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!

Victory Lager - Victory Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Victory LagerVictory Lager

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
81
good

666 Ratings
THE BROS
82
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 666
Reviews: 333
rAvg: 3.57
pDev: 13.73%
Wants: 29
Gots: 26 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Victory Brewing Company visit their website
Pennsylvania, United States

Style | ABV
Munich Helles Lager |  4.80% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 10-17-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Victory Lager Alström Bros
Ratings: 666 | Reviews: 333 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of jcdiflorio
jcdiflorio

West Virginia

2.73/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured into pint glass,beer was light golden,straw color.Lots of carbination,white creamy head dissapated quickly. Has a bread-like aroma. no real hop presense.Grainey,bread taste,not much of a hop bitterness.It tasted thin, not much body.Would be a good beer served cold on a hot day,not a filling beer at all.Not what I'm used to from Victory.

Serving type: bottle

09-14-2006 02:37:36 | More by jcdiflorio
Photo of WVbeergeek
WVbeergeek

West Virginia

2.75/5  rDev -23%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Appearance: Appears a pale straw color gold with a nice sized white foaming head leaving speckled lacing without much consistency to the pattern. Aroma: Grainy and light in malt sweetness, there is just a touch of hop presence in the air, I mean I know the helles style lager is delicate but this is a beer marketed toward the masses not one I m proud to hoist from Victory at this point. Taste: Crisp refreshing grassy sweet texture from the imported malts and a good amount of bitterness here to obtain balance, overall disappointing in the flavor department whatever happened to my beloved export style lager, shame on you Bill and Ron your targeting a "Bud/Miller/Coors" crowd with this one what happened to "we brew the type of beers that we like to drink"? Okay that was harsh considering this is a difficult style to make clean tasting balanced brew, I can also fathom how Victory needs a beer on the light side, but this one borders watery for me. Mouthfeel: Is thin carbonated water like texture, just no character. Drinkability: It's alright even good and refreshing but lacking the awesome flavor profile of the export style lager that anyone who purchased the Victory sampler found as a true jewel, in one word disappointing I was at least expecting a very flavorful Helles, oh well yeah I think I could drink a six pack of this without feeling anything. Light, crisp, refreshing lawnmower beer with no off tones, well constructed but lacking flavor.

Serving type: bottle

09-03-2003 14:13:54 | More by WVbeergeek
Photo of Bill69
Bill69

Pennsylvania

2.75/5  rDev -23%

09-27-2013 18:06:19 | More by Bill69
Photo of sendbeer
sendbeer

Georgia

2.75/5  rDev -23%

01-05-2013 06:11:44 | More by sendbeer
Photo of StaindProject86
StaindProject86

Pennsylvania

2.75/5  rDev -23%

03-10-2012 16:41:49 | More by StaindProject86
Photo of atrocity
atrocity

Virginia

2.75/5  rDev -23%

04-30-2014 19:22:21 | More by atrocity
Photo of Alex5
Alex5

South Carolina

2.75/5  rDev -23%

12-10-2013 05:50:47 | More by Alex5
Photo of muddah37
muddah37

Pennsylvania

2.75/5  rDev -23%

04-27-2012 18:58:00 | More by muddah37
Photo of deaconoflove
deaconoflove

Pennsylvania

2.78/5  rDev -22.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Ap. Victory Lager ia a very pale, pale yellow with a nice white frothy head. Not much lacing.
Sm/Ta. Can a beer smell and taste pale? This is a very mild beer. There is little smell or taste. It reminds me of less expensive, lessor quality beers. There is some perhaps grain/corn smell and taste.
Mf. Pale and thin?
Dr. Yes, but I'm not sure why.

Serving type: bottle

10-26-2009 21:49:15 | More by deaconoflove
Photo of PSUDREW
PSUDREW

Pennsylvania

2.78/5  rDev -22.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

It pours a light strwa color. It also has a light, sweet note to it, and bery hop resonance. not so much a presence, but it is there, and it is a resonance. Pours a light straw color, but not muh to it. It is very fizzy, but that is it. Over-all, I feel it has a light, sweet, malty flavor to it. The hops are there, but it is an after thoguht. Over all it has a nice, light mouth-fell, and, IMOO, it could be a good conversion beer.

Serving type: bottle

01-24-2004 05:18:36 | More by PSUDREW
Photo of JISurfer
JISurfer

South Carolina

2.8/5  rDev -21.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This was a disappointment for me. I guess I was expecting much more from this brewery. I was really excited to try it, but it did let me down. The main reason was the smell and taste. They were way too much like a lot of the Euro Lagers out there. The only thing, was that it had an ok look to it. Skunk abounded in this bottle for me. Not something I would offer to anyone I liked.

Serving type: bottle

11-15-2005 04:25:12 | More by JISurfer
Photo of kpw1000
kpw1000

Pennsylvania

2.8/5  rDev -21.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 5 | overall: 2

I was pretty disappointed in this beer.

I acknowledge up front my bias against this style: I prefer an IPA, a trippel, a milk stout or oatmeal stout, a nice brown ale.

While I'm not partial to this style, I've had the Weihenstephaner Original and loved it, and of similar styles, I've enjoyed immensely Hacker Pschorr's Oktoberfest, and several others.

I also have a generally favorable bias for Victory; they're kind of local and I've liked the Prima Pils, and loved (loved!) Golden Monkey and HopDevil Ale.

But this beer, while a nice color, a nice pour, a nice feel, seemed utterly bland in flavor. I know this style is not known for the power of its taste, but this seemed unacceptably and exceptionally insipid.

Sorry.

Serving type: bottle

05-05-2006 00:17:38 | More by kpw1000
Photo of CraftBeerTastic
CraftBeerTastic

Pennsylvania

2.83/5  rDev -20.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Ba Review #112
Served On: 01/20/2012
Glassware: Duvel Glass
Labeled ABV:
Date/ Code: 02/13/2012

This bottle was mixed in with a sixer of home brews I got from a buddy of mine.

Look: Lemony yellow color with possibly some chill-haze going on. The head was nothing more than a white coating of film. Carbonation was ok. Nothing too crazy.

Smell: I got sort of a pancake batter with some citrus hop notes. Definitely not a bad aroma for your typical lager.

Taste: The taste was very light and crisp. Some faint citrus was up front with a very watery middle. The bready notes from the aroma were definitely not in the taste. This beer is more reminiscent of a summer ale or wheat beer.

This beer was ok. It would basically put this beer into the 'lawn mower' category.

Serving type: bottle

01-21-2012 00:14:15 | More by CraftBeerTastic
Photo of UnionMade
UnionMade

Colorado

2.83/5  rDev -20.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Review is for the export style.
The beer pours a clear straw gold, topped with a huge, craggy white head. The head foamed up like crazy, filling half the glass with head. Very sticky lacing, forming large clumps of broken head on the glass.
Aroma is slightly sour and oxodized, with a winey white grape quality. Crisp pale malts and some mellow herbal hopping beneath. Mostly an oxodized aroma, which is a shame. I was assured this was fresh.
Clean pilsner malts dominate the flavor, with a light, crisp hoppiness following, finishing slightly dry and grainy, with a hint of unripened peach sourness. Moderate oxodization, with a bit of a papery flavor in the aftertaste, and some wine-like grape notes. Huge, mouthfilling carbonation, most likely because of the age, with a medium body.
It's a shame this is old, because I expect the hops are wonderful. Unfortunately, they've all but disappeared. I'll have to try this again.

Serving type: bottle

09-10-2003 02:02:21 | More by UnionMade
Photo of happy4hoppybeer
happy4hoppybeer

Pennsylvania

2.9/5  rDev -18.8%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a bright, clear yellow/light gold, with moderate white head about an inch thick. Retains for a few minutes, then quickly vanishes, leaving no lacing. Typical weak lager appearance.

My nose detects scents of lemon,citrus, grains and light malt. A little weird, but has character.

Mouth absorbs faint traces of malt and graininess. A slight acidic and bitter citrus-like edge near the end of tasting. probably from hops. Fairly light-bodied, with your typical lager high carbonation.

As you may know I am generally not a fan of plain ol' lagers(the non-pilsener and non-Oktoberfest kind), so I did not expect much from this. That said, it is what it is. Not supposed to be extraordinary, just an everyday-type session brew. It's rather average at that, because I know there's better offerings in this style out there.

Serving type: bottle

09-09-2011 02:05:13 | More by happy4hoppybeer
Photo of guinness33
guinness33

New Jersey

2.93/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

victory really continues to disappoint me. with exception of the wonderfully tasty hopdevil, the other brews of theirs that i've sampled thusfar really seem to be below the standards that i had hoped for them. the all malt lager is easily the worst of the lot that i have had. it pours a macro looking crisp straw golden colour with no head. i was very disappointed here. the smell and taste: average to slightly below average. both are watery and malty with a touch of grass, sweetness and hops. any flavour is way in the back behind the watery characteristics that dominate here. there's nothing here, really. bland. boring. blah. the one thing i will give this brew is that it is crisp and refreshing on a hot summer day, a bit moreso than your standard macro would be/is. this one is better than those macros, but not by much. i expected more from you victory and you keep disappointing. convince me otherwise...please.

Serving type: on-tap

06-25-2004 20:58:30 | More by guinness33
Photo of Amalak
Amalak

New York

2.93/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I had a 12 oz. bottle of this.
A- It has a straw-yellow color to it. It had a slight bubbly head that dissipated quickly and left no lace.
S- There's a hint of bitter hops there.
T- It's a very dry beer. Too dry, really. Crisp, with a slight bitterness and some wheaty overtones. Not that impressed.

Serving type: bottle

07-20-2009 20:56:38 | More by Amalak
Photo of DaggerEyes
DaggerEyes

New York

2.93/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Poured from a brown bottle with a "best before" stamp on it, into my trusty pint glass...Victory lager poured a golden yellow with a small head that disappated to leave hardly anything behind, all that was visible of the head was a faint faint ring or lace around the rim. Thin beads of carbonation rushed to the surface.

Took a few deep whiffs of this but had trouble pulling much of any character off the nose. A faint yeasty or bready scent was detectable.

The taste was really nothing to get excited over, bready yeasty really reminds me of a slightly better version of budwiser, not exactly what you expect when you spend your money on "Victory" if I had wanted a beer with characteristics like this I would have just bought a case of Bud for what I plopped down for a sixer of this.

The mouthfeel was the only thing that really set it apart from a cheap lager. slightly more carbonated and a little more active in the mouth. Water thin yet at times it feels like it is attemping to acheive a more medium body.

Very drinkable in the way any cheap lager is...not something you sit back and savor, but something you drink at a out of control house party...

all in all this is definately not worth the price. Bummer

Serving type: bottle

03-28-2006 03:18:32 | More by DaggerEyes
Photo of kindestcut
kindestcut

North Carolina

2.93/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

The beer poured a remarkable clear gold with evident carbonation and a large foamy head that survived several minutes. The beer looked far more clear than I was expecting, even for a lager.

The aroma was obvious malt, grain and herbs. The aroa was not overpowering, or even all that strong.

The taste was not very satisfying. I usually like lagers, but this beer is not as sweet as some I have had in the past. I felt like I was drinking liquid Grape Nuts and the musty malt was overpowering.

I have to say I wanted to like this brew but it just wasn't my cup of...well, beer.

Serving type: bottle

09-16-2003 20:09:42 | More by kindestcut
Photo of OldFrothingSlosh
OldFrothingSlosh

Pennsylvania

2.95/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: Bright golden-blond color with no head and minimal lacing.

Smell: Grainy and malty with a little citrus in the background.

Taste: Not very appealing to me. The first thing I thought of when I tasted this beer was "Budweiser". Too much of a "grainy" flavor and it lacked substantial sweetness, too.

Mouthfeel: Not a lot to get excited about here. Barely any carbonation to speak of detracts somewhat.

Drinkability: Not a beer that I cared for. I was too reminded of a macro beer. It's interesting to read the other reviews of this beer. Most seem to think that it is a very good example of this beer style. Given that this is the first beer of this style I've reviewed, I am probably not fully appreciating what this beer has to offer, but I just didn't care for it. One positive thing to take away from this is that I like hops (and lots of 'em) in my beer.

Serving type: on-tap

01-28-2003 11:07:59 | More by OldFrothingSlosh
Photo of papat444
papat444

Quebec (Canada)

2.95/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Best before May 1, 2010.

Poured from a 12oz. bottle.

Appearance: A starkly clear pale yellow body with tiny bubbles and a generous white head. Nice looking.

Smell: Um, smells a little like adjuncts here. I get some lemon & a grassy feel but can't help but feel the aroma is only a notch higher than a BMC.

Taste: A little better with a strong lemon overtone and some cereal or wheat also. Has a distinct aftertaste, like sulfur. Again, i find it tastes a little better than most macros but still, i kind of expected more.

Mouthfeel: Not too great. While it has a good zest and active carbonation that makes it lively, i find it soapy and not too comfortable in the palate.

Drinkability: Surprisingly a bit of a chore to finish this.

Overall: I'll pass next time. I like this brewery and their offerings but this one is not memorable.

Serving type: bottle

01-16-2010 02:11:46 | More by papat444
Photo of TheFightfan1
TheFightfan1

Pennsylvania

2.95/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured from a bottle into a pint glass. Pours a clear golden color with white frothy heading. Heading dissolves very quickly. Slowly carbonation bubbles drift upward kind of trippy. Very earthy and nutty smell with a citrus ending. Taste is very dry with alot of carbonation kind of to much, almost unenjoyable. I would call this a light lager that is very carbonated. Leaves no lacing at all. A kind of let down for a highly rated brew.

Serving type: bottle

01-18-2009 19:21:51 | More by TheFightfan1
Photo of mobyfann
mobyfann

Ohio

2.95/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Paid $28 for the mixed case...

The beer pours a slightly hazy light golden base with a medium white head, minimal head retention and a few specs on the glass in the end. The aroma.... what aroma, where are the hops, a very faint smell.

The taste is just average, a little flavor but that is it, very one dimensional and average as a helles. The mouthfeel left a slight dry and harsh touch in the end, it wasn't a particular favorite. Decent drinkability, for a standard beer over Bud I would take it and split a pitcher with someone, but I would rather end with this than start with it.

Final Thought: An average Lager, disappointing coming from Victory.

Serving type: bottle

12-27-2005 00:33:47 | More by mobyfann
Photo of vette2006c5r
vette2006c5r

South Dakota

2.95/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 4.5

Victory Lager poured a bright golden color with almost no head. Even though it was a fresh bottle, it smelt a little skunked, and veery light. It tasted like a traditional lager but very light. The flavors were barley noticable. Overall I was dissapointed with this. The flavors needed to be much stronger, tasted like a watered down sam adams lager, but cost more money. Deffently not the best lager, or the best beer by victory.

Serving type: bottle

07-09-2010 00:00:10 | More by vette2006c5r
Photo of Tilley4
Tilley4

Tennessee

2.95/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I'm crazy about most of Victory's offerings so I picked up singles of this and the Whirlwind Wit yesterday...

Pours a surprisingly clear light golden with a nice fluffy head... Lots of carbonation...looks pretty good..

I'm getting lots of sweet light malt and a macro-like corn aroma... Also, some sulfur going on.. Basically, smells beery if you will....hoping for a bit more in this dept...

If I didn't know better, I'd guess this was a macro... Its not bad or anything, but really just sorta average to me... Tastes sorta like a Bud or any of the other big names... Lots of light sweet malt and corn and virtually no hop presence... Again, sorta disappointing...

Overall... A letdown.. I was expecting more of a solid base of malt and hops that never disappoints, like Sam Adams, but this one didn't do it for me...

Serving type: bottle

01-22-2010 14:04:44 | More by Tilley4
Victory Lager from Victory Brewing Company
81 out of 100 based on 666 ratings.