Dismiss Notice
Subscribe to BeerAdvocate magazine and get 12 issues / year of fresh beer content delivered to your door each month.

Already subscribe? to manage your subscription.

Hamm's - Hamm's Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Hamm'sHamm's

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
68
poor

232 Reviews
THE BROS
74
okay

(Read More)
Reviews: 232
Hads: 665
rAvg: 2.9
pDev: 25.52%
Wants: 25
Gots: 92 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Hamm's Brewing Co. visit their website
Wisconsin, United States

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  4.70% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 06-20-2001

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (3) | Events
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Hamm's Alström Bros
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 232 | Hads: 665
Photo of emerge077
3.03/5  rDev +4.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

This seemed like the perfect compliment to a Frito pie at Quencher's Saloon in Chicago. At $2, I couldn't complain...

It poured an apple juice gold, with plenty of ascending streams of carbonation. One finger of head rapidly faded to a thin white ring around the edge. A small amount of spotty lace resulted, but it didn't really stick.

Light corn aroma, with a vague floral scent behind it.

Mild artificial apple flavor, and dry papery malt. No hops to speak of, although overall it's pretty inoffensive. Light and gassy feeling. As long as it's served ice cold, it's not hard to drink when you're thirsty. Possibly a better alternative to some of the more tasteless macros.

This will always remind me of Johnnie's in Chicago... RIP. (739 characters)

Photo of BuckeyeNation
2.98/5  rDev +2.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This review is part of Macro Smackdown XIV. Hamm's has an interesting history. The brand originated in St. Paul, MN and has since been owned by Olympia, Miller and now Pabst. It's now brewed in the Pabst brewery in Milwaukee, the same facility that brews its competitor today, Old Style Beer. Let's see which one is the better pale lager.

Hamm's is almost indistinguishable from the other beer. I don't like its cap quite as much since it's smaller, less creamy, less persistent and leaves no lace, but then Old Style isn't exactly a masterpiece either. Sad to say that most people will never see either one since the beer will be going from can to mouth.

The nose is about what I expected. Unfortunately, even though it's similar in nature to Old Style's nose, it isn't quite as enjoyable. It smells less fresh (even though the beer is fresh) and more musky. A minor difference, but a significant one.

Given the aroma, I thought Hamm's would suffer on the palate, but that isn't the case. It tastes quite a bit like Old Style and I'm not sure I could tell them apart if I wasn't drinking them side by side. This is actually pretty refreshing beer if your expectations aren't sky high. If I had to drink an ice cold macro lager at a cookout in July, either one of these would do just fine.

After multiple mouthfuls, I've decided that it's impossible to tell the mouthfeels apart. They're both acceptable for the style in terms of heft and carbonation. I still struggle with reviewing *completely* to style, so the scores won't be quite as high as they would be if I did.

As noted in the Old Style review, I continue to be impressed by Pabst. The beer they create (these two plus Pabst Blue Ribbon especially) is so superior to Budweiser, Miller and Coors products that I'm surprised at the sales figures. Well... maybe I'm not. Advertising dollars usually win out. Even though Hamm's is technically the loser of MacSmack XIV, it's still worthwhile beer for when you have a hankering to go old school. (2,015 characters)

Photo of zeff80
2.63/5  rDev -9.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

A - Poured a 12oz can into a pint glass. Pale yellow and highly carbonated, it actually had a 1 to 2-finger head and left some lacing.

S - It smelled like corn and grains. No skunk-like smells that often come with the style.

T - It is fairly sweet and has a slight malt taste. Mostly tastes like corn.

M - A little thin and light-bodied.

D - Overall, it is fairly good. Considering the price it is a bargain. (412 characters)

Photo of NeroFiddled
2.97/5  rDev +2.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Hamm's from an attractive blue, gold and red old-style can. 24 oz.! Because if 12 is good, twice that's better!

As expected, the bright white head dropped almost immediately to a standard collar; and only minor spots and splashes of lace were left behind. The body was straw-gold when held to the light, but looked more deep-golden while sitting on the bar.

The aroma was generic, although there were some non-descript hops in the background. Wait! Maybe not non-descript... they're actually a bit grassy. Otherwise it's just lightly sweet, grain and adjunct maltiness.

The flavor bears out all that the aroma had suggested, and I was a little disappointed that there wasn't just a slight touch more to it. I'd have taken some sulphur even! But no, it's pretty darned clean. And thus, ultimately boring. It could certainly be more bitter, but I'm guessing this is what the masses like. And there is some alcohol lurking beneath that maltiness. That at least helps to keep it from becoming too sweet.

Final analysis, pretty much a generic American adjunct lager. I wouldn't be surprised if this same exact beer is sold under a few other names as well. Not bad, not good, just mainstream inexpensive brew. (1,207 characters)

Photo of kojevergas
2.63/5  rDev -9.3%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.75

Brief impressions below from a can:

A: Pours 8 fingers of foam. Beige colour. Good frothiness.

Body colour is a translucent clean transparent yellow. No yeast or hop sediment is visible.

Sm: Pilsner malts, a metallic off-note, clean barley, grains.

T: Clean barley. Syrupy malt extract. Generic grassy hop character. Crystal malts. Meh.

Mf: Smooth, wet, crisp, direly overcarbonated, slightly syrupy, moderately thick.

Overall: This is in the - err - "student" category. A budget brew with one intended effect, it's best avoided by the discerning drinker. Not undrinkable, though.

C-

***
Impressions from a second 473ml can below. Best before: April 6th, 2015.

HEAD: 3 fingers wide. White colour. Generic. Average frothiness. Leaves spotty webby lacing as it recedes. Retention is good - about 5 minutes.

BODY: Clear weak yellow. Appears watery. Clean, with no visible yeast particulate or hop sediment.

Appears overcarbonated. Pretty typical of the style, this appearance is what most people think of when they imagine beer.

AROMA: Grainy, with corn adjunct and flaked barley. Has off-putting overly sweet malt extract notes. The water seems clean. Hopping is cheap, with a generic floral character at best.

Aromatic intensity is below average. It's shallow but not unpleasant, and has me timid to try it.

TASTE: Corn adjunct is evident, but it's not cloyingly sweet - bad as the malt syrup/extract character is. The body isn't weak, and consists of flaked barley and pilsner malt. Hop content is minimal, with only a generic floral character to offer.

It's a bit imbalanced; I find it too sweet. It's simple - per style conventions - and lacks any depth of flavour whatsoever.

TEXTURE: Smooth, wet, crisp, clean, overcarbonated, and light-bodied. Fails to elevate the beer, but it complements the taste decently.

OVERALL: More a student beer than one that will impress the discerning drinker, Hamm's is standard fare for the style but I wouldn't want it again; Trader Joe's has beers of higher quality in this style at a more reasonable price. Its best attribute is its high drinkability. To its credit, you could do far worse. Merely below average.

C- (2,173 characters)

Photo of feloniousmonk
3.02/5  rDev +4.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Refreshing as the land of sky-blue waters (wa-a-ters)
Land of Lake and Pine
cool enchantment
comes the beer refreshing,
Hamm's, the beer refreshing,
Hamm's...

if you know anything about Minnesota beer history, you know that jingle.
And I can't believe it's taken me this long to get to a can of Hamm's!

"Since 1865", says the can. Also, "America's Classic Premium Beer, Born in the land of sky blue waters." (Hey, that's here!) "Brewed in true family tradition from purest water and choicest barley malt, grain, and hops." Goody!

Ultra-clear, straw yellow color, some bone-white head at first, then it's gone.

Grainy nose, with some sweet malt evident, faint hops, but that's par for the style...wait, now I get it, it's injecting some bare bitterness into the sweet malt factor, arriving at a funky feel. Definitely not bad, not unpleasant, with some character.

Taste: not much here, mostly moisture. Slim flavors, if any...grainyness, at best. Malt is shy in this respect, the water rises above anything else. It's like lemonade without the lemon, and Kool-Aid without the Kool.

I can't really recommend Hamm's at all to anyone, unless your chief factors in deciding on a beer are cheapness of price and wateryness of flavor. There are many out there that fall into this category, Lord Love 'Em. I have a hard time knocking it...it's not bad, it is what it is...but, it's not much.

And they had a cool macot once, dress up in his costume, visit a strip club, and see what happens... (1,512 characters)

Photo of jwc215
2.54/5  rDev -12.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 2.5

Pours light straw yellow with a thick white head that descends to a lasting thin cover. A little lacing sticks.

The smell is of a hint of grain - relatively inoffensive.

The taste is of mild sweet grain, water, more water... Mild sweetness is balanced by a hint of non-descript hops. There is a touch of soap that mixes in and out.

It is crisp - not too fizzy considering the style.

I would easily chose a Miller High Life over this - and I did follow it with one - big difference. The money went to the same brewery, anyway.

This is cheap beer - and below average for that, in my opinion. Not enjoyable, though I was able to chug the second half and move on. (665 characters)

Photo of mothman
2.28/5  rDev -21.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured into a pint glass.

Pours a 1 finger thin off white head that fizzles down very fast. No retention or lace. Color is the basic clear straw yellow.

Aroma is skunky and grainy. Nothing too pleasing. Taste is very similar; very skunky. Some low end malts as well.

Mouthfeel is super crisp and overcarbonated. Ends with a slightly sticky aftertaste.

Overall, this is just another macro lager that is cheap and nothing exciting. I don't plan on drinking this again unless it is free. (488 characters)

Photo of stakem
3.3/5  rDev +13.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Thanks to Eric for hooking me up with a can of this. My bottom of the barrel ticks would be zero without your efforts to keep me in check.

Poured from a 12oz can into a pub glass. The brew appear a light straw yellow color with an eruption of carbonation that forms more than a finger and a half of white head. The cap maintains fairly decent for the style with larger than normal bubble pattern. A close inspection reveals the smallest amount of particulate that keeps the brew from having polished clarity.

The aroma has a zesty faint hop aspect that is mildly herbal and mixed with a sulfur touch. There is a mild sweetness, somewhat cheesy with a fruity ester to almost bubblegum quality but the herbal aspect is surprisingly in the forefront and is the leading characteristic of the very mild nose overall.

The taste has a little bit more sweetness than the aroma led on. It has a grainy sweet quality that mixes with a bit of fruity/bubblegum ester. Whereas the bit of herbal component in the nose was the leading character, it is all but missing in the flavor. A sulfur character brings up the back with a bit of cheesy quality.

This is a light bodied brew with a modest amount of carbonation. I dont know if it is the hot weather or lack of having a beer for awhile but I found this one to go down fairly easy considering the style. With the assortment of other mass produced products in this classification, you could do worse. If given the option of nothing but BMC products, I would probably choose this one over them. (1,533 characters)

Photo of woodychandler
2.4/5  rDev -17.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

CAN it be true? Hamm's in a CAN?!? Yow!

If Oly was a throwback to New London, CT c. 1984/85, this was a catapult back. Now, it was Monday nights at the Full Moon Saloon and this was served to us in an icy cold mug on draft for $ .50. My oh my!

I got a big, rocky two fingers of bone-white head with good retention. Nose had the distinct cereal sweetness that is associated with the style. Color was a light golden-yellow with NE-quality clarity. Mouthfeel was thin with a watery taste on the tongue. Finish was very mild. Lawnmower beer! (539 characters)

Photo of Halcyondays
3.22/5  rDev +11%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4.5

12 oz. can, from a 12-pack bought at the local BevMo for $5.99,

A: Pours a light, yellow colour from the can, into a mug, nice white head at first, but bad retention, no lacing, big bubbles.

S: Smells of light corn and malt, but fuller than most macros.

T: Tastes quite sweet from the malt and obvious corn adjuncts used, but it is not off-putting at all. A light flavour, that is a step up from the almost nothingness in taste that is today's mass-produced industrial lager, and I even tasted a bit of hops, the taste reminded me a lot of Schlitz.

M: Bubbly, light, a tad insipid, but it could be worse.

D: One of the better macros I've had, and cheaper than BMC to boot. A good choice if you're short on cash, but wan't a beer. (734 characters)

Photo of smakawhat
3.53/5  rDev +21.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured from the can into a shortie pilsner glass.

Straw to golden brass yellow and clear. Nice slow rising carbonation, with at first some sticky cola rising carbonation bubbles. Head is bleach white and thin foamy creamy appearance like a typical adjunct lager, but actually sticks around real nicely with good staying power and a half finger tall puck.

Nose is alright. Fairly solid, light grains, nothing too faulty, but pretty mellow and closed.

Palate is interesting. There's a bit of thickness on the mouthfeel that's kind of buttery on first sip. Some dense malts come in with a classic slightly macro sweetness in the mid palate. Swallow gives some crispness and a bit of hop bitterness, which is only a little bit medicinal. Thick feel, but very light tasting as expected.

Overall a pretty surprisingly good adjunct lager, probably the perfect lawnmower beer. (873 characters)

Photo of DoubleJ
2.9/5  rDev 0%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

One of tens of brands which were widespread in the 1950s, but has nearly dissapeared from the scene. I think its time is due. Part of a 12 pack which I bought at BevMo for $7.99, on to the beer:

Light orange/golden color, topped with a soapy head, slowly dissolving to a thin lace and a few dotsof lace. It's usual American lager in the nose. It's steeley, has some grain sweetness, and a touch of boiled corn.

Its taste is noticably smoother than its aroma. There seems to be a decent amount of malt in this adjunct lager, which was unexpected. Somewhat sweet, not overly cloying. Steeley character is minor. A whisper of hops make their way in and out. The body is light, provides some crispness, and is rather easy to drink without being very offensive.

In conmparison to the more mainstream lagers, Hamm's looks pretty good. Better and cheaper, a double win. Just don't confuse this with a Sam Adams. (909 characters)

Photo of tempest
2.38/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Ordered a can at the Bryant Lake Bowl in Minnapolis. I just had to try it. And now I have. OK, this is basically PBR extra. Same watery sweetness with a cheap lager tang and a slightly bigger touch of spicy hops. Yeah, it worth trying for the sake of trying Hamm's, but it's not a terribly pleasant beer. Not patently offensive, but the taste is most easily described as cheap, watery, American beer. (400 characters)

Photo of Zorro
2.96/5  rDev +2.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A Surprise found in Nevada.

Crystal clear yellow colored beer with a surprisingly tall and long last puffy white head. It has decent enough looks.

Smell is yeast and herbal and lemony hop. Certainly has a corn scent to it but not that big of one. Malt is mostly baked biscuit.

Starts out mildly sweet and yeasty with a soda cracker malt finish. Herbal with a slight lemon flavor. Bitterness is at about the door to medium from light. You can taste corn if you are looking for it but it hardly intrudes. Clean finish with no lingering bitterness or sweetness.

Mouthfeel is present.

Overall Solid especially for the whole $1 I paid for the 24 OZ Can. Not a thing wrong with it just not really craft beer but a solid Adjunct Lager from a can. (744 characters)

Photo of Wasatch
2/5  rDev -31%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours a light yellow color, nice carbonation, small white head, with some sticky lacing left behind. The nose is malty, with some hops, slight caramel. The taste is slightly sweet, malty, slight hop note. Light body. Not drinkable, would not buy again. (252 characters)

Photo of WoodBrew
2.66/5  rDev -8.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Continuing with the throw backs that have seemed to make its way into main stream I tried a Hamms. It is like Pabst's brother. The color is golden clear with decent carbonation. The smell and taste are grainy like you would expect. The mouthfeel is fine. (254 characters)

Photo of beertunes
3.06/5  rDev +5.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured into 10oz glass. Poured a golden yellow, much more gold than most of the style, with about 1/4 inch of white, bubbly head that had decent retention and surprisingly good lacing.

The aroma and taste were both typical and expected. Sweet, and notes of corn. There was a bit more grain on the tongue than is usual though.

The body was a smidge fuller than usual. Drinkability was about what I expected. If you're in the mood for a fizzy yellow beer, you could do better, and worse, than this. (498 characters)

Photo of flagmantho
2.74/5  rDev -5.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Poured from 16oz tall can (what else?) into a pint glass. I can't believe, 1,825 reviews in, I'm *finally* reviewing my beloved Hamm's. It's a crazy world.

Appearance: almost colorlessly pale yellow hue; no haze with a very strong effervescence. Head poured a finger of white foam and quickly dissipated. Good? No. But I know those bubbles are going straight to my brain.

Smell: lightly grainy and plasticy. Why do I like this beer? It must be the nostalgia.

Taste: stale bread soaked in water, stored in a Nalgene bottle for a few weeks. However, it also tastes like good times down at my local pub back in the day. So call it what you will.

Mouthfeel: very light body but a big, strong effervescence that generates a surprisingly good creaminess. Ba dow!

Overall: Hamm's. No additional comments needed. (809 characters)

Photo of tone77
3.06/5  rDev +5.5%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Thanks to cpolking for providing this beer. Poured from a 12 oz. can. Has a very pale yellow color with a 1/2 inch head. Smell is of corn and grains. Taste is mild, some grains, just a touch of hops, nothing offensive but not exactly flavorful. Feels light in the mouth and overall is a mediocre beer. (301 characters)

Photo of Bitterbill
2.27/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This pours from 12oz can a light gold with a smallish head of foam that doesn't hang around very long and there's just a wee bit of lacing.

The smell is very strongly of corn and sweet malt.

The taste on first sip is all sweet malt and corn. A few more sips in and there's some citrusy hops, mostly lemon, in the background that is most noticeable near and through the finish but I can't say it does a good enough job to save this beer from a short and less than stellar review from yours truly. (501 characters)

Photo of Bighuge
3.88/5  rDev +33.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Dim sun yellow. Thick and frothy white head. Great retention and some apeasing lace is left as well. Aroma is corny, grainy and sweet. Not off putting by any means. Very agreeable taste. Mild malts. Sweet wort like graininess. A touch of hop dryness...I think. Body is heft for a macro. I'd call it medium to medium-full. One of the better macros I've had in a long time. (371 characters)

Photo of Beerandraiderfan
2.85/5  rDev -1.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Clear yellowish liquid, surprising white head that stuck around. Super sweet corny aroma.

Taste, same cooked vegetal corn feel for it, but lots of carbonation, even detectable hops. Extremely metallic, maybe they never upgraded to those cans with the liner. Pretty thin mouthfeel, super easy to drink, and cheap enough that it isn't associated with the hipster ironic drinking revival. (386 characters)

Photo of Haybeerman
3.02/5  rDev +4.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

A: Bright, clear straw yellow. Poured a 1 finger foamy white head that dissipated quickly to a skim that disappeared in a minute or two. Decanted continually. Thin, inconsistent lacing after the first couple drinks, then nothing.

S: Hay and grass with some sweet, biscuity malts. Faint bittering hops.

T: Malt and hops consistent with aroma; very muted. Light sweetness lingers in muted bitter finish.

M: Light body. Ample carbonation. Crisp and fizzy.

D: Representative of style and affordable. Nothing very special, but I wouoldn't turn one down. (553 characters)

Photo of puboflyons
3.45/5  rDev +19%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

From the can stamped: SEP1012-CO8031534. Sampled on June 1, 2012. It pours a highly carbonated pale yellow with a head that rises about an inch and eventually settles down. I am rating this on whether it looks, smells, and tastes like and American Adjunct should. The look is right. The aroma is of grains, corn, and a bit of hops. The body is light to medium and creamy. The taste is also grainy, corny, but the hops finish it surprisingly crisp and clean. I stumbled across this in a beverage store in Southern New Hampshire and I have not seen Hamm's in New Hampshire since the 1980's. Easily worth the $3.75 I paid for the 6-pack. (634 characters)

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Hamm's from Hamm's Brewing Co.
68 out of 100 based on 232 ratings.