Schaefer - F & M Schaefer Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
SchaeferSchaefer

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
62
poor

240 Ratings
THE BROS
57
awful

(view ratings)
Ratings: 240
Reviews: 124
rAvg: 2.6
pDev: 26.54%
Wants: 8
Gots: 22 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
F & M Schaefer Brewing Co. visit their website
Wisconsin, United States

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  4.60% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: pezoids on 08-21-2001

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (2) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Schaefer Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 240 | Reviews: 124
Photo of magictrokini
1/5  rDev -61.5%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

The formalities first: pours clear yellow, fizzy white head. Disgustingly sweet corn syrup and metal aroma. Cotton candy and grass flavor, along with something sour and sweaty. Yay.

I brought this to a party one night as a joke. There just happened to be a cute blonde from Indiana that liked Schaefer. Needless to say, that was a really good night.

Photo of BMMillsy
1.11/5  rDev -57.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.25

Honestly, this is the second worst beer on earth. First place is the light version. We use to grab this in college for about 30 cents per can (and I was in college in the 2000's, not the 60's). Light gold color with some fluffy head I guess. Aroma is filthy corn and wheat, dirty must, and vomit. The flavor follows almost perfectly and this is really tough to get down during a game of beer pong. Avoid at all costs.

Photo of RonJensen
1.45/5  rDev -44.2%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.25 | overall: 1.5

From a can, poured into a glass. Aroma is kind of repulsive, it smells like something chemical or medicinal, combined with corn adjuncts.
Taste: A little too sweet, and again, you can taste something sour and medicinal, combined with corn and some hops, also, a little too carbonated.

Photo of kinger
1.45/5  rDev -44.2%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

The can assured me I wasn't drinking water. I wasn't expecting anything great when I picked up a twelve pack, I knew it was swill but I needed something for when I was painting. Never poured it out of the can so I am assuming that it is very pale yellow in color with a slight head and good carbonation. The aroma was non-existent. Mouthfeel was very thin, I have never had a beer that was this thin. The flavor is very subtle which makes this an easy drinking beer. At first I thought it was really bad, but after a couple it started to grow on me. Overall a drinkable beer that lacks any distinguishing qualities, the odds of me buying this again are slim to none.

Photo of Beeeeeerman
1.6/5  rDev -38.5%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.75 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Drank many cases of this many years ago

Photo of goochpunch
1.61/5  rDev -38.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

Pours a straw color with a dismal white head. No surprises here. Smells very grainy, which is fine by me, but there's this weird beef broth smell somewhere in there. Tastes like nothing but sugar with a hint of malt. Really, this has possibly less flavor than some light lagers I've had but with the bonus of being sickly sweet. I guess I should give it kudos for tasting somewhat like a malt beverage. Mouthfeel is like flat coke. Just gross. I don't want to drink this.

I'm not one to simply bash a macro lager just because it's a macro lager. I happen to enjoy some of them a great deal. This is really just that bad. Do yourself a favor and get Pabst or Schlitz instead of this. Same price but they actually taste pretty decent.

Photo of TastyTaste
1.73/5  rDev -33.5%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

Got it in 40 oz. bottle form in New Jersey (not available in my locale). Clear straw-gold color, with a white head. At $2 a 40, I didn't deem it worthy of a glass. Tastes of grain and corn, a true macro lager gone awry. It's drinkability is alright, if you factor in value of this cheap brew.

Photo of Overlord
1.73/5  rDev -33.5%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

I am slowly but surely knocking out all the mainstays of my college days.

The thing I remember about this beer was how sour it was. It poured the typical yellow with big white foam head of most macrolagers, but it actually had some flavor to it. That flavor being skunk with some sour bite.

Other than that: watery and forgettable.

Photo of hardy008
1.83/5  rDev -29.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pale gold with a two finger white head which fades quickly. The smell has corn, some grass, and bread. Not too impressive.

The taste has cooked corn, bread malt, and is somewhat sweet. No outstanding features, mostly just blah.

Thin bodied, high carbonation, and not much aftertaste. Very bland and definitely not worth trying again.

Photo of Wegomlegging
1.85/5  rDev -28.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Ah Schaefer, the beer your grandaddy grew up on. This is the beer I got for $2 a pitcher in college, from a guy who always let his cigarette ashes fall in the food and beer that he was serving. Appetizing, yes. It appeared watery yellow, with no significant head. The smell was like a watered down Budweiser, but less skunky and more fresh (a good thing, no?). The flavor...well, let's just say it was refreshing and not too "flavory." I'm in a kind mood. The mouthfeel was flatter than fizzy, and overall it's a good cheap beer to not turn your nose up at because, well, let's face it, there's no such thing as a bad beer...at least not one that's this cheap.

Photo of AltBock
1.87/5  rDev -28.1%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

12oz. can that a relative gave to me for free, so I lost nothing. A white can with the top and bottom of the label is gold and with a red Schaefer in the middle. In the gold it stated that it's "Proudly brewed in the U.S. with the finest quality ingredients." It's more than likely brewed with the finest corn and rice that U.S. can produce. It also states that it's America's Oldest Lager Beer. On the side of the can it would like to thank the Schaefer customers for their loyalty. I was also told that this beer is one of the cheapest rot gut beers on the market.

When poured into a Pilsener glass, the beer was the usual macro color of straw yellow, not urine yellow like some others. Got a nice 2 inch head of white foam that had good retention that left some rings and little sticky white lace around the glass. What can I say about the smell? I kept trying to get an aroma out of it but the only way I can describe the smell is that it smelled like beer. It had an ok macro taste of (at least it had a taste) little malt, corn, and some burnt hops at the end. At least the mouthfeel isn't as watery as I would have expected it to be. It wasn't too watery, smooth, carbonated, and with a sweet corn aftertaste. I'm sure that this beer would make a nice cheap summer brew! At least I found out for myself that this really isn't a rot gut beer.

Photo of WhiteHillsStore
1.9/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.75 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A great beer for a kegger, but not much else. The appearance is clear with a very fizzy head that disappears quickly. The smell is mostly rice. The taste is very light with a rice soda kind of flavor. Mouthfeel was very light. I knew what I was getting into when I had mine, and it worked well for the outdoor party being thrown. When the situation calls for it, not a bad choice, but by no means a great one either.

Photo of Stinkypuss
1.95/5  rDev -25%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 1.25 | overall: 1.75

LOOK: As the can tipped, the beer poured a mostly clear yellow with a large fizzy, quickly dissipating foam. Some lace is left behind. The clarity is poor, as there is some sediment that just doesn't belong in a AAL.

SMELL: Corn, hops, must, bread. It smells grainy which is a perfect precursor to all the flavor.

TASTE: In the taste, grain and processed stewed hops, a bit of corn, but not terribly offensive to those not easily offended. Has a fair amount of bitterness for the style, so hey, at least there's that.

FEEL: Light bodied with a stinging carbonation and dry cardboard in the finish.

OVERALL: This is fishing beer if you like drinking cheap beer whilst you fish. Possibly even a beer pong candidate. Anything else is not recommended.

Photo of Deconstructionis
2/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I remember this from it being advertised during Red Sox games on the radio as "the one beer to have when you're having more than one." Now there's a producer who knows his consumers.

I was served a can recently. I decided not have more than one. This is pretty much a typical budget class macrolager-- pale, thin bodied, highly carbonated, obvious use of cheap adjuncts.... That said it actually has a little flavor is maybe a notch above most other really cheap beers and closer to the flagship products fabricated by Miller, AB and Coors.

Photo of Brent
2/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

If you want a good beer, don't bother with this. If you want a slam-it-down cheap beer, then this is as good a choice as any. It has a fairly clean finish, which is about all you'll taste anyway if you're chugging.

Photo of Matty123
2/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

just another beer from an era when people didn't really care how beer tasted.

Photo of Wildman
2/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I had this beer alot when living with some other guys in a house. One of them liked to get this beer. The usual quote was "Schaefer, when your having more then one".

Photo of MuddyFeet
2/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Bought a 40oz for shitz and gigglez. Poured some in a glass and it was a very pale yellow. Thick bubbley head but the carbonation of the beer was negligible. Nose was very light--mostly rice. Taste is oh so simple. Lots of adjuncts and hints of some actualy malted grains. Hops? Nope. Very light and crisp, but flat. Definitely easy to drink.

Photo of vicsju1991
2.03/5  rDev -21.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

12 oz can poured into duvel snifter
A - clear pale ambery yellow blehhh, head dies down fast
S- cant really pic out anything but cheap beer
T - same cheep beer taste, nothing special here
M - easy to drink I guess
O - buy pabst.... seriously, if you are going to buy a cheap beer and try to get hammered just buy pabst

Photo of TheDeuce
2.11/5  rDev -18.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Appearance-pale golden color, a fair amount of head that dissapears quickly

Smell-cooked cabbage, a little corn, grain, fairly clean though.

Taste-thin and watery, really not much on the palette, a little grain to go through with but other than that it goes down clean and tasteless.

Mouthfeel-thin and watery, not a good aftertaste and not that smooth going down.

Drinkability-a drink em and get drunk type beer, I'd only have another if at a party or offered but I would certainlty not seek this out.

Overall-this is a cheap mass-produced beer made to drink quick and get buzzed in the vein of Milwaukee's Best Light or Natural Light, it's comparable to these and therefore obviously not something to seek out.

Photo of TheManiacalOne
2.12/5  rDev -18.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Poured from a 12oz. can into a US tumbler pint glass.

A: The beer is a light yellow color with a medium white head that fades quickly and leaves a spotty lace on the glass.

S: The aroma is of light malt, corn and other adjuncts with a slight touch of hops.

T: The taste is of grain, corn and the typical light macro sweetness and adjunct bite. There’s very little hops presence. After-taste is sweet. Not much to it, but there isn’t much to expect from the style.

M: A little smooth and a little crisp, light-to-medium body, medium-to-heavy carbonation, the finish is a bit slick.

D: Not very tasty, goes down ok, not filling at all, even within the style it’s not a very good beer. There are several other inexpensive beers that I would pick first.

Photo of shererjt
2.19/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Poured a clear yellow with light carbonation. Head was small and short-lived. Lots of escaping bubbles were visible. Not sure that any beer's appearance could be bad, but the poor head has to count against this one. Aroma was corn and astringency. Husky and grainy with a bit of hops in the background. Not a bad smell but not the typical hops and malt, either. The taste had an up-front astringency followed by a lingering corn sweetness. Not horrid, but not something I'd want to drink a lot of. Did have a bit more hop character than your typical macrobrew. Mouthfeel had a light-to-moderate body with a bit of prickliness. Drinkability was okay. Picked up a bit more malt character as it warmed.

This isn't horrible, but there are better cheap American lagers out there to pick from (Schlitz, Miller High Life).

Photo of Kooz
2.2/5  rDev -15.4%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Big's grandfather gave a bunch of these. They are at least a year old...

Upon opening the can, I noticed 2 things--something was floating in it and there was a bad odor. The odor never subsided, but thankfully the taste wasn't so bad. Sort of mellow, not as watery as I expected. Let me cut his short--I would drink these again, but only as a last resort.

Photo of Jason
2.25/5  rDev -13.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

Presentation: 16 oz can shinning a gold and red label with a white back ground, boast that it is America's oldest lager beer. No freshness date.

Appearance: Pale yellow with a quick forming and quick disappearing head that leaves nothing in its trail not even a thin lace, looks like apple juice or something else.

Smell: Watered down astringent grain with a weird aspartame artificial sweet aroma, otherwise a clean nose.

Taste: Light bodied with a lost crispness from an overly effervescent carbonation during the pouring perhaps due to that this beer should be consumed out of the can. Thin malt mouth feel and very little to the flavour other than some residual sweetness and vague graininess. A relatively dry brew, some odd cloying sweetness that seems mutated or engineered comes through. Hops are shallow and very light in the bitterness though just enough to balance the meek malt character. Slight cheap lager twang associated with canned beers is in the after taste but all in all it is a pretty clean one.

Notes: A chug-a-lug style beer, produced in mass quantities to be consumed in mass quantities. Not my mug of beer but its similarities to all of the other mass produced beers keep it popular in some areas around the country still.

Photo of Proteus93
2.25/5  rDev -13.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Can courtesy dkachur. Thanks?

A: Not horribly pale, but it's still quite a light yellow. Head forms quickly, and shows promise, but then pretty much vanishes as quickly as it came. As it is consumed, some spots of lace appear on the sides, but they disappear moments later, as well.

S + T: Grainy and just the slightest bit vegetal. There's an unusual sweetness to it that I can't quite place.

M + D: Carbonation seems just a little too light and it is missing a bit of crispness. It goes down incredibly easily, but without the other elements to make it worthwhile, that doesn't really matter much.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Schaefer from F & M Schaefer Brewing Co.
62 out of 100 based on 240 ratings.