Carlton Draught - Carlton & United Breweries, Ltd.

Not Rated.
Carlton DraughtCarlton Draught

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
56
awful

82 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 82
Reviews: 38
rAvg: 2.17
pDev: 32.26%
Wants: 2
Gots: 6 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Carlton & United Breweries, Ltd. visit their website
Australia

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  4.60% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: brewdlyhooked13 on 06-04-2002

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (41) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Ratings: 82 | Reviews: 38
Photo of GaetanoBresci
1/5  rDev -53.9%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

No, no, no, no, no! Carlton draugh is the worst beer on planet. Dark yellow coulor, wih rotten eggs smell. Taste like aluminum even on tap and glass bottle. Hangover after drinking just a pint, worst hangover of my life. I definetly will not buy anymore in my life. again

Photo of Anonmatel
1.16/5  rDev -46.5%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

The appearance of this lager from Carlton United is usual at best, filtered and filtered anf filtered some more. No head from the bottle
The Smell, Urgh smells of urine trough cakes that too many drunks have wizzed on.
The taste is very biter, no real flaour to mention from the bottle, and way too carbonated for my tastes.
Mouthfeel, what mouthfeel ?
as for drinkability, only try this stuff if it's a stinking hot day there is no other beer left, and it's for free.

Photo of LittleCreature
1.36/5  rDev -37.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Appearance - 2.5
Poured a finger of white head over a dark straw coloured body that looks to be moderately carbonated. The head reduced to a thin patchy layer quickly.

Smell - 1.5
Smells beery, kind of like old beer mats do. Once the head has disappeared, there is almost no smell, but what remains smells predominantly metallic, with some grains and a little hop aroma that isn't too bad.

Taste - 1.0
Wow, this is pretty much the definition of bland in beer. A little sugary sweetness upfront, with a very vague malt flavour, stale bread, a strong metallic flavour, and moderate hop bitterness in the dry finish. The aftertaste is strongly metallic. My first ever 1.0 for taste, because this truly does qualify as awful.

Mouthfeel - 1.5
The strong metallic twang seems to alter the mouthfeel also, as the beer feels somewhat filmy after it is held in the mouth for a while. Carbonation is low to moderate, and weight in the mouth is light to moderate.

Drinkability - 1.5
This was so close to being my first ever sink pour for a reviewed beer. Many use this as a session beer, and to be frank, the only thing this is good for is slamming down fast to get drunk.

OVERALL
The annoying thing is that Carlton Draught has really good commercials. Otherwise there is nothing worth even talking about here. Macro rubbish, and possibly the worst beer I have ever drank. The word swill sums Carlton Draught up pretty well.

Photo of heygeebee
1.41/5  rDev -35%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

On tap at local RSL.

Oh dear, the Carlton Draught vs VB taste-off.

It looks like beer and has a head and lace, but I can safely say I have never been assaulted by such an immediate hit of metal. Serious Metal on the tongue.

This beer has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Why do so many people drink it?

Photo of diablo14
1.46/5  rDev -32.7%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

stoutbots really nailed the qualities of this beer. i can polish off one or maybe two of these at the footy simply coz i cant get anything better. that gives it a little bit of drinkability, but its still rubbish overall. i just think carlton smells and tastes like what should come out of your body cavities before, not after you drink it.

Photo of laituegonflable
1.51/5  rDev -30.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Pours a standard gold with fair amount of carbonation, virginal white head that retains well. Leaves a certain amount of lacing. Actually looks quite decent.

Strong pride of ringworm on the nose with a very carbolic edge. Nose is fairly simple, but it reminds me of my childhood impressions of beer. The ingredients are there but it doesn't smell good, rather like the Australian beer industry.

Ah, the taste. That's why I don't drink Carlton Draught. Awful. Maybe a slight hop character on the front, not much to it, and it's mostly just a chemical flavour with a corn sweetness rounding it off. The mid-palate is then subjugated by a thick, chunky, raw bread dough flavour which pervades everything.

Mouthfeel is thin but sticky and leaves a bubble of phlegm in my throat as it goes down. Seriously, this beer is a coagulate of bad yeast and bad hops and is truly repellent. Ultimately I can't say I expected anything less, though.

Photo of WHROO
1.54/5  rDev -29%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

Drank from both a stubbie & from a jug on tap!
As in previous reviews...this is a typical example of a mass produced Aussie beer...although this definately has its own taste. Chemical, metallic, just tastes wrong for a beer. The only thing I liked about it was the lacing down the whole glass recording every unenjoyable mouthful.
Mouthfeel not too bad, just a little to carbonated - this is a more livey beer.
There is a new CUB limited batch of brew called Richmond Lager - not much better let me tell ya...although it doesn't have as much chemical stale taste, but would rate only a fraction higher - I will definately avoid both.

Photo of koolk
1.58/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Dark golden colour with a light head and decent carbonation.

Smells of grains. Not much else.

There is a bit more going on palate wise but nothing to exciting. More of a bread taste than a grain taste with a touch of fruit/floral hops. Round mouthfeel with a little drying sensation at the end.

Nothing special, but good when hot. Ruins food.

Photo of Weizenmensch
1.59/5  rDev -26.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

800mL longneck, consumed with corn chips following several other superior beers. Served in a completely inappropriate Tripel Karmeliet glass which I like drinking out of.

Appearance: Dirty gold colour, heaps of thin lacing, very little head retention except for a thin ring.

Smell: Entirely chemical. Any trace of organic produce has been smothered with the overpowering smell of organic chemistry.

Taste: Pretty bad. Much easier if you don't think about it. Thankfully, it's fairly insipid: the only other flavours are sulfury and unnatural. Pungent but watery, overall not nice.

Mouthfeel: Very thin. Fairly easy to throw back, ideally when totally inebriated. Much like the beer consumed before it, Carlsberg Elephant, only that beer had a nicer smell while you were drinking it. Little carbonation, combines well with salty food. Remember, it's cheap.

Drinkability: It all comes down to price. My girlfriend drinks it because the label at the pub has horses on it, and all the others have masculine logos, like an outline of NSW (Reschs), or a stag (Tooheys), or a pair of malting shovels (James Squire). I have no idea why my best mate drinks it, because I have introduced him to some heavenly beers and he still goes for this stuff. I think it might be because he's from Melbourne, and Carlton's a Melbourne suburb as well as a beer consumed by many in that city, and he is trying to hark back to those halcyon days before he moved to Canberra at age ten. How many Carltons he consumed before this time are known only to him, as are his reasons for drinking this O R D I N A R Y beer. Price is all it comes down to - you'd drink this over New, I suppose, if in an RSL club with $2 schooners. But why would you drink this in a place that charges the same for this as for Coopers or Squire on tap? Total bloody mystery.

Photo of Finite
1.68/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pale, high carbonation, soft drink like appearance.

Smells of faint off grain. Straw and little hops

Very dull and plain. No hop flavour to speak of asside from a dull and artificial bitterness. A straw like malt flavour which contributes little to the body of the beer.

avoid,

Photo of rastaman
1.7/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

I reckon they filtered any resemblance of flavour out of this one, just a crappy non-eventful beer, its drinkable though.

Photo of Kulrak
1.74/5  rDev -19.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours a somewhat dark golden color with some crumbly white head that fades away pretty quickly, but laces all over the glass.. The smell, as far as I can tell, doesn't exist. My wife says it smells like lemonade with a beer can waved over it once. The taste is like soda water with a promise of cheap beer someday. There really is nothing to this beer. Oh wait, there's a chemical aftertaste developing. The mouthfeel is very watery and slightly fizzy. Overall, it's about as drinkable as every other CUB beer. It's beer for people that don't like beer. The most impressive part of the beer is the appearance, and even that isn't that great.

Photo of tbeckett
1.79/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

On tap at Northcote Social Club. From notes.

A - Poured golden straw and bright. Medium carbonation, half finger of white soapy head and good lace with a film of retention.

S - Virtually nothing. Some corny grain.

T - Corny, grain, nasty flavours, We grain maybe. Vegetal, creamed corn. Not good.

M - Medium carbonation, light and watery body, lingering flavours of unpleasantness.

O/D - Beers with no flavour are far superior to this. No idea why people keep this guys in business by buying this in mass quantities. Brutal.

Photo of foles
1.81/5  rDev -16.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Hardly deserves to be called a beer. Usually looks ok in the glass because its widely consumed on tap and is relatively fresh. However it tastes like you have got a mouthful of the head and are waiting to get to the beer. However the taste doesnt change. Completely one dimensional and dry with no taste to speak of. Makes normally ordinary beers look pretty good. I would much rather have a swan draught or even a tooheys new when drinking in this league.

Photo of ADZA
1.86/5  rDev -14.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Unfortunately for me when i went to my new local this was their best offering def time to get a new local,it pours a yellow,gold macro colour with hardly any smell maybe weak grains,and it basically tastes like grainy water would never buy this beer usually was just thirsty and like i said this was their best offering.

Photo of stoutman
2/5  rDev -7.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pale Yellow Amber color with a small white lasting head. Bitter sweet, very metallic, with a chemical aroma. Clean, crisp and bitter in taste. Run of the mill mass produced alcohol that happens to be beer. Not much aroma, not really any flavour. I imagine a fresh tap pour to be better but this can stuff was really poor.

Photo of BeerEaterAus
2/5  rDev -7.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Tastes t i n n y

Photo of machalel
2.02/5  rDev -6.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Appearance: Poured a pale amber with a very weak head that disappeared almost immediately. Lacing down the glass was almost non-existent.

Aroma: Not a lot going on here. Smells like very faint 'beer', and no more specific than that.

Taste: Some pale malt and a bit of bitterness. A bit of grains in the background, but nothing that stand out.

Mouthfeel: Medium carbonation, low body, again... nothing that stands out.

Drinkability: Sure, you can drink it, but with many other options out there that are infinitely better, why bother?

Photo of Macca
2.03/5  rDev -6.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

This pours a golden colour. Clear. Not a lot of head to speak of and it disappeared quick. Looks dead.

I don't know how I can rate its aroma when it doesn't have one. Not even a bad one.

The lack of anything continues to the palate. A touch of malts perhaps.

Oh just so bland all round. Why do they bother? It is just an alcohol delivery device.

Photo of CrazyDavros
2.04/5  rDev -6%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Golden amber pour, thing head.
Lots of grainy malt on the aroma, no noticeable hops (they probably use isohops...). Shows a distinct "old dirty pub" smell.
Sweet grainy malt upon tasting, some caramel. Not much else to say really! Seriously weak bitterness.
Not as watery as you'd expect for a mainstream cheap lager, but the carbonation is over the top, as per usual!

Photo of lacqueredmouse
2.07/5  rDev -4.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Poured deep golden yellow colour, with almost no head. A very unremarkable start.

Slight yeast on the nose, unoffensive, but standard.

Very watery. Almost no discernible characteristics on the palate. Some bitterness, with a malty back-note, but very dull overall. So yeah, I guess it goes down easily.

Wow, thoroughly uninspiring. Bland, but offensive at the same time. It's almost impressive that someone can brew a beer this bad and sell it.

They obviously put all their money into the advertising campaign (which is great!), rather than into producing decent beer.

Photo of jarmby1711
2.09/5  rDev -3.7%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This beer is dark gold to red with a weak insipid head.
It has the characteristic CUB tinny water smell
It is mildly bitter in taste but little depth of character.
It is not to be recommended , however it is better "on tap", best suited to a quick 3 or 4 before the football

Photo of soju6
2.11/5  rDev -2.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A: Served a golden color with a small head that fades quickly to bits of lacing.

S: Aroma of sweet malt and coarse grain. Has a stale beer scent.

T: taste on malt sweetness with just a wee bit of citrus. Faint bitterness and a fairly clean finish.

F: Light body and fairly smooth. Not a lot to work with here.

O: Basic lager in an ocean of beer. Nothing to see here, move along.

Photo of Andrewziggy
2.38/5  rDev +9.7%
look: 2.25 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 2.25

It's ok for what it is

Photo of rec
2.51/5  rDev +15.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Near identical to the over-priced Crown Lager, it's bland and flat. It looks dissimilar to every other Australian session beer.

There's nothing stand-out in the taste department either. It's generally watery with a metalic aftertaste, but gets less noticable if you continue drinking.

I've drunk a lot of this beer in my time, and give it only credit due to its budget price and availability down-under - it is at least better than most other Australian beers in the same price range.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Carlton Draught from Carlton & United Breweries, Ltd.
56 out of 100 based on 82 ratings.