Hamm's - Hamm's Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Hamm'sHamm's

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
63
poor

601 Ratings
THE BROS
74
okay

(view ratings)
Ratings: 601
Reviews: 227
rAvg: 2.66
pDev: 28.57%
Wants: 25
Gots: 51 | 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:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 06-20-2001)
View: Beers (3) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | 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  | next › last »
Ratings: 601 | Reviews: 227 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of spycow
2.25/5  rDev -15.4%

Photo of BuckeyeNation
3/5  rDev +12.8%
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.

Photo of jaydoc
2.5/5  rDev -6%

Photo of ygtbsm94
1/5  rDev -62.4%

Photo of emerge077
3.05/5  rDev +14.7%
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.

Photo of JAHMUR
2/5  rDev -24.8%

Photo of zeff80
2.68/5  rDev +0.8%
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.

Photo of NeroFiddled
2.98/5  rDev +12%
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.

Photo of XmnwildX12
2/5  rDev -24.8%

Photo of feloniousmonk
3/5  rDev +12.8%
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...

Photo of jwc215
2.51/5  rDev -5.6%
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.

Photo of Rochefort10nh
3/5  rDev +12.8%

Photo of InspectorBob
2.75/5  rDev +3.4%

Photo of Halcyondays
3.23/5  rDev +21.4%
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.

Photo of stakem
3.28/5  rDev +23.3%
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.

Photo of woodychandler
2.38/5  rDev -10.5%
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!

Photo of Georgiabeer
2.25/5  rDev -15.4%

Photo of mothman
2.28/5  rDev -14.3%
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.

Photo of tempest
2.38/5  rDev -10.5%
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.

Photo of DoubleJ
2.93/5  rDev +10.2%
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.

Photo of Zorro
2.96/5  rDev +11.3%
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.

Photo of smakawhat
3.53/5  rDev +32.7%
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.

Photo of Mebuzzard
2.75/5  rDev +3.4%

Photo of Wasatch
2/5  rDev -24.8%
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.

Photo of Bighuge
3.9/5  rDev +46.6%
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.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Hamm's from Hamm's Brewing Co.
63 out of 100 based on 601 ratings.