1. Extreme Beer Fest. March 20 & 21, 2015 in Boston, Mass. Join us!
  2. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  3. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Coors Extra Gold - Coors Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Coors Extra GoldCoors Extra Gold

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
60
poor

261 Ratings
THE BROS
77
okay

(view ratings)
Ratings: 261
Reviews: 81
rAvg: 2.48
pDev: 31.45%
Wants: 5
Gots: 8 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Coors Brewing Company visit their website
Colorado, United States

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: Bitterbill on 09-06-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Coors Extra Gold Alström Bros
Ratings: 261 | Reviews: 81 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of jwc215
3.15/5  rDev +27%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours golden yellow (slightly darker than most macros) with a thin white head that soon disappears to a thin patch, then nothing but a thin white ring.

The smell is of typical overprocessed hops and corn-like husk.

The taste is of watered-down slick processed hops, corn-like adjuncts and a slight hint of sweetish malt.

The feel is fairly smooth. A hint of body becomes apparent in the feel. Plenty of watery. A slight oily texture is left.

It's a cheap macro. For three bucks and change for a six-pack and easy accessibility, it could be worse. It's acceptable enough for me to bring to the community pool in the heat of the summer occassionally (where only canned beers are allowed). A cheap "beat the heat" beer, but otherwise forget about it. I found this left over in the fridge from the summer, so decided to review it. Won't be revisiting this again until next summer by the pool. That's about all it's good for.
Scores based solely on being a cheap macro.

jwc215, Sep 25, 2006
Photo of lpayette
3.18/5  rDev +28.2%
look: 4 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Details- 12 oz. aluminum can that I snagged for free at a charity golf tournament I was participating in for work. When I saw it I knew that I'd have to take it home for reviewing just for kicks.

Appearance- A very appropriate gold color. Fairly fluffy white head with larger than average bubbles. Tons of carbonation. Very clear. and... Has some decent lacing! I'll have to concede that the appearance is better than most Macros.

Smell- Typical grainy macro smells, but with a very astringent alcohol odor. pretty unappealing even within the category.

Taste- A pretty good combination of malt sweetness and hop bitterness; each has its moments on the palate, but I'd definitely say that this is maltier than most american macros. Strong suggestions in the flavor tell me that corn is more than likely used.

Mouthfeel- Much thicker and fuller than most in this style. Approaches medium bodied. Carbonation dies down very quickly. Beer becomes a bit flat.

Other notes- One of the better macro beers I've had. Easy to drink but has character too. No, I wouldn't pick this out at the store, but I might drink one if I had to choose between the typical BMC selections and this.

lpayette, Sep 18, 2006
Photo of BryanCarey
2.88/5  rDev +16.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Coors Extra Gold is a basic lager with a little more flavor and character than the average mainstream brew. This beer is a little darker than other beers of its genre but it has perfect clarity, little foam, and the scent of corn, cereal grains, and yeast- qualities that are typical of a big business brew.

The taste of Coors Extra Gold, however, is a little bit better than its close relatives. The taste of sweet grains is evident, along with yeast, and very little hop. Ordinarily, qualities like these would result in a lower rating, but Coors Extra Gold is fractionally fuller bodied, offering a heartier, maltier taste than its close companions, Coors Original and Coors Light.

One annoyance with Coors Extra Gold is that it is only sold in 30- packs. You cannot buy smaller quantities. But on the bright side, the price is very low. It is common to find a 30- pack selling for only about $12, which is the equivalent of buying a six pack for only $2.40. It might be offered for sale in some markets in smaller packages but I have only seen it offered in the large thirty pack size.

Normally, I would preach against a product like Coors Extra Gold, due to its macro- brewed character and its adjunct qualities. But something about this beer makes me enjoy it more than I should. I think it’s the added body (when compared to Coors best selling products), the darker color, and the slightly maltier taste. This, added with the fact that it is much better than other beer in its price range, makes Coors Extra Gold a good choice of brew for certain occasions.

BryanCarey, Aug 16, 2006
Photo of tgbljb
3.5/5  rDev +41.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Poured a deep golden color with impressive white puffy head. Smell is minimal, with some sweet malt notes present. Taste is good with a strong malt character. Finished very refreshing and thirst quenching. Makes a very nice spacer. Can't beat it at $11.99 an 30 pack. Took a case on vacation and everyone liked it.

tgbljb, Jul 19, 2006
Photo of BadBadger
2.33/5  rDev -6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Coors Extra Gold is nothing to get excited about. This lager pours a cyrstal clear light gold color. Perhaps the "extra gold" refers to the color, as there is sadly nothing golden about this brew. The smell is a generic macro through out, with nothing but adjunct coming through-corn? No hint of malt or hops. The tatse is bland, no flavor at all. The mouthfeel is wet. Why buy this american macro lager, when there are better ones out there such as Miller High Life?

BadBadger, May 12, 2006
Photo of Rumpole
3.6/5  rDev +45.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

In Coors’ bevvy lineup, Extra Gold fits neatly between the main market Coors Original/Coors Light and the ‘sub-premium’ (read: cheap) Keystone. It was once Coors Extra Gold, but shrewd brewery marketers who no doubt know their business dropped the parent name some time ago and now it is simply Extra Gold Lager. Apparently it is available in bottles, but not here in glamorous Worcester, MA, where I have only seen it sold by the can in 30-packs for $14. Aside from the name change, the black and gold label has changed little, and has a pleasant simplicity that appeals to the Rumpole eye.

That visual appeal continues when you crack open the narrow straight-sided can and pour; Coors bolts to an early lead with the look of this beer, a beautiful rich and vibrant gold; here is a brew that lives up to its name. The scent is pleasant as well, a light but straightforward beer-like smell with a whiff of citrus twing.

Things continue to the good with the flavor profile; only some body, but no lack of maltiness of an uncomplex kind. Not much fruitiness, just enough hops to stay with that malt, and with that same citrine, seltzery lemon-lime note present in the scent. To be sure, there’s some adjunct graininess in there too, no getting away from it, but it doesn’t punish the palate or throw the beer off balance. It finishes neatly and without fuss. With a good smoke this stuff soars. Very potable, easy to put back several in succession without strain. I’d compared this directly with Red Dog, Miller’s attempt at extra punch in the value-priced bracket, and the Extra Gold took the biscuit in a walkover.

Keep this bargain under your hat, because for all the noise about Schlitz, Pabst Blue Ribbon and Miller High Life – justifiably so, granted – this Extra Gold quietly holds its own in that league, and in its own way; while it doesn’t have as much of the top notes, it’s maltier and stronger in the midsection of the palate, and as such can be a welcome and refreshing change of pace. It’s priced competitively in that crowd, too. What’s more, the brewery website confirms it at a solid 5% abv. Here’s a heavy hitting value from Coors.

Rumpole, Mar 08, 2006
Photo of Mebuzzard
2.17/5  rDev -12.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3

Drank from can.

Not much aroma. Smelled like a corn, barley, hops dirty sock. But not too strong.
Taste was shallow, light, and short lasting. Corn, straw, some malt. Wide mouth gave it points for drinkability. I can pound these b/c of its lightness. Good for frat parties, fishing, or a dare

Mebuzzard, Jan 26, 2006
Photo of ColoradoBobs
1.55/5  rDev -37.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Previous reviewer pretty much said it all. Not much here, except a hint of malt and hops, mostly covered by cheap adjuncts and bit of skunkiness. Sad to say, this is more expensive than Coors Light, but it's not worth any more. Drink this only if someone else buys it for you, you're thirsty, and there's no water available.

ColoradoBobs, Oct 22, 2005
Photo of AltBock
1.2/5  rDev -51.6%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

12oz. can that I got for free. That's a good a thing because I would never pay for the stuff. The only good about this was the appearance, which was a golden color with a 1 inch of white foam. It went down hill from here. The smell was horrific! It smelled like a cross between apple juice and urine. The taste and mouthfeel were the same, a heavily waterd down malty beer. Give me a bottle of water over this any day. If you want a cheap beer with no taste then get this beer.

AltBock, Aug 05, 2005
Photo of cro250klr
1.08/5  rDev -56.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

There are a few things in this world that will probably never be fully understood....How could Jesus have turned water into wine? How could Anheuser and Busch train a Clydesdale to piss in a bottle? And how in hell does Coors manage to take pure mountain water and render it undrinkable.!? I spent time in Aspen in the early 80's and the waters are beautiful. I also drank Coors out there. From what I remember it wasn't that bad. Now, I can down maybe three before my head is exploding. The only good thing that I could say about this beer now is that when it's poured in a glass it doesn't look that bad. And that glass better be sterile enough for surgery because, if it isn't, the head will disappear in two seconds. As far as smell, taste and mouthfeel, I'm sorry. It blows. Drinkability? Well, you know how your piss looks if you don't drink enough of water? Real dark yellowish/orange. If you put that piss in carbonated water you'd have a pretty close example of Extra Gold. I don't thing Adolf Coors had this in mind when he started his brewery. This is just another fine example of what happens when any buisiness gets too big. More money is sunk into advertising than into product quality.

cro250klr, Mar 29, 2005
Photo of Suds
2.5/5  rDev +0.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Actually, this beer doesn’t look half bad when poured from a 12 ounce can into a footed pilsner glass. It’s a deep golden color, with an almost champagne like effervescence and a respectable 1.5 inches of creamy white foam. It’s really an appealing sight. The smell is sweetish, with a malt and grain theme, and a little vegetable character in the background. Essentially no hops in the aroma. Taste starts a little sweet, with a one-dimensional graininess, and the finish is crisp and somewhat dry. Slight bitterness in the finish. It’s a light, very watery beer…as expected. There’s nothing really offensive about this beer, it just comes up short in the intensity of its flavor.

Suds, Jan 22, 2005
Photo of Gusler
2.05/5  rDev -17.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

The beer after departing the 12-ounce brown bottle resides in the glass a clear golden amber color with a portly bright white head that frothy in texture and the resultant lace a thin sheet to conceal the glass. Nose is all malt, crisp and clean, start somewhat sweet, lightly malted and the top thin. finish is prickly in its acidity, the hops apropos to the style, dry lingering aftertaste, well it will keep you from dying of thirst!

Gusler, Dec 14, 2004
Photo of Zorro
3.35/5  rDev +35.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a clear truly golden colored brew, looks like a regular Coors only more concentrated.

Smell is clean with a clear malt scent to it and the distinctive lemony yeast smell to it that only Coors brewery seems to have. There is a bit of corn smell to this but it is a supporting scent not a main feature.

Taste is fairly yeasty and lemony; it tastes like Coors regular X2. I grew up on Coors in Texas and New Mexico so I do like the Coors distinctive flavor. Flavor is quite clean for an American lager, it's no Microbrew but it is better than a Budweiser, which doesn't taste like much.

Mouthfeel is good; it is a solid brew that is more grain than water.

Drinkability is good, it isn't the best lager out there but it isn't bad.

Zorro, Nov 30, 2004
Photo of ZAP
3.03/5  rDev +22.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Clear gold color...small whisp of white lace...cooked corn and soft graininess on the nose...full bodied for a lager..pretty thick for a lager...taste is sweeter for the style at first but finishes dry...I think this is one of the better American lagers made...not a great beer but fuller bodied and tastier than most...I can enjoy these...better out of a can actually...

Someone mentioned this was rolled out to compete with Busch...If I remember right it was originally slotted to compete with MGD, etc...kind of a tastier Coors, but not premium like Michelob or Lowenbrau were considered...

ZAP, Jan 13, 2004
Photo of Shiloh
3/5  rDev +21%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

An average macro from start to finish and well deserving of a 3.0 score. Certainly drinkable when watching the game or any other social type function but lacks character.
Medium/light body of a bright golden hue and light carbonation.
Very limited head/lace/ring/&cling.
Slight grain in the nose.
Sweet complete with some evidence of the hops but limited.

Shiloh, Jan 01, 2004
Photo of GeoffRizzo
2.95/5  rDev +19%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Dingy pale yellow hue, thin head, but decent lacing; husky and grainy nose at best. Crisp and a bit of a nice twanginess up front, there is some decent malt flavoring, very thin bodied. Not much in the hops category, some adjunct flavoring noticed in the body. Overall, a bit refreshing and she does go down smooth, yet not to go bonkers over.

GeoffRizzo, Oct 26, 2003
Photo of yen157
2.73/5  rDev +10.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Orange tinted head which proved to be slightly sticky. Deep, dirty gold body that reminds me of slightly tarnished brass. Stewed grain nose (not in a malty way) with some dusty hops thrown in to remind you that this is, indeed a beer. On tasting, it’s hard to miss the big mouthful of bland grain. Nondescript hop flavor was present along with a surprisingly decent bitterness for a sub-premium American lager. The bitterness doesn’t build at all, but at least it’s there to do a little cleansing.

Not to shabby for a macro, especially since it was rolled out to compete with Busch!

yen157, Oct 24, 2003
Photo of AtLagerHeads
2.95/5  rDev +19%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Not being a Coors hater I was pleased to give this beer a try and it did not disappoint me. It does appear to be darker gold than the original formula and that gives the sense of more body even if the body has much the same lighter texture and feel. Decent enough head that does reced quickly and only light lace effect. Sense of malt and some adjuncts in both taste and aroma. Drinkable beer even if it does come from one of the major macro brewers.

AtLagerHeads, Jul 22, 2003
Photo of BeerResearcher
2.3/5  rDev -7.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Not a bad "looking" beer", then it goes down hill from there. It really is gold in color with a foamy white head and not much lace. Smells of damp corncob, sweet malt and mild hops. The modest malt body has tastes of hay and some pleasant herbal grainy qualities. The hops are barely discernable, but what there is, is hardly describable. I guess a light metallic taste is not too far off. It is better than I expected.
ps - This was a joke father's day gift from my college senior son.

BeerResearcher, Jun 15, 2003
Photo of adamboeckman
3.93/5  rDev +58.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Gold and black can that talks about patience in creating the distinctive lagers of the past and other statements. Not much for a head when poured, it quickly disappears. However, the aroma is attractive and the lager has a dark color compared to its other Coors beers. My first taste of it was great, however it lacks in the balance of the malts, and has sort of a over roasted taste. Altogether though, this beer in my opinion is the best of the Coors brand and I would recommend for something new. Not a everyday beer though.

adamboeckman, Jun 08, 2003
Photo of NeroFiddled
3.33/5  rDev +34.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a crystal-clear golden body topped by a creamy bright-white head that displays decent retention and leaves some nice lace. The color is actually somewhat darker than the standard Coor's, although I'm not sure why. I was under the impression that the Extra Gold was simply the standard banquet beer with additional aging time; although based on the color there seems to have been some additional Maillard reactions taking place in the kettle as well. But the label also mentions the "slow aging of the roasted malts" (?) and the "three extra brewing steps to craft every batch" - whatever that means! The nose delivers the sulphur constituents and gentle fruit of the Coor's yeast in combination with a mildly grainy malt. The body is light, and combines with a fine and somewhat moderate carbonation leaving it lightly crisp in the mouth. The flavor displays a well-balanced, grainy malt threaded with mild, background hop flavor. It finishes drying with some residual malt, a touch of light herbal hop flavor, and a very mild bitterness. It's got a little bit of character to it which is nice! Refreshing.

NeroFiddled, Apr 28, 2003
Photo of Rifrafboy
2.53/5  rDev +2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours golden yellow. Little head. Taste is maltier and more smooth than regular Coors. Hoppiness is apparent as are accents of grains, husks? This is nice and malty. This is better than I expected, and would call this a premium Coors product. Wish it was cheaper and more available where I live.

Rifrafboy, Mar 26, 2003
Photo of xXTequila
2.98/5  rDev +20.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

When I am looking for something cheap to stock the fridge up with I usually pick this one.
Looks just like every other american lager. Pale yellow with hardly any head.
Smells clean and sweet, alittle grainy.
Tastes much more malty than most American Lagers. Crisp with a dry finish.

xXTequila, Feb 05, 2003
Photo of Frozensoul327
3.28/5  rDev +32.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I tried this stuff as i had never heard of it, and it was 11.99 for a 30 pack. I was quite suprised, as this stuff was very gold in color and had (GASP) real flavor! It reminded me of coors original, and for the most part was, with the exception of a smoother element and not much of a head. Overall, it's not a bad beer by any standards. If you are a coors fan, give it a try.

Frozensoul327, Jan 19, 2003
Photo of Dogbrick
1.63/5  rDev -34.3%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Can version. I paid exactly 50 cents to try this. I was all ready to make fun of the name but this beer really does have an nice gold color which surprised me. It smelled and tasted pretty crappy though, and that didn't surprise me at all.

Dogbrick, Dec 04, 2002
Coors Extra Gold from Coors Brewing Company
60 out of 100 based on 261 ratings.