Dismiss Notice
Get 12 monthly issues of BeerAdvocate magazine and save $5 when you select "auto-renew."

Subscribe now →
Dismiss Notice
Join our email list →

And we'll send you the latest updates and offers from BeerAdvocate, because knowing is half the battle.

Budweiser Budvar - Budějovický Budvar, n.p.

Not Rated.
Budweiser BudvarBudweiser Budvar

Educational use only; do not reuse.

765 Reviews

(Read More)
Reviews: 765
Hads: 1,375
Avg: 3.61
pDev: 20.5%
Wants: 44
Gots: 129 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Budějovický Budvar, n.p.
Czech Republic | website

Style | ABV
Czech Pilsener | 5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: grdahl on 06-22-2001

Exported to the US as Czechvar.
View: Beers (12) | Events
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Budweiser Budvar Alström Bros
Reviews: 765 | Hads: 1,375
Photo of Andreji
3.15/5  rDev -12.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

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".

 631 characters

Photo of masterbruewer
3.65/5  rDev +1.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

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.

 520 characters

Photo of beergeek279
3.8/5  rDev +5.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

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.

 540 characters

Photo of HochFliegen
2.06/5  rDev -42.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 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.

 379 characters

Photo of daledeee
3.95/5  rDev +9.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

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.

 372 characters

Photo of Beastdog75
3.86/5  rDev +6.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

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.

 1,471 characters

Photo of DrunkMcDermott
3.1/5  rDev -14.1%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

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.

 312 characters

Photo of biernuss
4.06/5  rDev +12.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

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.

 377 characters

Photo of CharlesRiver
3.83/5  rDev +6.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

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.

 675 characters

Photo of Charthepirate
3.44/5  rDev -4.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

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.

 748 characters

Photo of HardTarget
3.2/5  rDev -11.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

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.

 841 characters

Photo of Sigmund
2.97/5  rDev -17.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

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.)

 1,012 characters

Photo of AtLagerHeads
3.8/5  rDev +5.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

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.

 466 characters

Photo of feloniousmonk
3.71/5  rDev +2.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

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!

 944 characters

Photo of grynder33
3.95/5  rDev +9.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 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

 311 characters

Photo of WVbeergeek
3/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

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.

 899 characters

Photo of allboutbierge
3.76/5  rDev +4.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Of the Bohemian Pilsners I have had while I was in Prague this was my favorite. Its a shame that a certain evil empire shares in the same name in the states.

I have had Czechvar before and surprise surprise, they are the same. However this offering was slightly more crisp and flavorful. Im sure the fact that it was probably less than a month old had something to do with it.

Color is a light and vibrant gold with a mountainous white head resting on top. Aroma is not very pungent but brings sweet and delicate notes to the nose. Flavor is well balance and full of delicate, behind-scenes-tastes. No real herblike elements to its taste.

Mouthfeel was quenching and extremely easy to drink.

 700 characters

Photo of bditty187
3.61/5  rDev 0%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Clear yellow-gold hue, large brilliant white head, decent retention, slowly fades to a foamy collar, minimal lace. The nose was off-putting and I was surprised with that. The bouquet reeks of cheap fusel alcohol and grains… not very Pilsner-like and not inviting. The palate is somewhat lacking but much improved over the nose... mild, pleasant bitterness, clean, crisp maltiness from start to finish. Clean aftertaste with hints of Saaz hops. Well constructed. Refreshing. Not as good as a fresh Pilsner Urquell but I could quaff this again. Strong, medium body with solid carbonation… a good hearty Pils mouthfeel. The abv is appropriate to session with. It is worth trying at least once.

Brown Bottle, 1 pint, 9 ounces.
Best Before: 04/2004

 749 characters

Photo of GeoffRizzo
3.92/5  rDev +8.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

Clear and transparent golden hue, a very thin and non-active head. Great lacing, and a ton of carbonation. A rather jumpy hoppy aroma, strong and offensive. Up front, some spicy notes, seems to be medium bodied, grassy and a bit slick; Saaz hop detection throughout the body. A rich and very smooth brew, some bready notes towards the finish, very tasty and enjoyable.

 368 characters

Photo of ALEBOY
4.03/5  rDev +11.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Can't get this beer in Australia so I had a friend bring some back from the U.K. . After all the hype i was ready to be very dissapointed, but instead I was very pleasantly surprised. A truly nice pilsner, worthy of praise. I was however a bit dissapointed in the lack of saaz aroma in comparason to Urquel.

 307 characters

Photo of Mustard
3.11/5  rDev -13.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Presentation: 12oz. green bottle; "best before" warning -- in this case 07/22/04 -- printed dot-matrix style on the rear label; purchased as a stray single from Trader Joe's for, I believe, $0.83.

Appearance: Pours a fairly clear, brilliant gold; smallish, sudsy, snow-white head -- albeit only upon a rough pour; b-cup's worth of lace; head retreats more quickly than the French army.

Aroma: Faintly of grain and herbal type hops.

Taste: Slightly thin, bready malt profile upfront; mellow, floral hop bitterness in the finish; firm notes of grain and grass throughout; beautifully spicy; not the least bit sweet; light to medium bodied with a somewhat crisp mouthfeel; a tad overcarbonated, even after an abusively rough pour.

Notes: Beyond the spiciness, was fairly underwhelmed.

 793 characters

Photo of DarrellK
3.36/5  rDev -6.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I agree with the previous reviewer in his assessment. The beer pours as a gold to amber color which is a bit richer than most Czech Pils. The average hoppy aroma comes through a full head that disapates quite quickly. More like a Bohemian body that say a Pilsner Urquell but similar in finish with some hops lingering on the palate.

It does stand up to the cold quite well and is a good post lawn mowing beer that is clearly superior to it's domestic counterpart. About four years ago I had a chance to try a six pack froma friend in the Czech embassy in DC and I would say that it is quite similar to my original tasting back then and not diluted by the new commercialization.

 680 characters

Photo of ToneControl
4/5  rDev +10.8%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Just a note to help explain the controversy:

This is still a good bottled lager, but no longer an excellent one. The trouble is, it is way below the quality it used to be until the early 1990s. I suppose communism must have some virtues!

When I visited Prague and Bratislava in 1990, beers there had stars on the label - 5 stars meant top quality (incl. Budvar and Urquell). Can you beat that, a government that grades your beers for you?

The missing characteristics I have noticed are the strange creamy texture and the powerful hoppy dryness, both now long gone.

Nowadays, Budvar is a pleasant lager, but I would no longer buy a case or more. I wondered if the dismantled Iron curtain allowed the Saaz hops to be sold abroad more easily, or maybe fighting the copyright battles with the "king of Beers" affected the brewing of Budvar too much.

 858 characters

Photo of Naerhu
4.27/5  rDev +18.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

Clear shimmering gold. White average head with average retention. Aroma is a bouquet of peppery floral hops. The hops stand out against firm malt frame. Creamy mouth feel. I could drink these all night. Actually, I did that last night. My six pack was gone in 90 minutes.

 271 characters

Photo of johnrobe
3.57/5  rDev -1.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Probably like a lot of folks, I tried this because I wanted to try the REAL Budweiser. While it is leaps and bounds better than its American doppelganger, Czechvar is not quite up to par with some of the best Euro lagers. Still, it's a solid brew that I'd be happy to buy again for an afternoon of barbecuing.
It pours a medium gold with a white head that maintains just a wisp of itself. Nice Saaz hops aroma in the nose with a bit of green fruit and grassy grain, and faint creamy malt. This brew is pretty crisp and clean with cereal-like grain and bitter Saaz taking the forefront but the light, sweet malt makes a brief appearance around mid-palate. Traditionally, Bohemian Pilseners are more substantial than their German counterparts but this one seems a tad light to me....like it could use just a little bit more malt. Even so, this is a solid brew good for summer quaffing.

 884 characters

Budweiser Budvar from Budějovický Budvar, n.p.
82 out of 100 based on 765 ratings.