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!

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

250 Ratings
THE BROS
77
okay

(view ratings)
Ratings: 250
Reviews: 82
rAvg: 2.46
pDev: 30.89%
Wants: 5
Gots: 5 | 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: 250 | Reviews: 82 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of matty
3.38/5  rDev +37.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Copper colored beer with a rapidly fading head.Aroma is the usual macro.Taste is a little bit more maltier than your average macro.My buddies who like the micros consider this to be an acceptable macro.I like macros and micros and find this to be a pretty damn good beer.I would buy again!!

matty, Sep 06, 2008
Photo of Jason
3.35/5  rDev +36.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Presentation: 12 oz gold and black trimmed can, blurb about how much is effort is put into making this beer on the can. Date on bottom does not tell if it is a packaging date or drink before date.

Appearance: Pale golden hue with a bright clarity, the white lace is wispy and lacks a little in retention. By the end of the glass the head was virtually gone.

Smell: Extremely clean to the nose, touch of fresh sweet husky grain and not much more than that.

Taste: Very crisp upfront, Light to moderate body. Crispness adds to the refreshing quality of this brew which in turn makes it that much more drinkable. Malt flavour is there even though it is on the thin side, lots of grain and mild husk flavours floating around. Nice snappy and straight to the point hop bitterness, clean and bitter without any harshness. The hops double up with the grainy character and clean the palate for more. Nice clean and balanced finish, not too dry but no cloying sweetness either.

Notes: Not too shabby for an American Lager, more flavour and character than most of the other big name lagers. Other than the malt being a bit thin this beer is a better pick in comparison to the bland lagers or skunky of the world.

Jason, Mar 24, 2002
Photo of Zorro
3.35/5  rDev +36.2%
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 NeroFiddled
3.33/5  rDev +35.4%
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 hmk22
3.33/5  rDev +35.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A so-so beer -- not overly sweet or rice-y, but nothing that special. The Coors name is downplayed -- you wouldn't know it's even a Coors product unless you read the fine print, wI guess because it's their budget line and they don't want to undercut their base brand (Banquet, which has the same ABV). Whatever, it seems to have limited distribution even where other Coors products are sold. I would place it above other macros' budget lines (e.g., Busch and Milwaukee's Best) which isn't saying much, but hey, it's not trying to be Sierra Nevada.

hmk22, Mar 25, 2012
Photo of beerluvr
3.3/5  rDev +34.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Another favorite "cheap" or "lawnmower" beer of mine. Great iced down in the cooler on those hot, hot Summer days. Gotta love the 30 pak for $10 on sale where I live (NJ)

beerluvr, Nov 07, 2001
Photo of Stinkypuss
3.3/5  rDev +34.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A. Poured from a can into a glass mug. Pale yellow with a fizzy head the dissappears in a minute or two.

S. Light corny malt aroma.

T. Decent flavor of grain, corn and some malt. No real finish, ends up semi-dry with no lingering off flavor.

M. Certainly light bodied and crisp.

D. The best beer Ive had from Coors. Drinks easy enough and not bad at all but not amazing either.

Stinkypuss, Apr 29, 2009
Photo of Frozensoul327
3.28/5  rDev +33.3%
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 dankjohn
3.25/5  rDev +32.1%

dankjohn, Aug 16, 2013
Photo of Conniehophead
3.25/5  rDev +32.1%

Conniehophead, Jan 06, 2013
Photo of ct6mblue
3.25/5  rDev +32.1%

ct6mblue, Mar 13, 2014
Photo of Mortarforker
3.25/5  rDev +32.1%

Mortarforker, Sep 08, 2012
Photo of Zombiekilller2
3.24/5  rDev +31.7%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I bought this beer for a party on Friday thinking it would
Terrible but to my surprise it was pretty decent. Overall it
Taste like a bud but has a slightly better flavor to it.
Poured into a glass was a very golden color with little to none
Foam head.
Overall I would buy this again especially for 11$

Zombiekilller2, Sep 10, 2013
Photo of cliffyp17
3.24/5  rDev +31.7%
look: 1.25 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Can't beat the price for a terrific poundable beer, you'll need to like a sweet taste tho, hell Mel Gibson used to drink it...overall summary for a meager review: yet another cheap beer that beats the hell out of Budwieser...seems to be only available in 30pack...don't see that as a prob though

cliffyp17, Nov 29, 2013
Photo of Lagerquestrian
3.19/5  rDev +29.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

Originally gave a quick review back in August, 2013. I had to do a write up on this after I cracked open some left over cans from a 30 pack purchased in Poncha Springs CO. I kept the cans cold every since. Anyway, cracked open a cold can and couldn't believe this beer. It was awesome in terms of head and appearance. Poured into a regular pint glass. The taste was like an amped up original coors. Much better than Bud and Miller products. This beer will go down easy and is easy on the pocket book. It surprised the hell out of me. Taste like a good lager should. Good camp beer at that. Nothing spectacular but worth the money and probably the best adjunct available. Coors did well with this one. Good for those warm days and nights or any occasion. I remember back in the 90's when the branding and label had coors on it. Now it's just Extra Gold. I don't think they changed the recipe much. Cheers!

Lagerquestrian, Feb 15, 2014
Photo of johnnnniee
3.18/5  rDev +29.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

My friends dad drinks this, so occasionally I'll end up having one or two with him. It's not bad for a macro lager, certainly more body in this one than some of the others. Pours a golden amber with a thin white head that dissipates quickly. Smells of noble hops some clean malts and a bit of skunk. Taste is macro mouthfeel is thin and watery. I have trouble with these, beacuse they are so light I can finish them rather quickly and they can catch up to me. Not bad, not great, but not bad.

johnnnniee, Dec 14, 2007
Photo of lpayette
3.18/5  rDev +29.3%
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 DerekP
3.15/5  rDev +28%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured into my nonic pint glass.

Looks gold! Fizzy. Aggressively carbonated. Decent white head. Slims down, but good lacing.

Smells of sweet corn (canned). A bit of hops in the nose, balancing with the sweetness.

A big bite up front in the taste. A grainy dryness in the finish. Husky flavor. A good level of bittering hops. A refreshing, fairly clean aftertaste. And a rim even hangs around til the end.

I paid around $7.50 for a 12-pk. Not too bad for the price, but also not too bad overall.

DerekP, Aug 09, 2010
Photo of jwc215
3.15/5  rDev +28%
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 Brenden
3.14/5  rDev +27.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.25

Not sure where this can came from, but here it is...

It doesn't look bad. It's nothing spectacular, but the clear and bright dark gold brew holds up a decent layer of foam that manages some spotting.
The smell is clean, but it's got little but corn, something like dry grass, and tangy sweetness.
For a beer with a less than impressive aroma, I'm surprised that there's some substance in the taste. For the style, the roasted malts, grains, husk and mildly soapy flavors are better than most. Add to that the fact that hops can actually be tasted and add a light bitterness that's easily detectable, and you might have the best tasting beer of a crappy genre out there.
Dry and husky on the tongue, it's light in body but nearly medium. It has a bit of graininess to it but nothing too harsh. It's quite crisp and even somewhat smooth.

Brenden, May 15, 2014
Photo of tzieser
3.13/5  rDev +27.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Lots of old memories with this beer. Probably one of the first I've had.

A: pours a typical golden color, a little deeper than most of this style. Decent head with minimal retention.

S: average aroma. Typical corn/adjunct ridden nose with a hint of hops in the back.

T: not bad. Sweet corny, grainy malts with a subtle crisp hop character. Typical watery body but that's to be expected.

M&D: slick mouthfeel. Decent drinkability.

About what I was expecting. A solid beer for the price. Worth getting if all you can get is macros.

tzieser, Jun 28, 2010
Photo of mjw06
3.13/5  rDev +27.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

wow... got this beer the other day for a kickback because it 8.99 for a case. so of course we weren't expecting much. but i must say this is actually a pretty descent brew. and id pick this over most of the other cheap brews.

it has a nice clean, taste of malts that are pretty sweet, with just a little bitterness on the end that last for just a little bit before it finishes cleans. the malt is balanced, not to ricey or too corny or none of that. crisp and refreshing with a light-medium body. still a little watery in taste though... but hey, you know how that goes.

its a good beer for what its meant to do, which is be cheap. next time you need a cheap beer, id highly recommend this one. you may be pleasantly surprised.

mjw06, May 23, 2009
Photo of Bitterbill
3.13/5  rDev +27.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This pours a straw gold with a huge head of foam and tons of bubbles rising from the bottom of the glass.

Corn and grain dominate the nose but there's quite of bit of bitter notes as well.

The taste reflects the nose to a T. Lots more going on here than in the regular Coors or the Light and the flavours, though typical of the style, work ok for me.

Close to medium bodied with lots of carbonation.

Drinkability? A couple of cans back to back isn't out of order. Good drinkability.

Bitterbill, May 01, 2010
Photo of mynie
3.13/5  rDev +27.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

In 2000, I worked at a gas station where people would bring back empties for their deposit. One time someone brought back--from god knows where--a case of Coors golden. The box made it clear that this was Coors' "premium" brew, kinda like their Michelob. It made note of all the awards the beer had won, which sounded fancy to me, at the time, since I didn't know nothing about beer.

Ten years later, the marketing has done a full 180. This is now Coors' answer to PBR or Red Dog--a drinkable budget macro that's sold by the 30 pack. Normally I'd avoid something like this, but I was really intrigued by how a beer could fall so completely out of favor with the people who brewed it. What did this mean? Obviously, the difference between high and low end macros is entirely a matter of marketing, but why the switch?

If Coors light is the color of sun shining through white straw, and if regular Coors is maybe a teeny bit darker, this is about three shades darker than both. I know all about suggestion bias and all that, and so I was all set to bitch about this beer not being dark enough, but, no, it's actually pretty golden. It's also got one of those big fizzy macro heads that looks pretty but then dies away real fast.

Smells rounded and very tame. The sweet, chewy (but very light) maltiness you get out of original Coors, along with that lightly astringent Coors yeast. But it's a little stronger. Not by much, just a little.

Tastes like it smells, like an amped up version of original Coors. Very mellow and round. The malt is bittersweet and the back end is dry. Well balanced, immensely drinkable.

mynie, Apr 09, 2010
Photo of Foyle
3.11/5  rDev +26.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Appearance: pours a 1" fluffy white head which recedes moderately. There is a moderate amount of lacing. Beer is a deep golden color with noticeable streaming carbonation.
Aroma: roasted barley, corn husks, clean water and a bit of hop aroma.
Mouthfeel: light and crisp. This brew goes down easily and finish is quite dry.
Flavor: pleasant taste of toasted bread crust, a bit of buttery toffee, some corn sweetness. There is a mild hop bitterness in the finish and aftertaste.

Foyle, Apr 27, 2014
Coors Extra Gold from Coors Brewing Company
60 out of 100 based on 250 ratings.