any but the most basic experimentation went into this really bad beer

Photo of BeerAdvocate
2.95/5  rDev -4.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

From BeerAdvocate magazine Issue #72 (Jan 2013):

The highlight here is that the beer was finished on beechwood chips, which are usually used to provide more surface space for yeast during the fermentation of Budweiser. While it’s noticeable, its overpowered by a near cloying sweetness and a misplaced caramel note.

STYLE: American Amber Lager
ABV: 6.0%
AVAILABILITY: Limited

LOOK: Rich, clear, amber with a tight, creamy white lace

SMELL: Caramel, floral, hint of wood, clean

TASTE: Light, smooth, creamy, malty sweet, caramel, bready, nutty, cereal grains, corn, herbal, dried wood, dry straw-like finish

Photo of garymuchow
3.53/5  rDev +14.2%
look: 3.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.75

Attractive. Nice copper amber and brilliantly clear. Off-white head that does settle out.
Faint aroma. A slight caramel aroma. Also a soft lager yeast character.
Clear caramel flavor that is soft enough to not be overwhelming or too sweet. Soft hop flavor. Some drying on the finish. Bitterness only to balance.
Bigger than a typical lager, but not big or even quite moderate.
I don't mind this at all. The flavors are pleasant and generally satisfying. Drinks like a lager in that it is clean and refreshing.
Thanks Spunky.

Photo of Fatehunter
3.53/5  rDev +14.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A good finger of head on a clear, amber colored body.
The aroma is a little grain with some fruit, the beechwood is evident too. Smells nice.
The taste is balanced and smooth. It has only the mildest bitterness to go with it's malty body (for a lager).
The texture is crisp with moderate carbonation.
It's a smooth and tasty lager.

Photo of RonaldTheriot
4.25/5  rDev +37.5%
look: 4.25 | smell: 4.25 | taste: 4.25 | feel: 4.25 | overall: 4.25

Budweiser Batch No. 94106 (re-released in 2013 as Budweiser Black Crown) has a thick, off-white head and a clear, somewhat bubbly, reddish-golden appearance, with nice lacing left on the glass. The aroma is of mild hops and fruit (think pears). Taste is of fruit, white bread crust, grain, and a little hop bitterness at the end. The mouthfeel is light and watery, and Budweiser Batch No. 94106 finishes crisp, clean, refreshing, and highly drinkable. Overall, this is excellent.

RJT

Batch No. 91406 (Los Angeles, CA) from Anheuser-Busch
72 out of 100 based on 133 ratings.