1. American Craft Beer Fest returns to Boston on May 29 & 30, featuring 640+ beers from 140+ brewers. Tickets are on sale now.

Foster's Lager - Foster's Group Limited

Not Rated.
Foster's LagerFoster's Lager

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
60
poor

1,692 Ratings
THE BROS
59
awful

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,692
Reviews: 586
rAvg: 2.52
pDev: 25%
Wants: 14
Gots: 134 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Foster's Group Limited visit their website
Australia

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: kbub6f on 07-10-2001

No notes at this time.
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Foster's Lager Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,692 | Reviews: 586 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of JoeyBeerBelly
4/5  rDev +58.7%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

I got a bottle of this in a "beers of the world" mixed pack

this wasn't the first time I've had this beer (I've had many, many "oil cans" of this back in the late 70's) but this is the sample I shall base my review on.

looks ok, nice golden/amber color with a good white head

smells nice, malt, Australian malt?

taste/mouthfeel - full malt character on the mid-palate blends well with a delicate creaminess and crisp, clean hop finish, creating a perfect balance to the beer.

Australian for beer?...

copy & paste to your browser - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3RYHKWXIwI

drink up mates !

Photo of ghostmech007
3.09/5  rDev +22.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

12oz bottle poured into a pilsner glass.

Pale golden color with an impressive head at the pour but fizzes to nothing after second sip.

Malted grains and husky masked nose. Clean smell.

Crisp on the tongue and nicely smooth. Weak body and the husky tones really add up here. Hops are blended really nice in this brew. Flavors really are difficult to trace in this. Bland finish.

Taste: Crisp and grainy with a slightly refreshing smoothness. Light to moderate body. Sweet grain leans towards husky with light biscuity and powdery flavours. Even hop bitterness that couples well with the fresh graininess. Vague astringent flavours are mild and hard to trace back to their grain and hop origins. Husky finish that gradually dries.

You can really drink this one though. Went great with my steaks.

Photo of zeff80
2.68/5  rDev +6.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A - Poured out a pale gold color with a two-finger head. Highly carbonated.

S - It smelled of grains and malt.

T - Tasted of grains and wheat. It starts sweet and then finishes with a slightly bitter hoppiness.

M - It was crisp but a little flat. A light-bodied beer.

D - Not bad for the style. It has a little more hops than most of this style.

Photo of stephendr
2.35/5  rDev -6.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

12 oz. bottle- color of pale yellow, with a short white head - nose of sweet corn , some malt , and mildly hoppy – taste of sweet white corn , mild hops , light skunk , and fruit ???- body watery , and well carbonated – aftertaste of mild hops , and burnt malt

Photo of TheManiacalOne
2.25/5  rDev -10.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

On-tap 2/23/07 at The Celtic Pub in Pawtucket, RI, served in a US tumbler pint glass.

A: The beer is a light gold color, with a large white head that fades quickly and leaves a thin lace.

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

T: The taste is predominantly heavy flavors of corn and grain. It has a thin malt character and is not as sweet as most macros, but has very little hops.

M: Crisp and not too smooth, kind of watery, light-to-medium body, medium-to-heavy carbonation, clean finish.

D: Not very tasty, goes down ok, not filling at all, doesn't seem to have much of a kick, I wouldn't stick with this beer if I had another choice.

Photo of Scottsan
2.83/5  rDev +12.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I poured from the bottle into a glass and, somehow, managed a large, pillowy head. Attractive, all-around . . . meaning average (I was pretty thirsty).

Detected a malty smell (an artifact of Canadian brewing?). And a hint of dry grass.

The taste is definitely not unpleasant, with nothing really notable or discernible. There's a dry bite on the back end. And the cumulative aftertaste is fairly bitter. The mouthfeel is somewhat thin and . . . oily.

Overall, not bad, but down the list of "imports" I'd pick up at the store. On the other hand, I'd push aside several domestic macros to get to this in the back of the fridge at a party.

Photo of RedneckChemist
3.18/5  rDev +26.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This is my first review, so please bear with me.

Presentation: 25.4 oz "oil can" as the case box describes

Appearance: This beer is the color of the gold accents on the can. Pours rough from the over-sized can to a decent, one-finger head that holds moderately well. Looks like a "yellow-fizzy"

Smell: My nose is not refined enough to pick out individual scents, but, again, I must default to the "run of the mill" macros

Taste: Here is where this beer seperates itself from the swill. Full-flavored, ever-so-slightly bitter, finishes somewhat dry. Not bad.

Notes: As a reformed macro fiend, I must admit that this is the beer that I turned to first. It has the drinkability of water with more flavor than most Am macros. All-in-all not a bad beer, but it is by no stretch of the imagination a good beer, either. This beer is fit for cookouts or raceday when it is a "quantity rather than quality" kind of occasion.

Photo of alexskovan
2.06/5  rDev -18.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pint can made in Canada.

I sang along with the philosophers, so I didn't get the can lobbed at my head.

Poured pale yellow with a lumpy white head. Virtually no aroma whatsoever, beyond the prickling of CO2 in the nose. Taste is almost not there, except for a slightly nasty afterbite.

Made in Canada by an Australian company, but it is still an American Macro, and not a very good one. As the Philosophy Department Dons of the Australian University would say; "Like making love in a canoe -- f**king close to water!"

Photo of Azur
3.33/5  rDev +32.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This beer pours a heavy golden head that laces the glass adequately. The scent is crisp, clear and a bit malty. One of my favorite drinkable beers, but the scent could use improvement. The taste is light, crisp and sweet with a slight hop after taste. Among domestics, it is defiantly worth the extra cost. Besides, among foreign beers, you get more of a flavor for less of the price then other beers.

Photo of billybob
3.91/5  rDev +55.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

pours clear yellow with a five finger white head that surprised me by holding fairly well and some lacing to the finish. musty, earthy smell. taste has a little more malt and a little more hop which gives it a little more body. mouthfeel is clean and fresh. i think it would great in the summer with your cheeseburgers and hot dogs.

Photo of peabody
2.73/5  rDev +8.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured into a pislner glass from the big can. Looks like a bud with just a bit more white suds.
Very little to no smell .Mabey just a dash of yeast/malt.
Watery taste. Not much here at all.
I used to love these things then I started drinking for the experience, not just the drunkeness.
Leave this one alone!

Photo of treehugger02010
2.03/5  rDev -19.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

This brew was pretty damn bad. Of course that is in my opinion. The functional features were awful. There was no head, no retention, no lace and no smell. Since it wasn't totally water, there was a very light yellow peaking through the glass. The taste was rather rancid. I'm not sure what it was that I was tasting, but I did not like it. The mouthfeel was well, felt. Don't drink and review.

Photo of GratefulBeerGuy
2.64/5  rDev +4.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Ahhh yes, the classic pint cans. I used to really dig this beer...pre-BA days of course!

AP: A vigerous pour from the can displayed a totally clear, very bubbly, light Golden color with a three finger, pure white, frothy head that showed really good retention qualities. Really not a bad look for the style.

Nose: Grainy malt>yeast>Wheat>herbal hops

Taste/MF: This is actually a bit more robust and flavorful than most of these "macro" style lagers. The first hit is a light, crisp and clean feeling bite with a malted grains and wheat flavor that has a yeastie and herbal hop flavor at the end.

DA: This is one of the easier to drink beers of it's kind but it still gets old very fast.

Funny note: The can states that Foster's is the "Official" beer of Formula 1 Racing.

Photo of scoobybrew
3.23/5  rDev +28.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

This was poured from the bottle into a pint glass. It has a light straw color with a decent head that is very well retained. The scent is very clean with a slight, faint hint of malt. The flavor is primarily a light, sweet malt and has a mild hop finish. The body is very light and watery with high carbonation.

Overall, this is a decent example of yellow fizzy beer. I couldn't stomach much of it, but I think they nailed the style well enough.

Photo of zuggy9
3.2/5  rDev +27%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This is a decent lager, a bit better than average. Pours pale yellowish gold with a big white head with reasonable retention. Pretty much standard smell and mouthfeel for any large produced lager, but the taste is crisp and refreshing, with a bit of malt to it. It drinks well, but isn't anything special. Good with seafood.

Photo of stoutman
3/5  rDev +19%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Haven't got around to reviewing this average beer. Drank this one years ago and recently tried a bottle and the mini-keg can they mass-produce. The oil can, which I haven’t in a long while, now remember why. The taste was very average with a touch of tin. The best part was the appearence which was very average as well. The bottled version wasn't much better (sans the tin flavor).

Photo of BuckSpin
2.37/5  rDev -6%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I would be curious to see how many times this beer is reviewed in & around Thanksgiving for no other reason than you need the &^%$#@! can to do a Beer Can Turkey...which is what I was doing. I certainly wasn't going to waste the 1/2 can you must empty in order to use a beer can as a poultry enema, so here I sit reviewing it.

What can I say? Poured a ubiquitous pale yellow gold, nicely bubbled, a fat finger of mixed white foam rose & vanished pretty quickly with a little lacing - in other words the stereotypical beer of cartoon & pop culture lore. Nose had some faint citrus qualities, maybe straw, a little stale, otherwise was unevenful.

As far as the AML genre I guess its OK. It is what it is. No real noticable taste qualities, a little smoother than others I've tried. I think I detected a hop or two, but not sure, a trace of malt, maybe a lingering aftereffect from the nose as far as a tiny orange quality. It sharpened on the tongue, then filmed itself away on the throat with no real aftertaste, maybe a trace of bitterness.

It was smoother and easier to drink as far as other AMLs, so it does have that going for it. I must admit if given a choice between ice water & this when lawnmowing I'd take the aqua.

That said, the remaining beer in the turkey's butt did a damn fine job. Bird was moist & tasty, and it didn't fall over. So, for that reason alone I see myself saying that a 1/2 can of Foster's every last Thursday in November could become a tradition. I highly recommend it for its Beer Can Turkey qualities, and it could be a lot worse as far as the beer you drink to make room in the can to do so. Gobble...gobble....gobble...

Photo of BitteBier
2.58/5  rDev +2.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Clear, golden yellow pour with average head and unremarkable lacing. Nose is dominated by nondesscript grains--some sweetness and little else. Likewise for the taste, which is sweet and malty up front and a bit drier toward the finish. Mouthfeel is similarly OK. As for the drinkability, well, I got through 3/4 of the glass before I dumped it.

Photo of mnesporov
2.51/5  rDev -0.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Presentation:12oz bottle, with no freshness date to be found.

Appearance: Pale yellow with a good sudsy white head when poured. Need less to say the head did not last for more than a couple of minutes and slowly scattered into a lace that stuck.

Smell: I hinted traces of vegetables with undertones of malted grain and musk.

Taste: A slightly hopy bear that balances well with the muskiness and the grains. I also enjoyed the simplicity of this brews flavors.

Mouth-Feel: A very crisp and grainy mouth-feel that refreshes into a dryness.

Drink-Ability: Not bad lager but it’s just not one of my favorites..

Photo of veech
3/5  rDev +19%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

The concensus among the Australians that I've met over the years is that none of them drink Foster's at home. It's either Victoria Bitter or Castlemaine XXXX for most that I've spoken with. Cooper's is my personal Aussie favorite, and Foster's definitely ain't Coopers. All the above categories could be summed up very easily: see also my review for Budweiser. Foster's is simply a pretty good lager beer that is appropriately categorized in with American Macros. It may be a little hoppier than Bud, but that 's pretty much the only difference that I can discern. Solid middle of the road macro lager that is best suited for repetitive consumption during yardwork, barbeques and other warmer weather activities.

Photo of lordofthewiens
2.48/5  rDev -1.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I seem to recall from my younger days (many years ago) that I thought this was a decent beer. Not any more. We were flying back from Texas, and I wanted a couple beers. This seemed like the best of some bad choices. It was a clear yellow with a small head and a fair amount of carbonation. It had an aroma of grain/corn. Taste was very vague. I'd describe it as somewhat sweet, and leave it at that. Not much either way for mouthfeel, and drinkable like water is drinkable.

Photo of Padron4KM
2.01/5  rDev -20.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

12 oz bottle. Date code stamped on neck.

Clear golden, with a soapy white, short lived head. Minimal lacing.

Aroma starts out sweet and corn sugary, ends up metalic and grainy as it sits.

Flavor is sweet, slightly bitter with an acidic finish.

Australian for Bud.

Photo of Weizenmensch
1.83/5  rDev -27.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

"Fosters, it's Australian for beer". Kind of a half-truth, like that Yoplait Petit Miam ad - "It's French for yum". It's actually French for small yum, and Fosters is Australian for bog-standard palatable-when-cold-and-very-cheap macro brew.

Well, it's cold and it's cheap and most importantly it's here in front of me now. Minimal head, lots of lacing, not much effervescence, pale straw in colour. Smell - whatever's there isn't pleasant. Can't tell if they're actually hops or what. Taste is OK, goes down easily, not much thought. You don't need a Proustian scholar to do the job of a security guard - just drink it and shut up. Mouthfeel, drinkability, why am I bothering continuing this review. It's OK and it was cheap. I must say it's worse than Reschs Pilsener though, which was also cheap, but Fosters costs about 80c more normally.

You would drink this in Australia if you're rebelling from the throngs of Carlton Draught/VB aficionadoes. If you're trying to experience beer, even Australian beer, please look further afield!

Photo of bonbright7
2.43/5  rDev -3.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I thought it was funny that I picked this up out of the Stop and Shop in Woodbury NY because I had just talked about knocking back an oil can or two "back in the day" with a friend. The big can always made an impression upon young minds who were worshipping Molson and Moosehead at the time (early 80's). It was also entertaining to know Molson was brewing Foster's under contract for most of the US.

I poured the big can into a tall glass and watched as it made a large foamy head with a pale yellow existence below it. It didn't smell like anything I have been spoiled with recently, courtesy of the BA, this year, so the next stop was a taste.

The first impression was not good as an odd smokey flavor emerged and then disappeared with the light lager taste which resembled Molson on a bad day.
The beer cleared up a little and drank easily, but then the smokey flavor came back later. That was strange for me and I hoped this would be better on tap.

Photo of kimcgolf
2.48/5  rDev -1.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Not sure what the Commercial Description was talking about, but apparently was not this brew. Aroma was next to nothng. Flavor was very heavy grain with some hops, which led to a dry, bitter (not in a good way) aftertaste. Cooper’s is Australian for beer, Fosters is Australian for #$@^%!

Foster's Lager from Foster's Group Limited
60 out of 100 based on 1,692 ratings.