Batch No. 63118 (Saint Louis, MO) - Anheuser-Busch
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 134 | Reviews: 58 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by Reaper16:
2/5 rDev -31.7%
12oz. bottle served at Egan's, Tuscaloosa, AL.
Overall this is just a sharper Bud. A better Bud. But still Bud. The aroma has a sharpness to it from the hops -- its not especially floral or spicy, but it is amplified compared to Budweiser. The malt profile is soft and round, and actually reminiscent of a German pils. There's still a rice and yeast flavor that you find in Budweiser. I wish it weren't there.
This beer tastes like the missing link between Budweiser and Bud Light Platinum. On the finish there's a characteristic that is sweet like a light malt liquor. But overall the beer is just a moderately improved Bud.
11-10-2012 00:12:23 | More by Reaper16
More User Reviews:
3.08/5 rDev +5.1%
Poured from a bottle into a pint glass.
Appearance: Clear gold color wioth a thick white head.
Smell: Very mild smells, some faint sugars and malts.
Mouthfeel/Taste: Smooth, light bodied. Some light hops for taste, not much else.
Overall: OK beer, not bad, but not really good either.
11-30-2012 22:17:49 | More by Cavanaghty
2.9/5 rDev -1%
This one shines brightly, a clear yellow-orange color. The head, just off-white, makes it to half a finger and falls quickly but not as quickly as some, leaving some wisps of foam capable of some decent spotting.
Pilsner's an easy style in once sense in attaining to the strength and depth it needs, but very difficult in the technicalities to brew without flaws. As such, this beer's cleanness and drinkability point to some skill. It's floral and pretty grassy with a little sweetness and some citrus zest. There's just a buzz of spiciness in the nose and the tip of the tongue. There are some huskier, almost dry, grains underlying. To be honest, though, this would get more points as a Czech pils. It's entirely too weak as far as the hops are concerned, and a little too sweet overall.
It's light-bodied but not thin or weak like A-B's typical lager lineup. There's a solid crispness to it. I'm a little surprised by a certain creaminess.
10-08-2013 20:56:40 | More by Brenden
3.5/5 rDev +19.5%
A - Pours a clear golden color with a white head
S - pale grainy malt
T - bit of sweetness up front that slides into a grainy finish.
M - medium body with higher carbonation to it.
O - Not a great beer but better then bud. Worth trying especially if pils are your type.
12-09-2012 02:17:36 | More by Damian74Shensky
2.73/5 rDev -6.8%
No matter how AB tries to sell this project 12, these beers are still Budweiser beers.
63118 is a heavier and more flavorful version of Bud.
Tastes like a cheap beer.
It is not foul or anything, just a poor attempt at a German Pilsner.
Unless you are a big fan of Budweiser, you will most likely be disapointed.
Not worth seeking out.
01-02-2013 03:53:48 | More by JohnFatAss
3.13/5 rDev +6.8%
Two fingers of head on a clear, golden colored body. Nice head retention too.
The aroma is faint, some grain?
The taste has a mild lemon bitterness, smooth and nice though.
The texture is crisp with moderate carbonation.
Not amazing, but descent enough.
03-17-2013 02:17:25 | More by Fatehunter
4/5 rDev +36.5%
Poured a nice deep golden orange with a thin off white head, light retention with carbonation running throughout until the end of the glass.
The smell is very fruity with a bit of apple and white grape coming through along with a light touch of corn.
The flavor is clean with a light crackery malt body with a lightly green noble hop quality to the finish, very balanced with just a light bit of sweetness and slightly grassy bitterness working well together.
the mouthfeel is very dry and a touch of resin.
Overall I like this, it has just a touch more character than most pils I come accross along with I know it being super fresh probably helps as well.
11-03-2012 22:14:07 | More by bashiba
3/5 rDev +2.4%
Poured from a chilled bottle into a Perfect Pint. I let the glass warm up to about 45º before drinking.
A=Color is a dark gold--reminds me a bit of the old Coors' Extra Gold in appearance, but probably a shade or two lighter...still darker than anticipated. Minimal foam head with little staying power.
S=Nothing right away, but then a hint of hops, but not much.
T=Sweet, like a malt liquor. Hops are relatively light; Budweiser yeast not quite as evident as in the #23185.
M=Heavier body than I anticipated, and definitely more robust than light and many BMC's--moderate carbonation, but rather drinkable.
O=Better than I anticipated, but still comparable to Miller Genuine Draft, only sweeter. If I wanted this flavor profile, I'd probably opt for a Mickey's Malt Liquor instead.
11-03-2012 22:55:27 | More by dhannes
2.15/5 rDev -26.6%
Pours to a thick white head that falls to a thin layer. Minimal lacing. Gold color. Aroma is grainy and sweet with very little hops. Flavor is bland and grainy, Bud yeast character, and you can detect the alcohol in the taste as well, which is the hallmark of a cheap ass beer. Mouthfeel is thin, fizzy and not exactly "smooth" Overall, I would say this is a step below Michelob lager, but a step above plain Bud. Someone mentioned on here that it was similar to that Bud Light Platinum. That about nails it. Manufactured swill. This is not anywhere near a German Pils I've ever tasted.
If you told me it was a premium malt liquor or a non-light version of the Platinum and it was priced accordingly, this review would be more forgiving, because from a drink-ability and enjoy-ability standpoint it works on that level. But don't sell me a Pinto and pass it off as a Mustang. That drops you a whole point across the board.
11-17-2012 21:25:49 | More by EagleTalon
3.43/5 rDev +17.1%
From the 12 fl. oz. bottle marked 12275-WA95. Sampled on November 22, 2012.
The pour is basically a golden yellow with a white head, which unlike its two counterparts in the 12-pack, lingers on for the session.
The aroma has plenty of grainy notes and a clean, crisp but muted hop note.
The body is light and creamy.
The taste is also rather grainy with a moderately dry hop ending that lingers for a moment. It does have a pilsener feel to it but it is very much like a Budweiser with a bite. If it is based on a 19th Century recipe it makes me wonder how the original Anheuser-Busch Budweiser must have tasted then.
11-23-2012 00:28:07 | More by puboflyons
2.68/5 rDev -8.5%
12 ounce bottle, born on date of September 30, 2012 (Julian Date 12274 stamped on label). A buddy recently bought me some of the Project 12 beers since they were on sale (got the 12 pack for just $5.75), figured I might as well try it! Served in a pilsener glass, the beer pours a clear dark gold color with almost an inch white head. Head retention is OK, but there isn't much lacing. The brew smells like sweet and bready malt, along with some corn. Taste is just like the aroma. Mouthfeel/body is light, it's smooth and easy to drink with good carbonation. It's not what I'm looking for when I buy a pilsner, but it's not an awful beer either. Worth a try if you can get a single or if you can get some for free. But overall, it's my least favorite of the Project 12 beers I've tried.
03-02-2013 01:29:21 | More by bluejacket74
2.55/5 rDev -13%
Deep clear golden color with a very modest white head. No lacings.
Smell is green apple, some floral aspect.
Taste is sweet puckering apple juicey with a mild euro hop back. The Malt Liquorish too sweet too boozy is not what I expect from a Pils. Not a bad beer but just too sweet for me.
Mouthfeel was pretty good for the style.
Overall an interesting venture from A-B. I think they chickened out on the hops and added some sweetening of some sort. A Malt Liquor Pils for sure.
12-20-2012 05:38:54 | More by Spikester
1.55/5 rDev -47.1%
Ba Review #245
Served On: 12/12/2012
Glassware: Rolling Rock Flute Glass
Labeled ABV: 6.0%
Date/ Code: 12274WA68 (???)
This was from the 'Project 12' mixed pack I found at Evergreen Liquors in Frederick, MD ($11.99).
Look: Poured a crystal clear golden color. Carbonation bubbles stuck to the glass like soda. Some thin patches of lacing here and there. Head was a thin white fizzy coating of bubbles.
Smell: Sweet nose with a wet grass character. Some wet hay notes present. Also some grainy corn. Not that great.
Taste: First up was semi- sweet corn. Then a metallic taste. The finish was clean like water. Some dextrose sweetness did return in the finish.
Not a very good Pilsner in my opinion. I just love how AB-Inbev talks up their beers by naming some popular hops and malts - so I try the stuff and it's a complete disappointment. Textbook case of false advertising.
12-12-2012 17:56:28 | More by CraftBeerTastic
2.01/5 rDev -31.4%
Appearance: clear, golden, bone white head, svelt lacing.
Aroma: sweet, pale malts, corn sweetness, grainy, no hop nose.
Taste: sweet cream corn, malt, nutty, herb hints.
***Regardless of being an AB beer or not, this is not very stylistically accurate. Too much sweetness, no hop profile, no balance, forgettable body. Forgettable in general.
02-18-2013 22:40:27 | More by EgadBananas
3.06/5 rDev +4.4%
12 ounce bottle
Served in a pilsner glass
A - This beer features a golden body and is crystal clear. Three inches of white head rise above.
S - I don't get much. I get some grain and grass. There is the slightest hint of floral hops.
T - It has more flavor than I expected. I detect a sweet corn flavor, but it is balanced by some perceptible hops.
M - Thin and slick. Almost oily on my tongue.
O - 'Twas not a hateful experience. It has some flavor. I at least give A-B a little credit for a little creativity. Maybe some day they can sway public opinion to a wider variety of mass produced beer.
03-12-2013 22:45:15 | More by buschbeer
4.31/5 rDev +47.1%
Budweiser Batch No. 63118 has a thick, creamy, off-white head, lot of thin lacing left on the glass, a clear, reddish-gold appearance, and a good amount of streaming bubbles in the beer. The aroma is subdued, but one can detect light, sweet grains and fruit (think of apricot). The taste is also very fruity (one wonders if fruit is not, in fact, added to the beer), with white bread crust, sweet grain, light brown sugar, and a slight hop bite at the end. Mouthfeel is light to medium, and Budweiser Batch No. 63118 finishes crisp, refreshing, and not too dry. Drinkability is high with this one, and not much alcohol is detected, except in the back of the throat after a few sips. Overall, this is another interesting offering from InBev. Check it out!
01-10-2013 15:48:42 | More by RonaldTheriot
1.73/5 rDev -41%
I don't know how anyone would give this a decent score, for a German style Pilsener. I drank from bottle, stein, and slender glass, but overall was bad.
Appearance- golden, clear
Smell- so faint I can't describe anything
Taste- I actually thought that a brewmaster's collection would taste remotely like something different from all the other watery beer from bedweiser, but I was horribly wrong. I may be sounding a little extreme, but when I tasted, the most I can describe is that I tasted the faintest amount of beer before it vanished. Flavors of malt and hops aren't really worth describing because they might as well not be there. If this tastes different from bud, then it's by a fine margin. In fact, I just poured another one to make sure I wasn't being too harsh. nope, I even want to say busch light tastes better than this, just because it has enough carbonation to give it some bite.
Mouthfeel- light carbonation
Overall- sorry but this one of the blandest beers I have ever drank, I can't describe anything unique. I'm really not a beer snob I just can't taste anything other than watery coors/bud/busch flavor
11-10-2012 07:42:49 | More by OregonGrown7
Batch No. 63118 (Saint Louis, MO) from Anheuser-Busch
69 out of 100 based on 134 ratings.