XXXX Gold - Castlemaine Perkins

Not Rated.
XXXX GoldXXXX Gold

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
61
poor

75 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 75
Reviews: 28
rAvg: 2.4
pDev: 29.58%
Wants: 4
Gots: 8 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Castlemaine Perkins visit their website
Australia

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  3.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: brewdlyhooked13 on 09-16-2002

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (5) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Ratings: 75 | Reviews: 28
Reviews by WoodBrew:
Photo of WoodBrew
3.28/5  rDev +36.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

If there was a Foster's commercial....like the ones they used to have...What's Australian for Michelob Ultra...XXXX Gold Lager!!! The previous people who reviewed this beer did not take into consideration the purpose of the beer. This beer was created for the hard working Australian in northern Queensland where the summers are long, hot, and humid...much like the legs on many a Sheila!!!! This beer looks, smells, and tastes like Mich Ultra. Stop being a snob and enjoy the beer as it was created. You can suck this SESSION down ...FOREVER!!!

More User Reviews:
Photo of rastaman
1.1/5  rDev -54.2%
look: 1 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

even worse than the regular XXXX, this is a midstrenghth brew (3.5% ABV), and it sure as hell tastes like it, very weak, chemically and watery, most beers are better than this, too light for me.

Photo of biboergosum
2.44/5  rDev +1.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

375ml bottle, on an Aussie-themed patio on Whyte Ave, on a nice, bird-watching spring day.

This beer pours a crystal clear medium golden yellow colour, quite reminiscent of watery apple juice, with two fingers of weakly puffy, thinly foamy dirty white head, which leaves some decent fuzzy, tightly honeycombed lace around the glass as things quickly sink away.

It smells of grainy malt - barley and husky corn alike - with a thankfully small dose of weedy, lightly skanky hops. The taste is mildly sweet corn grist and spent barley awn, some stale yeast, and acrid, chemically astringent 'hops'.

The carbonation is generally quite high upfront, before petering out rather quickly, the body a pithy medium-light weight, and pretty plainly smooth. It finishes off-dry, the corn cereal sweetness, and a little skunkiness lingering in yer typical unholy duo.

Nice to try some different offerings from Down Under, but this just seems like more of the same ol', same ol' shite, and sadly, this time with less petrol! Not worthy of the price tag here all the way across the Pacific Ocean, and, I'm guessing, equally so right at home.

Photo of Sammy
2.35/5  rDev -2.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Yellow with significant white head that soon dissipitates. Neutral aroma. On thin side, bit goes down easy. Not much taste and long metallic and bitter finish. Some corn. Carbonation is OK. Why does our government or any one else decide to bring this in? Proof that New Zealand, the underdog, produces the decent Australian beer.

Photo of Andrewziggy
2.91/5  rDev +21.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

watery and light bodied with a crisp medium carbonation.best on tap

Photo of Kulrak
1.64/5  rDev -31.7%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Pours a nice golden color with a decent amount of white fluffy head (though I did pour into the middle of the glass) which fades away fairly quickly. Smells faintly of chemicals, not very pleasant. The flavor is about on par with the smell, faintly of chemicals, slightly sweet, and a horrible aftertaste I can't place. The mouthfeel is fairly creamy with only a slight scraping from the carbonation, not too bad until it hits the back of my tongue and the horrible taste comes in again and ruins it. All in all a horrible beer. I can't imagine why anyone would drink this.

Photo of aeolianshredhead
1.15/5  rDev -52.1%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

A- Well, no surprise here, it looks just like every single other Australian macro lager- boring as shit and a heavily carbonated straw colour. Honestly, what else could I expect?

S- That stupid, annoying, goddamn corn/starch smell which I'm sure every poor beer drinker with actual taste buds DREADS whenever he/she goes over to their mate's place.

T- Insipid, weak, diluted. People actually drink this voluntarily?!? Let alone en masse?!?! How ridiculous. Tastes as if vegemite and bread were put through a blender and "brewed" up as beer. Absolutely nothing but a stale, yeasty aftertaste on the palate.

M- Exactly like soda water. Carbonated into submission and ridiculously abrasive. Water has more body to it.

O- I can't believe this passes for beer. People always say, "It's refreshing," but these same people probably wouldn't even know what Hoegaarden was. This is no more refreshing than the average glass of tap water. A truly abysmal brew.

Photo of DaveFL1976
2.95/5  rDev +22.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I drank a few…or more than a few on my Queensland trip to Cairns, the Great Barrier Reef and Palm Cove, but never got a chance to do a review. I meet XXXX again at the Red Gum Hotel on the corner of Victoria and Peel in Melbourne.
It pours a dark straw (not quite golden) color with a thin white head that settles down to not much more than a cap in short order. The smell is fairly sweet and malty with little hop presence. The taste is better than your average CUB product in my opinion. The taste is light, a bit sweet. Not hoppy, but still fairly crisp. What separates this brew from Carlton, Crown and VB is the lack of the horrible metallic aftertaste. That’s a relief.
It’s by no means a great beer, but it’s not horrible and would be great to consume in quantities on a hot day…sort of the same way as iced tea or Gatorade.


Addendum: My wife and I recently took a NT trip to Kakadu National Park. It's a beautiful park and there's heaps of fantastic hikes to do that all end in waterfalls and rock pool swims. Anyways, we stopped at the 'last-chance-for-beer-before-the-park' stop where our choices were VB or XXXX. We chose XXXX because I do everything I can not to give CUB my money.

It really isn't a bad drink on a hot day. It's really closer to Sprite or Iced Tea than it is beer, in my opinion. I had like 6 of these on a hot afternoon/eve and never caught a buzz. I don't know if it's possible to get drunk on XXXX. In a way, that's good. It's a refreshing drink that doesn't taste horrible and won't leave you with a hangover.

Photo of soju6
2.03/5  rDev -15.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A: Pours a clear yellow color with a small head that fades to no real lacing.

S: Aroma is sort of musty with some grain and malt sweetness.

T: Tatse of sweet malt and grain. Mild bitterness and a sticky finish.

F: Light body, fairly smooth and pretty bland.

O: Pretty basic lager, bland and boring.

Photo of funkengruven
3.12/5  rDev +30%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Got a 6 of these at the LCBO last weekend, was just expecting a typical macro lager, which is pretty much what I got. Poured a standard yellow with a fizz that subsides quickly to nothing, smell is a little corny, some alcohol, little else. Flavor is not terriible, aromas of corn and weak malts, barely a hint of hops, however flavor is slightly better than your average macro. Carbonation is abundant, a little over abundant actually, but overall this was quite an easy drink.

I'd say it's slightly better than Coors Light, but certainly not worth the $11 i paid for a six pack.

Photo of Breeza
2.71/5  rDev +12.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

A: Clear gold, thick head with disappears very quickly leaving some large soapy-like bubbles. Moderate carbonation.

S: Hoppy and very metallic.

T: Hoppy and metallic taste also in taste profile, with a hint of Vegemite/yeast.

M: A bit thin and watery, but ok.

O: This is my preferred go to beer if where ever I am drinking at doesn't have much on offer, will drink this over most mainstream Australian beers anyday. It's definitely a beer to enjoy ice cold on hot summer days. Very simple in flavour but that isn't a bad thing at all.

Photo of jimiboi
1.06/5  rDev -55.8%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Yellow, clear look. Drunk straight from a can so you can get the best of both worlds: zero taste and extra-bloating carbonation. What a treat! I avoid this beer in my haughty beer-snobbery, not because I’m a New South Welshman and loyal to Toohey’s New (because I avoid that too). This is a good beer to enjoy at a family BBQ, when you want to ‘fit in’ with normal folk who have convinced themselves that a good beer is characterised by a strong marketing campaign.

Photo of Viggo
2.53/5  rDev +5.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

12 oz can, from the LCBO! Sweet another premium lager!

Pours a clear straw yellow, kind of pissy, big thick white head forms, pretty tight, actually has a nice head on it, good retention and leaves a ton of lace. Smell is familiar, corn, urine, wheat, honey, bread, adjuncts of all kinds, some citrus, bit of a skunkiness. Taste is more of the same, watery adjuncts, some honey and bread, sugars, lemony twang, very weak finish, little bit of sourness. Mouthfeel is light bodied with medium carbonation, pretty low carbonated for the style which makes it slightly more drinkable.

Photo of laituegonflable
1.38/5  rDev -42.5%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

Pours a dirty pale golden colour with slow, slow bead feeding a modest white head that sits listlessly and retains artificially well, with a sheet of lacing around. Looks bland, and you know, mass-produced on a factory line. Not abysmal though.

Smell is that "beer" smell that since childhood I've tried to avoid - sweet corn and grain husks with that soda-stream forced carbonation acerbicness. Touch of POR at the back, but not a lot of hop, just a weird sweet tang overall. Pretty poor.

Taste is bland; yeasty. Touch of sweet corn with rice grain on the front, then becomes bready yeasty on the mid, with an odd lemon/honey tang as a faint mid-palate. Finish is awfully sweet, just adjunct grain with a touch of children's cough medicine. Slight sweetness but otherwise just phenolic and raw. But on top of all that, it's bland as well. I'd be angry with how bad this beer is, if it didn't just suck all the spirit out of me.

No texture at all; no body. Not even carbonation sizzle. I've had tea with more fizz than this.

It's unpleasant enough to be bad and beyond just blandly drinkable. Powerfully mediocre.

Photo of Goosehunter75
2.7/5  rDev +12.5%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.75

A - Pours a pale yellow with a decent 1 finger fluffy white head. Very little retention however

S - Not much aromas. Smells grainy and yeasty

T - More flavor than most American Adjunts, but still not very flavorful. Mainly malts/grains

M - Very light beer. Feels slick in the mouth.

O - Nothing special. Doesn have more flavor than a light beer. Similar to Budweiser in my opinoin. Not a bad beer, just nothing to write home about

Photo of pootz
1.88/5  rDev -21.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

Can from the LCBO

Pours a pale straw colored lager with a flaccid white cap that collases quickly...only light lacing.

Aroma of sweet rice and cardboard

Taste is bland and fizzy with light malts but mostly dextrine sweetness...clean finish, no off tastes just a boring adjunct bland lager with a watery weak character and an annoying dextrin sweet after taste.

It pains me Dogfish head 60 Min. IPA was rejected this summer so we could enjoy bland adjuct lagers like this...with a far too pricey tag for what you get...I won't go back for more...this is the Miller Genuine Draft of OZ.

Photo of biegaman
2.29/5  rDev -4.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

330ml can listed as Castlemanine XXXX Export Gold... and is by all accounts very underwhelming and painfully average...
Pours a brilliantly clear yellow body. Small bubbles drift about. There is a creamy white head that persist the entire tasting. The body is a little flat, with flavours of stale grassy hops and basic (adjuncty) malt bill. The drinkability is about average for a macro lager but I wouldn't by any stretch reccommend it.

Photo of dansmcd
2.22/5  rDev -7.5%
look: 1.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

A - like flat ginger ale, absolutely no head even with an aggressive pour, the carbonation is gone within seconds and zero lacing at all

S - that very artificial beery smell without intricacies, as if based on a 'beer' flavoured jelly bean or ice cream

T - citrus and corn, very typical of the chemical macro Aussie beer

M - like water

O - the only thing going for it is it's cheap. Absolutely has to be served ice cold to be drinkable, if so - it does serve it's purpose after some hard yakka in the sun - you can really slam them down fast if you dont have to taste them. less horrible on tap.

Photo of doktorhops
2.15/5  rDev -10.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Well, well, well well well - XXXX the beer Queenslanders love to hate - nowhere else in this big brown land are people so vehemently against one of their own iconic products, but nearly every single Queenslander I met when I lived in Brisbane hated this brewery and the beers they produced. I often found myself wondering who was drinking all the XXXX and how they could stay in business, then a mate told me "It mostly gets sent down to NSW, Victoria and SA" like some form of cruel punishment to the other states for being terrible at the State of Origin. Then I found out that XXXX got bought out by Kirin, which explained everything. Anyway despite my polemic I had an ice cold XXXX Gold once and didn't mind it so much (as I recall it was a choice between that or a VB).

Poured from a 375ml Stubbie into a nonic pint.

A: Like a plethora of Aussie macro Lagers XXXX Gold presents a clear golden body with a white head that fizzles to nothing.

S: Barnyard apples that have been dropped on the floor mingle with grainy malts and vegetable hop notes. Certainly not as bad as I remember from the Bitters aroma, however it must be noted that this is the watered down version.

T: Grainy malts mostly. There is a hint of apple and the finish is an awkward dry cabbage flavour (Pride of Ringworm strikes again!). About as refreshing as a glass of sheep dip on a hot summers day (and I'm not referring to the whiskey of that name).

M: Understated, watery and light bodied with a crisp medium carbonation.

D: Look this is really a winner when the other options are VB, Toohey's New and XXXX Bitter - aside from that there is little reason to touch this with a barge pole, unless your plan was to knock it off a table to smash it on the ground with said barge pole.

Food match: Whatever they're selling at the footy match you're currently attending as that is the only reason you purchased this beer in the first place.

Side note: The classic New South Welshperson joke goes that "Queenslanders call it XXXX because they don't know how to spell BEER" [Yeah there's definitely some inferiority complexes at play between those two states].

Photo of heygeebee
2.46/5  rDev +2.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

'XXXX Gold Now On Tap' proclaims my nearest club.

Joy! Celebration! or not....

Sadly this falls into the category of most other mass-produced macros with the sole plus being this is mid-strength so all the usual metallic / macro flavours have a little more reason to be present, ie to give at least some flavour.

Is it 40 deg? Drink it from the Esky.

Is it not 40 deg? Don't drink it...

Photo of SmashPants
2.82/5  rDev +17.5%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Can: a very macro-orientated yellow 375mL can.

Appearance: pours a strong yellow colour with plenty of lumpy carbonation. A fluffy white head dissipates quickly to a sparse cap. Looks a bit ordinary.

Aroma: plenty of grain and some malt - sweet barley and husk. That ol' XXXX smell. Some metallic since it's in a can (the only way to have it in Queensland).

Taste: pretty much follows the nose. XXXX is as XXXX does - a pretty simple mid-range lager.

Aftertaste: the flavours disappear pretty quickly as expected for a mid-range throw-down lager.

Mouth feel: a light mouth feel and plenty of carbonation. Easy to put back in a hot climate, which is kind of the idea.

Overall: XXXX Gold is extremely popular in Queensland due to its refreshing drinkability. A great price too, but all told I'd probably rather a Hahn 3.5 or Carlton Mid from this bracket.

Photo of jarmby1711
1.79/5  rDev -25.4%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

The look of this beer is unusual It is the brightest clearest yellow/gold with a pure white head and the most bubbles I have ever seen.It all looks to a computer generated image of an enticing beer Wierd stuff.
The smell is off putting chemically water
The taste is stock standard bitter water with the vaguest of malt backgrounds.The more of the glass you had the less flavour there was to back up the bitterness.
It is not awful nor has it any merits to recommend it beyond being thirst quenching on a very hot day.But as there are many beers that do this AND add flavour it is hard to recommend it

Photo of Finite
2.63/5  rDev +9.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Actually better than I thought. Im from NSW and everyone says this is poison well its better than carlton or new and about the same as VB. It was a basic malt profile with some surprising hop flavours and smell. Small yet more than expected. A crisp BBQ beer for sure. An easy drinking aussie larger and probably on the better side in terms of macros but in the end its poor in the scheme of craft beer.

Photo of Andrewharemza
3.52/5  rDev +46.7%
look: 3.75 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

it's a good beer at bbq and you have to drive grainy malts light bodied and very crisp

Photo of SargeC
3.78/5  rDev +57.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Appearance: Deep golden color. Dense head with good lacing. Large carbonation bubbles slowly rise to the top.

Smell: Sweet tones, grass, small touch of alcohol

Taste: Very light hop flavor backed up by mild malt flavor. Good tame balance.

Mouthfeel: Good body for a lager.

Drinkability: Great session brew. This was hand carried back from Queensland to me. It is a great reminder of good times in Australia. A very high percentage of those times involved a Castlemaine product.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
XXXX Gold from Castlemaine Perkins
61 out of 100 based on 75 ratings.