Sleeman Original Draught - Sleeman Breweries Ltd.

Not Rated.
Sleeman Original DraughtSleeman Original Draught

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

68 Reviews
THE BROS
-
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 68
Hads: 162
rAvg: 2.79
pDev: 17.56%
Wants: 0
Gots: 17 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Sleeman Breweries Ltd. visit their website
Ontario, Canada

Style | ABV
American Pale Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: bmacaskill on 05-02-2005

Original Draught combines Sleeman's premium brewing heritage with the freshness and sociability of traditional draught beer. This unpasteurized lager goes down well in the company of friends.
View: Beers (25) | Events
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 68 | Hads: 162
Photo of kevinlater
3.36/5  rDev +20.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

from the bottle

a: a dark yellow, somewhat towards a light caramel colour

s: has a kind of nice sweet bready corny malt smell, not much else though

t: the aforementioned sweet malt flavours with a lack of hops

m: fizzy and light but not watery

o: surprisingly above average? far from well-rounded (lacking hops), but i found it pleasant to drink as the malt flavours were nice (381 characters)

Photo of Skullkeg
2.16/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

A: A medium golden colour with no head whatsoever. At first pour it had soda pop type carbonation.

S: Apple, stale corn an a very typical adjunct lager smell. It smells bad. Jolly rancher and sweet piercing on the nose.

T: Balanced only in the sense that everything is equally bad. Adjunct taste, very dry and thin but also bit of cream corn sweetness in the finish. It is what it is. I can think of at least a dozen beers that this beer tastes like. I can also recommend at least 5 adjunct lagers I would choose to pound back over this. Keep it cold and you may be able to stomach this. It is just a typical adjunct lager. The draught moniker is pure marketing. This is not a good tasting beer.

M: Thin, and weak. Highly carbonated which may work in its favour.

OVERALL: You get what you pay for. It is sad how badly Sleeman has fallen. Even their flagship cream ale has tarnished itself over the years. It is a poor beer with huge of flavours of apple and a funky sweetness that prevents this from even being a serviceable lawnmower beer. (1,066 characters)

Photo of kevofficiel
3.03/5  rDev +8.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3

It takes time to get use to it of that special beer. Why I said special because it take at least 5 or 6 to get use to that finish of the beer.

The smell of it is really nice. You have that corny smell.

The taste of it is less stronger than the smell. It was more on a watery side. I do prefer the smell over the taste but it was an enjoyable beer to drink for me. You won t notice that 5% ABV if it was a bit more stronger I would give a higher grading.

So overall, would I recommend it? Yes, nice refreshing beer. Nothing spectacular but if you are in Canada and you find it on special, go grab a pack. (606 characters)

Photo of CalgaryFMC
2.65/5  rDev -5%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Had a pint on tap at a Calgary pub. Arrived a light amber hue with perhaps an inch or so of white head that quickly broke and disappeared. Aroma is a pronounced malty sweetness and not much else, maybe the barest tinge of sour fruit is detectable if you really focus. This could be one of the sweetest beers I have yet to consume ... One almost wants to taste some astringent husks or something to mitigate this. Even my wife, who is not a beer drinker, described this as tasting "like a cooler". The doughy malts recall cheap white bread and the rest of the flavor comes off like someone dissolve some sweet-tart fruit candies into an otherwise bland base (or perhaps think artificially flavored cherry gum). Savage carbonation, thin watery body with a vaguely buttery mouthfeel. Nil hop aroma or flavor. The finish is cleaner, although the sweetness continues to linger. Alternating between cidery and vinous, this is clearly a "young" beer with acetylaldhyde placed front and centre to entice mainstream drinkers, the good old Budweiser trick put to use in a brew that is supposed to be a tier above an adjunct lager. No thanks. (1,131 characters)

Photo of DenisKolkin
2.85/5  rDev +2.2%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3

Re-reviewing this brew. Bottle found from my Mom's fridge. Not sure how long it's been there, but it looks ok. Served cold into a Murphy's pint glass.

Appearance - Pale golden color, lots of bubbles and topped by a half finger of foam which dissipates away to almost nothing in short order.

Smell - Some faint grassy aromas and maybe some graininess. Not a lot here, but nothing cringe-worthy.

taste - Like the nose, there's some faint graininess and then... well.... nothing. Very inoffensive, but lacking flavor by any standard.

Mouthfeel - reasonably well carbonated, gives it a decent crisp feel. Fairly light body and non-descript finish.

Overall - Well worse beer exists and this isn't bad if you've just been doing yard work or some sort of workout. Otherwise, pay an extra dollar or two for a case and get something with a little more flavor. (855 characters)

Photo of Beerdrinker21
3.69/5  rDev +32.3%
look: 3.75 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I purchased this beer from the Beer Store at a price around the $34 mark. I chose this beer so I could try something new then my normal Labatt Blue beer.

A: A medium golden color with a nice foamy head that disappears rather quickly. A few noticeable carbonation bubbles , but nothing that affects the look of the beer.

S: Upon opening, has a malty smell that finishes off with a slight hint of sweet pine. Pleasant enough to get my taste-buds excited, but not anywhere near an excellent smell.

T: Balanced flavours, but more on the malty side. Has a familiar taste, but also it's own bit of sweetness attached. After the beer warmed up a bit, it still maintained a decent quality, but the alcohol was more prominent.

M: Light, but strong amounts of carbonation. Has a nice smoothness to the mouth and throat when pouring in mouth. Slightly higher then normal tingling on the tongue; (probably due to the high carbonation)

OVERALL: Excellent beer for the price. I am on my 6th beer now and will continue to drink more of this. It seems to be made for a nice, hot summer day on the patio with some friends. Will recommend this beer to people if they are looking for a quality beer with a low price tag. (1,208 characters)

Photo of patre_tim
2.62/5  rDev -6.1%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A: Deep golden, lots of fine bubbled carbonation, 4 fingers of off white foamy head with little retention, clear filtered.

S: Malt, some wet dog, some metallic quality, a little herbal quality, some dry hay.

T: Malt forward, some dough near the end, little if any bitterness

M: Light and a little watery, very little carbonation, dry finish.

O: My Alpha Mater beer. Never had it during University, its a distinct marker of where craft beer was 20 years ago in Guelph. I could see it as an alternative to a Molson Canadian for some as its less bitter. (554 characters)

Photo of DamageCase76
2.54/5  rDev -9%
look: 2.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Bottle came from a 12 pack I bought for my father in law. I have not had one in a while so I gave it another shot. Poured into a beer clean Sam Adams Boston Lager glass.

A) Pale copper, no head retention, no lacing.

S) No hops, more corn and apples than anything, but very faint.

T) Not assertive in the flavour either. Get a lot more of that red apple character. My first sip made me think I poured some apple juice.

M) Was decent, did not taste as overly carbonated as some of the other mass brands do.

O) Not too much going on, a beer for people who don't like flavour in their beer (of which there are many!). It wasn't horrible... just too bland for my taste. The DMS was a bit of a fault though, giving it that corn aroma. I actually kind of liked the apple, reminded me of an ale a bit that way. (808 characters)

Photo of bulldogops
2.03/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 3 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.25 | overall: 2

Bottle. 5%. Not my favourite, and would require a lime or some other fruitiness to be drinkable. Nice clear light to medium yellow color, white to off-white head. Mild sweetness and a very light bitterness, and softly carbonated. Too much grass and adjuncty-acetyl mess on the palate to be praised. (298 characters)

Photo of Nikolai070
3.96/5  rDev +41.9%
look: 3.75 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 4

Buddy of mine brought me one after work one day and I was really surprised. Easy drinking beer perfect for summer. Excellent taste with a smooth finish. Bubbly for a beer with so much flavour and no aftertaste to speak of. Color isn't a huge deal for me but is appealing nonetheless. One of those beers you can drink all night. (327 characters)

Photo of Olek4374
3.01/5  rDev +7.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

I bought a trifecta of sleeman beers - the main ones - so I'll try to do proper reviews of them. i've had them before and they are very drinkable beers, but reasonably well done.

First on the hit list is the O Draught. It pours a dark yellow and is almost orange, but not as orange as the Honey Brown. The head is approximately two fingers in height and dissipates very rapidly. It's a good clean smell - mostly just malty but there is not a large hit of adjuncts, which is nice. The taste is simple - a little bubbly on the tongue with some malty goodness and virtually no aftertaste of any sort. It would have been nice if the brewers had introduced some hoppy bitterness to give it a more exciting taste - but I think they were only going for a well made lawnmower beer, and I have to think they have created a good one. If you're looking for an introduction to Canadian pale lagers, look past Molson and Labatt and grab this instead.

It's just an ordinary pale lager. Standard stuff, but yknow.. well done. (1,012 characters)

Photo of BlurryVisi0n
2.72/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Served in a pint glass.

Appearance: Pours a deep gold, ligt bubbles off the body very thin white head that barely rose to 1/10".

Smell: I would rate it lower but it doesn't stink and that's the only reason why. Smells like nothing.

Taste: Light malt and hops, little rice feel to it that makes it very easy to drink.

Mouth: medium carbonation, exceptionally smooth.

Overall: Not a bad brew, I know it's not meant to be great but it is just right especially right after meal. Salud! (491 characters)

Photo of BARFLYB
2.77/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A bottle into a pint glass. Thank you mom, for the tick.

Sleeman pours out your standard yellowish gold color with some faint bubbles that don't get to a cap, or even nothing. By the time i was dome pouring, nothing to speak of. Smell is pale malt, adjuncts, spent grain and sweetness. Taste is pretty much the same, I get some caramel, with faint old earthy hops. No bitterness though. Malt presides. Grain comes forth with warming, drink it up. Feel is a bit above light bodied, For a pale beer, the body won't do. The crispness is not present as the carb is minimal and the taste aint all there. No aftertaste to speak of, that's a plus. The ABV is minimal, but so is the taste. On a rainy day in Canada if I ever get up there I will revisit this and blend in. (764 characters)

Photo of NovT
1.7/5  rDev -39.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

tall can, poured into a pint glass

a yellow... 1/2" head at first, disappeared almost immediately, no lacing to speak of.
s watery-apple
t slightly sweet, bready finish, mostly flavourless
m quite thin
o not really worth buying beer for. Might be nice cold on a hot summer's day, but, then again, so is water. (311 characters)

Photo of timtwoface
3.08/5  rDev +10.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Before I branched out into the microbrew scene, this one a beer that I had considered "exotic". My, how times - and opinions - have changed.

That said, as a more mainstream lager, I can enjoy it - you just know what you're getting into. It's clean, it's crisp, it goes down well, it just doesn't have much in the way of extra deliciousness that really sets it apart from the others in the pack.

I've had it over the years and have never been disappointed; this was my beer on tap of choice on St. Patrick's Day when they added the green dye. At least it really looked pretty!

Not bad by any stretch, but if you're looking for something interesting, move along past this one. (677 characters)

Photo of thisismyname
2.85/5  rDev +2.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

473mL can poured into a glass

This has always been one of my favourite domestic brews. I've never really figured out why though. Let's see what we can do...

Pours a clear dark golden hue. The head fades quickly but it left a goofy-looking dotted pattern in my glass.

Very faint aroma of grains and malt.

Taste follows the nose with absolutely no aftertaste. Some corn is present. Has a roasted quality that most other Canadian lagers sorely lack. Highly chuggable and rather tasty for a domestic.

Moderate, agreeable carbonation. Goes down like water.

Overall, drinkable and yummy. CHUG! CHUG! CHUG! (605 characters)

Photo of CharlyNovember
1.91/5  rDev -31.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I remember enjoying a Sleeman's Original Draught quite a while ago... Now, I can't quite remember why.

A: It looks half decent for a lager, I'll give it that. It's a nice, very slightly amber tinted yellow, a tad darker than your average macro lager (and quite a bit darker than say, a Coors or a Bud). A finger of head, barely any retention, no lacing.

S: Very light on the scent.. an average adjunct lager smell, although more subdued than most.

T: Almost non-existent! No hops, no malts, slightly chemical. Absolutely no finish. Suspiciously watery for a non-light lager..

M: Light carbonation, extremely thin and watery.

I swear, there's more flavour in my tap water. I can say without a doubt that this is the most boring macro lager I think I've ever had. This is so flavourless, so watery and so thin that I think I'd be terrified to see what Sleeman Light or Clear is all about.
However, this is a fantastic beer if you're planning on getting tuned, drinking a bunch and perhaps showing some friends how you down a pint 3 seconds flat (don't worry, there's nothing worth savoring anyways).

Did they change this beer?? I haven't drank it in quite a while, but I remember it being sweeter and more robust, it also used to be more expensive... hmm.
In any case, if you're in the mood for a cheap mass-produced brew, drink a Canadian... even a Coors Light trumps this. (1,379 characters)

Photo of Otterburn
3.05/5  rDev +9.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

straight from the clear bottle

small white head foam

low carbonation

clear body

smell classic blond brew, nothing special

taste is the one of a blond beer. medium /small body. classic blond, refreshing and easy to drink.

mouthfeel»»: fine carbonation, and smooth texture

enjoy this one without guilt. une blonde classic (329 characters)

Photo of joemcgrath27
2.61/5  rDev -6.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A - clear golden, finger of white head held at a thin covering
S - mostly corny adjunct, light grassiness, some wheat
T - very faint hops and pale malt, adjunct, a fairly standard mass produced down the throat type taste
M - light with good carbonation, fairly thin with some dryness
O - its a run of the mill pour it down your throat as fast as you can american lager, not a lot going on (388 characters)

Photo of david18
3/5  rDev +7.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This was another of a bunch of unremarkable beers I had on a recent visit to Toronto. Not too much to say about it. It's pale in color, not much in the way of aroma. Flavor is not bad but not great either. There are other fizzy yellow beers I'd have instead of this one but I guess I'm glad I tried it. (302 characters)

Photo of SebD
2.66/5  rDev -4.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: It has a nice clear golden/yellow colour to it. It has a nice white head that dies down quite fast and has some lacing.

Smell: The aromas give out hints of corn, bready grains and not much else.

Taste: Like the aromas, it has a bready/grainy malt taste to it with corn and a slight hop presence. Typical macro taste.

Mouthfeel: It has an average carbonation with a watery and thin feel to it.

Drinkability: It's a very smooth drinkable beer accompanied with bland flavours and aromas. (503 characters)

Photo of Stocean1
2.97/5  rDev +6.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A - poured a fluffy white head - clear golden colour, little retention or lacing

S- grassy, malt, metallic

T - grassy, malt, corn, grainy, a little metallic bitter after taste

M - light body,plenty of carbonation, a little dry, bit definitely refreshing

O - drinkable but nothing special to report here (306 characters)

Photo of marty21
2.85/5  rDev +2.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: Pours a clear golden with two fingers worth of bubbly white head. The head is gone within 2 minutes. It didn’t leave any lacing either.

S: Typical macro grains and adjuncts. Nothing out of the ordinary.

T: Pretty light on the taste. It actually tastes better then most macro’s but that might just be because it’s pretty light.

M: Light carbonation with a light body.

O: Average beer. It’s better then most macro’s but you can still find better as well. (472 characters)

Photo of thehyperduck
2.71/5  rDev -2.9%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I must admit this is one of those beers whose popularity among the general public I never really understood. Many of my friends swore by it in college. Even before I started regularly trying styles of beer besides adjunct lagers, I always thought it was indistinguishable from most macros, excepting the clear bottles and higher price. It has been about 6 years since I last had this, and I'm still not willing to spend the money on a six-pack to review it, but a tallboy can should do the trick.

Translucent gold colour and lots of bubbles, looks a little darker than your average macro lager. A puffy white head looks promising at first, but ultimately disappoints and fades to virtually nothing before a minute is up. Smell is decent; sweetgrass, grains and corniness.

I can't taste anything at first because the carbonation is too distracting, but afterwards the taste of corn syrup begins to rear its head. It could be barley malt, but whatever malt it is, it has a corny feel to it. There is a slight floral quality, and a combination of adjunct and hops in the aftertaste. Mouthfeel is light, and carbonation is high.

This isn't a drainpour, but it's not something I intend to purchase again. If I am going to drink beer that has corny adjunct flavors, I would rather spend half as much and get some Brewhouse or Lakeport, which are only marginally less-refined. Maybe I'm biased - I've never really liked the flavor of candy corn. It's a truly vile candy, and this beer emulates its flavour suspiciously well, for a style that claims to use no adjunct.

[Updated Jan. 16 2014]

I picked up another can of this for some reason, and consumed it fresh out of the fridge at a very cold temperature. Sleeman Original Draught actually isn't too bad when served in such a manner, but that's mostly because the coldness numbs your taste buds, masking some of the cardboard and corniness. My father enjoys this beer so I've had it plenty of times in the past, but I just really don't like the stuff all that much. I'd take most of the major Canadian macro lagers over this stuff, but I'll amend my earlier statement and say it's still preferable to most of the cheaper, 'value brand' lagers.

Final Grade: 2.71, a C-. (2,222 characters)

Photo of uno99
3.43/5  rDev +22.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Bottle from the brewery.

Served from the fridge into a Stella glass.

A: A light honey kissed straw color with a foamy white head. Head dissipates quickly after the first sip and leaves a little bit of clingy lacing.

S: Very neutral scent. Slight hops, and some bread. Not bad at all.

T: A little fuller than the average macro but only slightly. Nicely balanced and no off flavors. Im sure if I let this warm a bit however some of the adjunct properties may come into play.

M: light but not too watery. carbonation is quite high, but I suppose that is to style. lots of burps!

Overall: Could be the best Sleeman offering. Not a bad lager, but not a standout. (663 characters)

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Sleeman Original Draught from Sleeman Breweries Ltd.
68 out of 100 based on 68 ratings.