1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Budweiser Budvar - Budějovický Budvar, n.p.

Not Rated.
Budweiser BudvarBudweiser Budvar

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
82
good

1,227 Ratings
THE BROS
80
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,227
Reviews: 748
rAvg: 3.61
pDev: 15.24%
Wants: 32
Gots: 45 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Budějovický Budvar, n.p. visit their website
Czech Republic

Style | ABV
Czech Pilsener |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Exported to the US as Czechvar.

(Beer added by: Todd on 10-19-2002)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Budweiser Budvar Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,227 | Reviews: 748 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of stoutman
4.33/5  rDev +19.9%

This is a world class Bohemian lager. Excellent malt, great bitterness, Saaz on the nose. Clear medium yellow. Mild lager-esque aroma of lemons and spices. Thin in the mouth, very mild with good carbonation with some nice subtle grain and citrus flavors. Very much like Pilsner Urquell but nowhere as easily available.

stoutman, Mar 04, 2004
Photo of woemad
3.08/5  rDev -14.7%

Bottle purchased at Huckleberry's in Spokane for $1.39. THis is my second attempt. I bought one of these a while back and it was hopelessly skunked.

Poured a copperish gold. Very little white head. Very modest lacing.

Smell is, alas, slightly skunked. One can still detect the original flavor trying to get through, however. There's a pleasant, newly mown grass scent provided by the hops, and a sweet maltiness hovering in the background.

Flavor, like the scent, is a little marred. Beyond that, the hop taste comes to the fore. It isn't an overbearing hoppiness and lends a nice crispness to the beer.The maltiness is primarily there to give a sturdy backbone to the proceedings. Without the skunky notes, this would be a great warm weather beer.

The mouthfeel is just as it should be. No surprises here.

This is the best slightly marred beer I've had in a while. Yes, that is quite a caveat. If it wasn't for the skunkiness, this would be a very fine beer.

woemad, Mar 03, 2004
Photo of jonnylieberman
3.23/5  rDev -10.5%

Poured out crystal clear. A very well lagered and fined beer. Probably filtered, too.

Smell was OK. A little malt, not much else.

Tasted like a biscuit soaked in water. Maybe the driest beer I've ever tasted. No fruitiness whatsoever. Some good malt flavor, but not quite enough. Hop bitterness is apparent, but hop aroma and flavor were not present.

A very thin beer. Just like any lager.

I got a case of this stuff from a wine shop that was getting rid of their beer for $14.99 At that price, I nearly bathed in the stuff. Very easy to drink.

jonnylieberman, Feb 20, 2004
Photo of jsolack
3.08/5  rDev -14.7%

Appearance:
Strong golden color, medium head.

Smell:
Very light malt smell. Pretty even scent.

Taste:
LIght and malty flavor, smooth and even finish... seems like it could use a little more sweetness in flavor.

Mouthfeel:
Heavy with light carbonation... Clears off tounge quickly.

Drinkability:
Pretty tasty beer, smooth and easy to drink.

jsolack, Feb 19, 2004
Photo of RedDiamond
3.7/5  rDev +2.5%

Clear and radiant yellow snow color, alive with a head that starts active but soon recedes. Crisp, fragrant, malty bouquet. The flavor is gentle, malty and bright with a clean finish. The character is simple. Nothing is overstated or unnecessary.

Unlike American mass market imitations there's no unpleasant bitterness in the finish and no industrial aftertaste. This is the beer the St. Louis / Milwaukie / Golden, CO Axis of Evil never got right. It's not Czechoslovakia's proudest accomplishment, but it's an enjoyable beer drinking experience nonetheless. And it's nice to have a cold one after drinking so much ale lately.

Question: Czechvar only promotes this beer as a Bohemian lager, not as a pilsener. Is a Bohemian lager automatically considered a pilsener even if it's not labeled or promoted as such by the brewer?

RedDiamond, Feb 16, 2004
Photo of mrpicklerelish
3.73/5  rDev +3.3%

Apperance - Poured a light golden color with a very small head that seemed to vanish rather quickly. My second bottle had about an inch thick head that stayed a little longer that left only minimal lacing on the side of the glass.

Smell - A hint fo malty sweetness with some floral scents. Also has a few very small hop notes to it.

Taste - Very very smooth malty sweet taste. Nothing to overpowering but very well done taste.

Mouthfeel - A very light feeling beer, very crisp, with a little carbonation. Very refreshing taste.

Drinkability - Very very easy to drink. One you could easily drink after a day out in the yard doing yardwork in the heat.

Comments - I have also had this in Germany while stationed there a few years ago while in the military and was very happy to see it finally come stateside albeit with a new name. Same great taste, same easy to drink beer that I remember. One not to be missed if you get the chance to try it.

mrpicklerelish, Jan 22, 2004
Photo of Boilermaker88
3.48/5  rDev -3.6%

Poured from a 12oz brown bottle as shown in the picture. Had a clear golden yellow hue and a compact and bubbly white head that slowly faded down to a small cap and left behind webby lace.
The smell was sharp in the nose, with a grassy maltiness, spicy hops, and the faint aroma of skunk. The taste was grassy and lightly grainy up front. A taste of lemongrass and spicy hops eased over the palate and left a nice lingering bitterness in the finish. The feel was light, clean and lively due to the persistent carbonation.
Czechvar was a pleasant, well balanced pils that was good at mid-afternoon after a few hours of yardwork. Not a remarkable beer but definitely not the worst pils I've had roll across my tongue.

Boilermaker88, Jan 18, 2004
Photo of Ieatlambfries
4/5  rDev +10.8%

Poured very gold and very clear with a puffy white/off white head. The smell was slightly malty/grainy with citrus/hop notes. The taste was indicative of the smell. Slightly sweet malt, but well balanced with the citrus/hops. Also some grain and alcohol flavors lingering in the background. I didn't detect the herb flavors that some have remarked about, but I only drank 2, so perhaps if I get the chance again I'll be able to scrutinize it a bit more. Mouthfeel was excellent, crisp and dry. Drinkability was good also, In my opinion helped along by the crispness. Worth trying, and maybe even worth the hype.

Ieatlambfries, Jan 17, 2004
Photo of Zorro
4.5/5  rDev +24.7%

Pours a clear sunny gold color.

No skunking present, a good bottle.

Smells of grain and malt, and a bit of summer flowers and a touch of honey.

Mildly sweet and grainy flavor, with just the right amount of hops. The hops have a pleasant floral quality. I taste absolutely no off tastes at all. A definition of the word LAGER, I considered giving it a 5.

Mouthfeel is perfect, refreshing without being watery, and without going to the place where you have to chew your beer.

Drinkability is excellent, low enough alcohol content so that you can have 3, not so heavy that it fills you up. AND no flaw to detract from it’s fine points.

I wonder just how good this is sampled at the source? There has to be some quality loss from traveling to the other side of the world where I sampled it.

Zorro, Jan 15, 2004
Photo of Andreji
3.18/5  rDev -11.9%

When at a bar you order a bud (i didnt! my friends did it for me!) in such a US bound country as greece, you expect your typical mediocre macro product which boasts its king of beers label. Lucky for my drunk arse, I find myself in front of a budvar bottle as all of my friends, fearful of change, ask themselves: "budvar? what's that?".

But its lucky and malt flavourful variation of the crap you generally draw from get-your-arse-drunk-cheap lagers was a satisfying experience which invited for another few bottles to be ordered. Sweet but bitter, well carbon-balanced, Its worth a try among the ever worse family of "lagers".

Andreji, Jan 09, 2004
Photo of masterbruewer
3.65/5  rDev +1.1%

Pours a light golden color with substantial white head (about a half an inch) with light but steady carbonation.

The smell is grassy or grainy and a little doughy

A nice malty flavor, smooth, a hint of hops at the end. No off flavors. The taste is well balanced. Not too strong but not wimpy with just enough hops to know they're there.

The feel is pleasant, light and carbonated, but not so carbonated as to be astringent.

This is a highly drinkable beer. I'd keep it on hand if I could find it around here.

masterbruewer, Jan 06, 2004
Photo of beergeek279
3.83/5  rDev +6.1%

Served in the pint bottle, into a hefe/pilsner glass. The color was golden, with some foamy white head. The smell was nice hops over a light malt backing. The taste was a very nice Saaz hoppiness over the solid, adjunct taste-free malt base. Mouthfeel was a bit thin. As for drinkability, could have several of these.

Czechvar certainly is the darling of the beer geek for standing up to the "evil empire", and certainly on its own, it's a far superior beer. A nicely hopped, adjunct free, and certainly a beer I will have in the future.

beergeek279, Jan 01, 2004
Photo of HochFliegen
2.05/5  rDev -43.2%

Well to sum it up I wasnt impressed.
Pours a light copper and a not so long lasting head with little to no lacing. The smell was so faint and light I almost couldnt detect it. The best I could say is that it had a slight maltiness. The taste was very watery. No bitterness at all and a very slight malt taste. This beer almost tastes like an american lager ..ie not much taste.

HochFliegen, Dec 30, 2003
Photo of daledeee
3.98/5  rDev +10.2%

Beware! Buy the pint bottle. The 12 oz bottles are in green and are skunk.

Pours like a lager. Some head that goes away. not much lace. Nose is a hint of malt. Fresh smelling. Taste is a nice mellow malt profile with some hops(a little bitter at the end) Mouthfeel is velvetty. This is actually the best part of the beer.

This is one of the best lagers I have had.

daledeee, Dec 22, 2003
Photo of Beastdog75
3.9/5  rDev +8%

Czechvar/Budweiser Budvar is the "other" big name in Bohemian Pilseners (the other of course being Pilsner Urquell). It's nice to see this beer on the North American side of the pond, and it turns out that this indeed is a classic brew in all respects.

Czechvar pours a very nice bubbly golden color with a decent foam white head that lasts for a little over a minute and leaves some thin lace. The smell is a bit on the neutral side (luckily it wasn't skunked), and I could only detect some light malt crispness. The mouthfeel is crisp and bubbly, the way a pilsener should be. Very drinkable. The flavor has some light malt flavors and even has a bit of an almost sugary sweetness in there, although it is very brief. A hint of butteriness also flashes by very quickly. The hops add some very nice flavors in there, ranging from herbal qualities to spiciness to a leafy green flavor (which seems the most predominant of the hoppy qualities). The beer does not finish out that bitter though. In the aftertaste, some toasty malt qualities arise at first, but it subsides into cleaness, and then the hops kick in some dryness that lingers for a bit. The beer finishes with a light alcoholic warmth (of course, nowhere near ale proportions).

Czechvar is less hoppy and a bit more malty than Pilsner Urquell, and it is probably an easier drinking beverage. If comparing to Anheuser-Busch's Bud, there is simply no comparison. A classic brew in every sense of the word.

Beastdog75, Dec 05, 2003
Photo of DrunkMcDermott
3.03/5  rDev -16.1%

Oooh, looks like my first taste of this classic brew is from a slightly skunked bottle. Still, it has a great spicy hop nose and a very decent head. I almost got kind of an orangey hop taste. Even with this sample, I can tell it’s simply more of a beer taste. I’ll hope to try this again soon and re-review it.

DrunkMcDermott, Nov 26, 2003
Photo of biernuss
4.13/5  rDev +14.4%

I first tasted this beer at a beer tasting festival in State College, PA and was impressed. So I waited a little while and picked up a couple of bottles to further check it out. I am still impressed with this style. It pours golden with a nice thick head. My palate is still unrefined but I like the taste and feel of this beer. I will put this brew on my "to buy often": list.

biernuss, Nov 24, 2003
Photo of CharlesRiver
3.85/5  rDev +6.6%

Poured from a 1 pint, 9oz bottle. I don't have a Czechvar glass so I used a Bitburger. Best before date is 03/2004. Very light yellow in color with a good size white head that holds up. Looks very effervesant in the glass as tons of small lines of bubbles make their way to the top.

The smell is malty and sweet with a touch of hops. The taste is kind of what I expected. Crisp, clean, refreshing with a solid taste profile. Smooth and sweet in the beginning with a slight bitterness coming through in the middle and end. A touch dry, but nice.

This is a beer that I should drink on poker night. I don't have enough appreciation for this style, but I should. Good Beer.

CharlesRiver, Nov 21, 2003
Photo of Charthepirate
3.53/5  rDev -2.2%

The original budwieser, much, much better than it's american counterpart.

Poured a golden yellow with a creamy head. Gorgeous, but the head dissapeared quickly leaving only a little lacing.

Smell is rancid. Seems like it could be skunked, but there are smells there that aren't skunk, and aren't pleasant either.

Despite the smell, the flavor is pleasent. Saaz hops flavor is very strong and very spicy. The skunk I smelled doesn't seem to manifest itself on the toungue, but I can still smell it lending unpleasentness to the flavor. The maltiness is stronger than most pills, and balances the hops nicely.

Average mouthfeel, needs more carbonation.

All in all a solid brew, not fantastic but much better than it's american ilk.

Charthepirate, Nov 19, 2003
Photo of HardTarget
3.18/5  rDev -11.9%

Green foil topped bottle with best by 06.06.04 (sampled Nov. 2003)
Aroma: Clean balanced smell, a bit peppery, guessing Saaz hops
Appearance: Bright clear gold with a transient white head that collared but didn’t lace
Flavor: Clean, crisp, well balanced. Somewhat like Grolsch but not as intense. Some bread like characters, maybe like sourdough.
Mouthfeel: Medium body with some lingering hop bite at the end, more of a nibble. Very dry finish.
Overall Impression: Light, clean refreshing lager. A good thirst quencher and a nice light session beer. While it’s possible to drink a few more, it’s lacking a bit in terms of memorable character that would make you crave another. Bland is too harsh of a term, mild is closer. Would choose this over any American Macro, but it’s down on my shopping list of micros.

HardTarget, Nov 19, 2003
Photo of Sigmund
2.98/5  rDev -17.5%

Rerate: 500 ml bottle, airborne from Praha/Prague, 5.0% ABV. Golden colour, large head disappears instantly, no lacing, bubbly. Some Saaz aroma, but not nearly as good as Starobrno or Staropramen. Flavour is rather malty for a pilsener, reasonable bitterness. Drinkable, but not my favourite pils.
Original rating: I had this beer from a can in Norway, 4,5% ABV. The expiry date was 6 days ago, i.e. the production date was 1 year earlier, and the beer had not been stored cool at my retailer's. This must have impaired the quality, exactly how much I can't tell. A couple of other raters had the same impression of the beer as I had, and they probably had a fresher can/bottle. Disappointment is the word, folks! Still, I'd like to sample this brew fresh on tap in the Czech Rep. before letting the axe fall. As it is, I have to say that Staropramen has a lot more going. (If anyone would be in doubt: Even outdated and more or less skunked, this 'Budweiser' has a lot more flavour than its American namesake.)

Sigmund, Nov 17, 2003
Photo of AtLagerHeads
3.83/5  rDev +6.1%

The pure crystal clear golden body initally gets a huge cream colored head, but this heads shrinks back rapidly and leaves but little lace on the glass. The nose when the bottle is opened gives brief hints of skunkiness, but this quickly passes to be replaced by a very distinct smell of honey. The malty flavor is reminiscent of Urquell, but does not have nearly as much Saaz hops to it. I fairly light body seems a bit thin, but the drinkability here is just fine.

AtLagerHeads, Nov 11, 2003
Photo of feloniousmonk
3.75/5  rDev +3.9%

Appearance: clear, pure yellow color, with afine, thick bone-white head, slowly shifting into a tight ring.
Aroma: blank and bare, simple, but not shallow, a hint of hops, dry, but delicate, possessing a stoicly sophisticated character.
Taste: nice little lift of hops enters the tongue, then quickly heads out and leaves the palate in a mellow condition. Light bodied, good balance, miniscule malt, making for an overall very nice, satisfactory lager. Only a few hop notes away from a pilsner like Urquell, perhaps.
After finally sampling this brew, I can understand why Anheuser-Busch has spent so much time, money and energy spanning a century plus to contest this beer's right to exist. If the Budweiser drinking suckers knew how dumbed down and cheap their version is, compared to the original they swiped from, in name, style, and slogan, who knows, maybe they'd question their choice.

Cheers to Morris729 for sending one out to me!

feloniousmonk, Nov 10, 2003
Photo of grynder33
3.95/5  rDev +9.4%

Poured a dark gold large head with a rich malt hop aroma that you usually associate with European lagers. The taste was a nice blend of malt and hop It reminded me of when I went to Europe and drank the wonderful German lagers and realized that this was the way beer was meant to taste. I prefer this to Urquell

grynder33, Nov 08, 2003
Photo of WVbeergeek
3/5  rDev -16.9%

Damn didn't check the date before buying it, best before12/2002 that is probably well past this beers prime, appears deep golden filtered with a nice frothy white head leaves speckled lace as it dwindles doesn't look bad nothing in the appearance says it's old. Let's check aromatics, seems stale but the hop presence of mild Saaz are still there along with a grainy sweetness not too complex and best of all it doesn't smell completely off or rotten. Tastes like a crisp Czech lager to me a hint of fruitiness and some bready yeast notes that I never recalled being there before nice crisp Saaz hops in the finish just a bit mild in flavor. Mouthfeel is light to medium in body decent carbonation better than yellow and fizzy right. Drinkability is very good for this summer session Czech lager from Budejovice, seems a bit still but not bad very drinkable even after almost a year past it's prime.

WVbeergeek, Nov 06, 2003
Budweiser Budvar from Budějovický Budvar, n.p.
82 out of 100 based on 1,227 ratings.