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!

Foster's Lager - Foster's Group Limited

Not Rated.
Foster's LagerFoster's Lager

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

1,552 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,552
Reviews: 569
rAvg: 2.53
pDev: 24.9%
Wants: 9
Gots: 71 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Foster's Group Limited visit their website

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 07-10-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Foster's Lager Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,552 | Reviews: 569 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of dedrinker
3.48/5  rDev +37.5%

Golden yellow with a thin white head. Aromas of sweet grains and maybe a little corn and sulfur. The flavor is your typical macro - cereal grains/ corn, and some sweet malt that can easily go sour, but Foster's has a little more smoothness and roundness and cleanliness than many of its companions when judged within its category. Light body, finishes grainy and bubbly, very good drinkability - I got my apartment clean while watching college hoops and listening to some music. It's not about rating this higher than some craft beers, but properly assessing it within its given category, so when you ask yourself, "sheesh, what is this guy on?" Well duh, I'm on beer man. Geez...

dedrinker, Mar 31, 2008
Photo of drinksandeats
2.88/5  rDev +13.8%

Got an oilcan of this to drink while watching some Thursday afternoon March Madness action. Instead of chugging this like I'm prone to do, I decided to do a proper tasting.

I poured the golden, almost pee-like beer into a glass, and it hissed with a few fingers worth of foam. After it subsided, leaving nice lace fingers on the glass, I stuck my nose in and took a whiff. A maize aroma filled my nostrils; it was sweet enough to send my pancreas scrambling to produce insulin.

My palate's first impression is "flat", followed by "sweet". A dish of bitterness slipped in the middle of the sip, but otherwise the beer was as easy to drink as a not-so-fizzy soda. There's a distinct mild taste: is it pilsner malt, or is it corn?

While Foster's lacks the depth of a solid lager, and its mouthfeel is very close to water, it is very easy to quaff in large quantities. The price is the big stumbling block; add $1 to the price of an oilcan and one can buy any of a long list of quality beers. Given that opportunity cost, it's hard to recommend Foster's over either a fine lager or a cheaper macrobrew.

drinksandeats, Mar 20, 2008
Photo of osi
2.78/5  rDev +9.9%

A - Straw yellow and you could see right through it. Head faded quickly.

S - Not much smell coming from the light brew. What little is coming out is of malts and grains.

T- Completely all malt. Like and Australian Budweiser.

M - Crisp with a medium body that finishes clean.

D - Probably would not have more of these. Definitely better lagers out there. On a good not would probably go well with a nice spicy meal.

osi, Mar 17, 2008
Photo of pennsybrau
2.6/5  rDev +2.8%

It has been about 15 years since I had a Foster's so i figured I would give it a shot. I picked up a case and was excited to see that the beer from down under had traveled all the way from... Oil Can Breweries in Texas or Georgia. Disappointed before the first swallow, but I will try to be fair.

A- Yellow with a slight amber tint. Poured with about an inch and a half head which dissipated after a few minutes.

S- Not overpowering hops smell, some malt. Overall not that great.

T- Macro Lager... Nuff said
M- Smooth, oily in its aftertaste which frankly I enjoy.

D- This beer goes down easy. I enjoyed this more than other macro beers. If your gonna session on a low budget this would not be a bad choice. The colder the better.

pennsybrau, Mar 05, 2008
Photo of hardy008
2.53/5  rDev 0%

Appearance - Light gold in color with a white foamy head which disappears quickly with a light lace on the side of the glass.

Smell - Grain and corn..

Taste - Grain and corn. Just like the smell

Mouthfeel - light, clean, and smooth.

Drinkability - Not bad, not great either.

hardy008, Feb 22, 2008
Photo of Gehrig
2.93/5  rDev +15.8%

The golden throat charmer, Foster's lays out two fingers of white head on a medium golden body--not a bad macro appearance. The smell exudes some grassy hops, sour malt, and little else. The taste starts fine and ends poorly, with bitterness not only seeping in but also dominating. Decent carbonation salvages much, offsetting the fairly sour taste.

Not the worst macro I've had, and is fine in a pinch. Yet there is so much better out there, why settle?

Gehrig, Feb 17, 2008
Photo of baseballrock
2.98/5  rDev +17.8%

this beer is much better on tap than a bottle or can. I've had it in a can from the beer store and on tap at Outback.

appearance is of a yellowish color. It has a nice semll. Taste is decent cooked vegetables. not a whole lot going on though. On tap it is drinkable i wouldnt recommend a the can.

baseballrock, Feb 12, 2008
Photo of Gambrinus1184
2.73/5  rDev +7.9%

Had a 25 oz. oil can at Ditto's in Litchfield, Conn.

A: Just poured a bit to get a look at it, drank the rest from the can. The brew is a standard looking lager; pale gold with a slight fizzy head and rushing carbonation.

S: Smells like cooked vegetables, metallic grain and some musty hops.

T: Tastes pretty much like it smells, with a thin oily taste of grain and no real aftertaste. It's just a lot of sweet malt.

M: Mouthfeel is a tad oily across the palate, but washes down with fair ease.

D: Not impressed, but not so bad that I had to leave half of it on a table somewhere.

If it weren't for the oil can presentation, I'd probably never get Foster's. It's the "more bang for your buck" lager, so get it specifically on the grounds of cheap-o economics.

Gambrinus1184, Feb 03, 2008
Photo of Adam2200
2.55/5  rDev +0.8%

The fosters beer didn't really stand out on my list of favorites. The beer does not live up to the hype that it does. the taste was average and the smell was much like most lagers but just didn't stand out like the others i have tried. It does drink well with cheese and crackers but average is the only thing I can say about this beer.

Adam2200, Jan 27, 2008
Photo of auxiliary
1.78/5  rDev -29.6%

appearance - Clear straw yellow. Fluffy white head when poured but then settles down. Some lace, but not that nice sticky lace. More like thin lace that was left on the glass. Could hardly see it.

smell - Not much going on here,smells of grain and some skunk smell.

taste - Sweet taste and a skunked after taste.

mouthfeel - Watery, light

drinkability - Reminds me of a Corona and a Heini mixed. Was ok, but i don't like the skunked aftertaste.

auxiliary, Jan 26, 2008
Photo of mltobin
3.43/5  rDev +35.6%

Purchased in the "oil can" format from a neighborhood convenience store.

A - A light golden color, with a medium sized head.

S - Light and slightly malty.

T- Nicer than some other macro lagers in the marketplace. Clean, crisp and kinda refreshing after some time in the surf, makeshift football field, etc.

MF- Easy and enjoyable, nothing too extreme.

D- Above average macro lager, the classic aussie lager.

mltobin, Jan 26, 2008
Photo of clayrock81
2.73/5  rDev +7.9%

"Enjoyed" this in the big boy can. Airy smell of grain (maybe one can pick up corn or something) and alcohol. They market themselves from being different (read: better) than an American macro, but it maintains the same smell and appearance. It looks like every other macro, w/ a pale gold color with heavy carbonation. This carbonation outweights the hoppy, watery taste and just dries out the tongue. I will stick to having a can once in a blue moon.

clayrock81, Jan 24, 2008
Photo of KUpolo
1.55/5  rDev -38.7%

I did a blind tasting of a bunch of macro lagers recently and Foster's was decidedly the worst of the bunch in my opinion.

It scores highest in the appearance category because it is a pale clean looking lager. After that things go downhill.

The smell is mild yet slightly offensive.

The taste gives way to what I was smelling. Poor use of hops in a lager make it taste skunky. The mouth feel is what can be expected form a macro lager -- heavily carbonated.

Macros are supposed to be easy drinking, but I can not get past how bad this one tastes so even though it is pretty mild, I could not drink very many of these.

KUpolo, Jan 08, 2008
Photo of bboven
3.78/5  rDev +49.4%

###Reviewing with the style in mind, not personal preference##

Pale gold clear body with a respectable looking head. It's got more of both than most macro lagers I've seen.

Good aroma, too. The hops are easy to pick up along with a fainter malt flavor. Really good for what it is.

Taste has a good bit of malt and hop bitterness, but there is an obvious metallic twinge to the taste as a whole, and the bitterness at the end is a bit like dissolving an aspirin on your tongue. Still better than no flavor, though.

Lower carbonation that I'm used to with this style, I like it though, as you don't feel bloated with CO2 after a hearty swig.

I rarely drink this style; I bought it to practice for my BJCP test. I'd certainly pick it over many others in the style, however.

bboven, Jan 07, 2008
Photo of Gmann
2.35/5  rDev -7.1%

Pours a slightly golden straw color with a pure white head that left some spot lacing as it dissipated. The smell is almost non-existant. There is some light grain aromas. The taste is of grain and cooked veggies. Adjunct sweetness is noticable. No malt or hop presence what so ever. Typical macro. The feel is light, fizzy and a bit astringent. Typical macro, great on a hot day or tailgating. I'm a sucker for the oil can but that only goes so far. Serves as a BMC replacement if needed.

Gmann, Jan 06, 2008
Photo of iconoklaztor
2.45/5  rDev -3.2%

this is my first encounter with Fosters and its okay. It gets the job done. hell 50 oz for 4 bucks aint bad. Enjoy this cheap brew for what its worth.
the taste is thin but for a cheap, drink to get a buzz drink, it does the job.
Overall, its a cheap, enjoyable brew.


iconoklaztor, Dec 09, 2007
Photo of jneiswender
3.2/5  rDev +26.5%

Had this beer served in a chilled pint glass out of a 12oz bottle on Miami Beach.

Decent lasting head with a clear sunny yellow color.

Smells very sweet. Some rice background.

Tastes as sweet as it smells but you can definitely tell that more hops are added than many other brews from this style.

Finishes clear and dry.

I have to say that if I had the choice from this style one of my top choices would be this beer. Lets face it, if you are stuck with a macro lager then you are somewhat limited in flavor.

My score is more reflective of the beer within the style than my personal tastes.

jneiswender, Dec 02, 2007
Photo of Kookiekwan
3/5  rDev +18.6%

This is your typical American Macro style Lager. It pours a fizzy Golden/yellow, has a one finger head with some decent retention and some soapy looking lacing left over. The aroma is faint of corn syrup and I get a little bit of hops but not enough to talk about. The flavor is slightly spicy compared to most beers of this style but that hardly makes it standout. This beer is drinkable if served icy cold but I wouldn't try it warm.

Kookiekwan, Nov 06, 2007
Photo of erosier
3.05/5  rDev +20.6%

This beer pours a nice golden yellow color with a white head. The aroma is a faint malty hoppy smell that reminds me of an american macro lager. Not bad, but nothing to write home about. The taste is pretty good for a beer in this category. It has a nice watery kind of taste with hints of malt and hops that are there, but not in large quantities. The aftertaste isn't bad and it has a nice moutfeel with nive refreshing carbonation levels.

I kind of like this lager and I get it because of the huge can which is kind of a novelty. I also kind of liked the crocodile dundee-type commercials.

erosier, Oct 31, 2007
Photo of likestoswallow
2.88/5  rDev +13.8%

I can get this canned, bottled, or on tap. This review is for the tap variety. I drank a big mug at the Outback steakhouse in El Cajon. Pairs very nicely with their prime rib. The aroma was barely detectable due to the beer being served to cold and in a frozen mug. What nose there was showed some earthy biscuits and sweet malts. Color was a clear golden-brass color with large foamy white head. The head showed some lacing and lasted a log while. Flavors of yeast, biscuit, light malts and cedar. mouthfeel was a bit thin and watery. Anti-climatic finish with mild hops that leaves you wanting a big steak (so its a good thing they serve this at a steakhouse!). Overall: Recommended with conditions and reservations.

likestoswallow, Oct 25, 2007
Photo of armock
2.4/5  rDev -5.1%

A - Poured a straw color with a white head that goes down pretty fast

S - Not all that much going on here some malt

T - Yet again not much going on finishes with some hops

M - lots of carbonation in here

D - Its not a terrible beer I'd rather drink this than a BMC but its more of a lawn mower beer

armock, Oct 21, 2007
Photo of maddogruss
2.15/5  rDev -15%

Had this on tap at a wedding over the weekend:

A: This beer pours a light gold body with no head or lacing to note. Appearance was typical of a macro.
S: There was not anything truly pleasant to the smell of this beer. It smelled slightly sour, like Genny Light.
T: There was pretty much not taste to this beer. Maybe hints of alcohol, if anything. Tasted very watery and a little like seltzer water. Not impressed.
M: Overcarbonated. As soon as I took a sip, it dissolved in my mouth, barely giving me anytime to taste anything let alone savor it.
D: I would not really say this was that good of a macro! Granted most macros have no taste or body or anything when compared to most craft brews, but this beer made other macros seem like Lion's Stout!

maddogruss, Oct 19, 2007
Photo of ericj551
3.08/5  rDev +21.7%

Fosters Lager pours a crystal clear light golden color with a beautiful thick foamy head that rides way above the lip of the glass and stays. The smell is sweet and clean with a light graininess. The graininess if stronger in the flavor with more clean sweet light malts. The finish is bitter in an astringent way, not in a hoppy way. Overall not a bad beer for $2.

ericj551, Oct 13, 2007
Photo of biggmike
2.63/5  rDev +4%

Very average lager. Nothing remarkable about this beer. Might be described as the "Budweiser of Australia", which is definitely not a compliment. Pours yellow/golden color with white head that dissipated quickly. Aroma was nothing special, and the taste seemed a bit on the metallic side. This was served to me way to cold in a mug that was practically iced over. If this is "Australian for Beer", then this is my last from down under.

biggmike, Oct 12, 2007
Photo of Halcyondays
2.78/5  rDev +9.9%

25.4 oz. big oil can, just finished watching Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles, so I had a hankering for this,

A: Pours a typical, pale yellow, but the head is really nice initially, and has pretty good retention, a nice, soapy white.

S: Very light, faint, some malt notes.

T: Light malt notes are backed up by a surprising amount of hops for this style of beer, definitely not an IPA or pilsner, but for an American macro lager, it's got a bit of a crisp hop bite.

M: Light and a bit fizzy, I find that the oil can is less carbonated than the bottle, which is a good thing, since when I had Foster's out of the bottle, it felt way over-carbonated, which made it difficult to drink, overall though I found the mouthfeel a bit watery and vapid.

D: Fine, though that big oil can has a lot of beer in it, as much as a wine bottle, 750 mL, so about halfway in, I found myself not drinking any for about 30 minutes, I found it just disinterested me, for an American Macro Lager it's not bad, but compared to some of the better European-style lagers, it just doesn't stand up.

Halcyondays, Oct 07, 2007
Foster's Lager from Foster's Group Limited
60 out of 100 based on 1,552 ratings.