Budweiser | Anheuser-Busch

1,660 Reviews
no score
Send samples

Brewed by:
Missouri, United States

Style: American Adjunct Lager

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.00%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
Brewed using a blend of imported and classic American aroma hops, and a blend of barley malts and rice. Budweiser is brewed with time-honored methods including “kraeusening” for natural carbonation and Beechwood aging, which results in unparalleled balance and character.

Added by kbub6f on 11-21-2000

For Trade:
View: Beers | Events
User Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Reviews: 1,660 | Ratings: 6,084
Photo of blackie
3.1/5  rDev +27.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

appearance: Pours a 1.25" white head that steadily fizzes down. The beer is a clear, pale hay color.

smell: There is a light sweetness and an aroma of pale barley and rice adjunct. The very light touch of hop aroma actually smells somewhat green and fresh.

mouthfeel: The carbonation is between high-medium and light-high, and the body light and thin.

taste: Tastes of weak pale barley malt and adjuncts. Practically no hop flavor and just a touch of bitterness. Finishes with a lingering adjunct lager flavor. An artificial, industrial, gross aftertaste lingers on the tongue.

drinkability: Relatively inoffensive I guess, but still not very drinkable.

"Born on" April 10, 2006

a few scores updated 7-7-08 after a nice time having a few Buds on a July 4th trip to Oriental, NC

 783 characters

Photo of ericj551
2.9/5  rDev +19.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Light golden color, similar to hard cider, but with a slighly nicer head. It has a grainy smell, no hops noticeable. Taste is dry and inoffensive, no real malty flavor, just the light graininess. Overall a pretty drinkable beer, although I wouldn't pay for it, I'll drink it when its left in my fridge.

 302 characters

Photo of HoustonTX
1.81/5  rDev -25.5%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Appearance - Very yellow, with little to no head, no lacing and lack of carbonation.

Smell - Skunky smell with a hint of grain.

Mouthfeel - Watery, and slighty easy to go down.

Taste - Taste is not good with almost a bitter taste.

Drinkability - Is decent if this is your thing. Otherwise avoid.

Avoid this beer if at all possible, possibly the worst lager I have ever had.

 388 characters

Photo of harpo111
2.23/5  rDev -8.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Bud is bud...you get what you expect... a marco american..
apprearance: nice yellow with a 1 inch head on it.
smell: a little grainy, with a slight pungentness...almost metalic
taste: watery, carbonated, slight hops..not much....
mouthfeel: thin...carbonated..fizzy...like sodapop
drinkablilty: you can do a lot of these easy..not that i would want to...doesn't fill you up fast...good for a hot day to cool off..

 429 characters

Photo of CastAStone
3.69/5  rDev +51.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4.5

Oh Budweiser...

So this is the King of Beers. And you know what? For a macrobrew, they're probably right. Bud changed their recipe recently, according to the Wall Street Journal, adding more hops, so I decided to try and review.

A: Pours alright, even from a can. Nice head, dissapated slowly. Better color than I remember.

S: It smells like Bud/Miller/Coors/Molson, slightly hoppy and crisp. A little stronger than Coors or Molson, and weaker than Miller. Its a good smell but fairly weak.

T/M: Bud tastes like Beer. When I think beer, I think the taste of Bud. A little hoppy, full flavored, more malted feel than than some other macros. Finishes extremely clean. This is the fullest lager flavor you can get at 50 cents a can, hands down (though for the price I prefer Labatt Blue, a malty Pilsner).

D: It's Budweiser - its engineered to get "real americans" drunk quick. It drinks well, though not as well as a crisp IPA (or for that matter a light beer...if you go for that sort of thing)

As I said, its about the best you can get for your money.

 1,069 characters

Photo of FenwaySquid
3.68/5  rDev +51.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Presentation: 24 oz can, "born on" date of April 5, 2006, poured into a conical shaped pilsner glass.

Appearance: Pours a pale bright golden yellow color, about 2 fingers of head. Carbonation was faint, maybe because I couldn't fit the whole offering into the glass. Oh well.

Aroma: Very mettalic, nothing else.

Taste: Faint hoppy flavors up front with a hint of apples (the beechwood chips, maybe?) in the middle. The finish is almost clean, but there are some hops thrown in there at the very end.

Mouthfeel: Crisp and refreshing, there is also more carbonation than the glass let on.

Overall: Before I ventured into the realm of beeradvocacy, this was my favorite. And still, when I'm stuck at a party or in a bar with only macro swill to drink, this is what I reach for. And why not? budweiser is has infinitely better flavor than its ligher (or liter) cousins. For what it is, a mass marketed beer made with the intent of broad appeal, there's still a good amount of flavor packed inside, it's still very drinkable, and I have trouble not enjoying it. On the other hand, there's nothing memorable about the beer, no flavor that sticks out and makes you say "Oh yeah, that's why I like budweiser." Also, from my pre-beeradvocacy experiences, I can say that this beer, when consumed in large quantities, will produce a monster hangover.

 1,354 characters

Photo of PuckLSHS
2.43/5  rDev 0%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

You know, for a macro this has to be one of my "Okay, I will buy this" kind of beers.

The beer pours very pale with nice little beads of carbonation. I usually get about a 1 finger head on the beer that dissipates at an average rate.

clean, crisp...because of the added rice...yes, we all know this. The beachwood aging also helps give it flavor.

For a nice summer day with a college students' wallet, this beer works.

 428 characters

Photo of BigD1972
3.65/5  rDev +50.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Light yellow/amber in color

Nothing special about the smell.

It is very drinkable not bad tasting (Better than Coors) typical American larger

Goes down smooth, no aftertaste. I have had many on a nice warm day and while I dont think it is the "King of Beers" it is one of my favorite Macro Brews

 305 characters

Photo of bigdeuce
3.09/5  rDev +27.2%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 1.75 | overall: 3.25

Hey, it's budweiser, what can you expect. They lie on every add, well, coors lies a little more. Bud is actual drinkable if you haven't had any micros beforehand. Has a little taste, no smell, no hops, not much life. But if you're gonna drink an american macro, bud should probably be the choice.

 296 characters

Photo of mcowgill
2.73/5  rDev +12.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours an almost crystal clear pale yellow. Nothing distinctive at all. The Narragansett I just had was more appealing. Not much at all in the smell department. I do enjoy the taste of a Budweiser now and again though, especially in the summer or at a baseball game or watching football. This is the easy drinking beer for the masses and although I don't reach for it often, I never turn it down either.

 402 characters

Photo of GuinnessHero
3.25/5  rDev +33.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Let's keep this simple. This is a beer that is world renowned, and will continue to be that way as long as marketing has it's way.

Appearance - Yellow, very typical color with a small head that dissipates through the beer.

Smell - Slightly metallic, with a strong smell of rice and hops.

Taste - Full flavored unlike it's sister beer Bud Light. Very clean finish with a touch of hops and carbonation. Very tolerable.

Mouthfeel - Clean as it hits the pallet and very refereshing.

Drinkability - The best part of this beer. Very refreshing and decent taste makes it a decent beer in my book. Great for a hot afternoon in the south like I am.

Overall, this is not as offensive as everyone says it is. Ice cold, it can be a great beer, and compared to some of the things coming from Asia and other rice-based beers, this is a great beer for using rice. Give it a chance, and it will actually be a party favorite.

Keep an open mind.

 952 characters

Photo of John_M
1.7/5  rDev -30%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

I have to say I have mixed feelings about the "king of beers." Once upon a time I found this beer to be perfectly acceptable (if nothing to write home about), but then 'back in the day,' my expectations weren't very high either. These days I have a fondness for double IPA's and Belgiums. Tastewise, Bud might as well be on the dark side of the moon in comparison to Pelican IPA, Blue Dot, Chimay and La Chouffe. In fairness one should compare like with like, but even here bud falls flat (pun intended). Ostensibly, Bud is modeled after some of the great pilsners from Czechoslavakia and Germany. However, it has nothing like the flavor, smoothness, richness and drinkability of a great German/Czech pilsner. On the contrary, the beer goes flat very quickly, has minimal flavor, with almost no noticeable finish.

My question is this; why does this beer have to be soooo uninteresting and flavorless? I know they're marketing to the masses, and I've read plenty of beer reviews noting that the chief aim is to just get drunk (see reviews for Natural Ice light), but still... would a litte extra flavor be too much to ask?

I'll finish with with what I think is a funny story. I was in Ireland (Dingle) a few years back, kicking back with a pint of Harp. A young lady sitting across from me had gotten a bottle of bud, which she proceeded to pour into a pint glass filled with ice. I smiled and told her that back in the states, the brewers at AB would be horrified that she was diluting the "king of beers" that way. She laughed and said well, it was such a light beer after all anyways, how could diluting it with ice hurt it? I laughed and told her I agreed, but then pointed out that back in the states AB markets the beer as a rich, full bodied, satisfying lager/pilsner. When I said that she just laughed; I could tell she didn't believe me. The really funny thing is that bud has more calories then guinness, and so if she was watching her weight she'd have been a lot better off with a glass of stout.

Bottom line. This beer is not very good and there's no excuse for how boring and flavorless it is. This is just another example of the old addage that if you try to brew a beer that will offend no one, ultmatley you'll make a beer that appeals to no one.

 2,272 characters

Photo of dubman003
1.61/5  rDev -33.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

It's the stink that does it for me...I think it's horrible. There is something to be said about a beer when its aroma has a natural 'stink' to it; I still can't place it specifically, but the stink carries into the taste. Don't get me wrong, I can drink it if it's offered, but there is something very sour about Budweiser.

Realistically, people drink 'bud' because they think they are the all-American for it, which is a horrible reason to drink budweiser. The image of the hardened American backwood dweller is not something to be proud of...and associating Budweiser with yourself? Shows you haven't had that much to drink.

 629 characters

Photo of jasonjlewis
3.09/5  rDev +27.2%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer is supposed to be a full flavored beer. It tastes really watered down. I compared it to an MGD in a bar, and liked the MGD a lot better. Bud has no taste to it IMO. I think it's more for people who don't like a lot of beer taste in their beer. It has a nice flavor and is really smooth and has a nice crispness. I could knock these back all night with no problem and not care, but I prefer other beers over this one.

 426 characters

Photo of rabsten
2.3/5  rDev -5.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

I end up with Bud on a fairly regular basis, unfortunately. A couple of my friends won't drink anything else, and if I show up at their place, I bring a six. Add to that the fact that there's not much else available in my backwoods region, and, well.

Pours yellow with a fizzy head that evaporates like a soft drink's. lots of carbonation.

Smell is corn or rice and corn syrup. No hops to speak of.

Tastes on the sweet side of American Macro-lager. It goes pretty well with a turkey sandwich and doritos. That's the highlight.

Mouthfeel = soft drink. Fizzy, with no resonance on the palate.

Drinkability: not to be a smartass, but it depends on how much I've paid for it. I can, and have, drunk this beer all night. However, that's because of its alcohol delivery qualities. It can be a pretty refreshing drink though. Quintessential lawnmowner beer.

Look, we all know this beer and what it represents. However, for all its problems - and they are legion - it's not completely offensive. I'm drinking a little 7oz. pony bottle as I write this, along with the aforementioned turkey sandwich and a cup of coffee (lunchtime). I think the pony+sandwich+coffee makes a good lunch: the flavors all play off each other and there's so little alcohol involved it doesn't interfere with the afternoon's work.

 1,318 characters

Photo of chrisms86
2.68/5  rDev +10.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3.5

Aside from th prejudices many on this site hold against companies like Anheuser-Busch, Budweiser is not a bad beer. It does not have the complexities of a microbrew, but it doesn't have the price of a microbrew either. I find it almost impossible to review this beer because it is the beer upon which all others are rated. It pours with enough of a head for you to believe it is a beer (unlike other low-price brands), and it is not as filling as a micro so you can pound a few without getting a big gut. The taste is not revolting, but it isn't anything impressive either. The mouhfeel is probably he most disappointing in that you can feel the sharpness of the carbonation.

Not all of us can afford to spend $8 or more for a sixpack all the time. When I can't get my high class stuff, I won't cry over having to buy a halfrack of Bud.

 840 characters

Photo of Applesauce1
2.13/5  rDev -12.3%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Got Bud on-tap at the CI in Athens, OH.
Yellow-piss color off the tap into my nice plastic cup.
Smelled pretty bad, that typical macro smell (skunky)
Taste: kinda sucked, no presence of hops or malt or anything but the cereal flavor
Mouthfeel: kinda fizzy
Drinkability: cheap, can drink a lot of these in a night to get drunk

People need to quit drinking this beer.

 373 characters

Photo of jdmorgan
2.46/5  rDev +1.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

This beer had a moderate head that didn't last long and the color was light. The aroma was fairly weak and smelled faintly of the malt. The taste wasn't very hoppy and had a thin body to it. The mouthfeel felt about average and had a moderate to high carbonation to it. As far as drinkability goes, I think this beer would be adequate for those who just want to have a reasonably priced macro lager that atleast has a bit more body to it than light lagers.

 456 characters

Photo of Pepeton
2.05/5  rDev -15.6%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 3.5

I have no excuse. I tried this one because I couldn't avoid it in a social gathering.

It's appearance is almost non existant.

Smells of almost nothing.

Taste is less of almost nothing.

Mouthfeel is, again, less of almost nothing.

Ah! It's high is in it's drinkability. Easy to gulp.

If it weren't for it's drinkability Bud would be almost a beer.


 376 characters

Photo of DrJay
2.33/5  rDev -4.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Crystal clear and very light yellow, it looks kind of like watered down apple juice. The fluffy white head dissipated rapidly. Faint malt in the nose, along with a hint of apple and alcohol. Light grainy malt and just a whiff of hop bitterness and sweetness at the end. Just a bit of fruit here as well. Thin body, crisp carbonation and very clean. This isn't as terrible as many believe, just incredibly boring with a thin flavour. I've had some very nice "light" beers from smaller brewers lately with delicate flavours and light bodies that completely outclass this beer.

 574 characters

Photo of maddamish
2.48/5  rDev +2.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I am not here to slam on bud. BUt I will say this.

When I was a bud light drinker, I would switch to this and would think about how strong this beer was.

I walked in the door of my parents house and my father had one of these out. I jump at the chance to drink it again since I haven't tried it since I have been reviewing beers.

Lets just say that it isn't what I remembered. It isn't bad for a lager but there are much better versions of the style out there. This one is watery and the "strong taste" was pretty much gone.

After you have crossed over into the world of good beer, it is kind of hard to go back to the BMC crowd.

 641 characters

Photo of mcarroll10177
3.26/5  rDev +34.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 5

Keep in mind the syle of the beer before laughing at this review.

With that cavat in mind this is prime example of an American macro lager.

Poured from a can into a traditional pint glass.

A- very pale yellow with a white head that disappears quickly. Lots of fizz and lots of carbination.

S- does not have really any nose to it. Hints of hops perhaps. That being said it does not smell bad, like a particular green bottled beer for instance.

T- a good tasting beer for what it is. No complexity at all but that is not what this style beer is about. Crisp up front, clean clean finish.

M- nothing really stands out here, watery but this is not a Russian Imperial Stout, so what should someone expect.

D- the easiest drinker around smooth and very clean. The best example of a macro lager and the only one( in my opinion) worth a review. Nothing complex here, but nothing offensive either.

If going strictly by style for review give it 4.5s this is the best of the big mass produced macro lagers.

 1,020 characters

Photo of lpayette
2.72/5  rDev +11.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 4.5

Pours a crystal clear, very pale straw color with a bright white head into my pilsner glass. Excellent retention as well. Tons of bubbles.

Smells of light corn, and hops. Not as bad as some beers in this style as far as smell, but still nothing to be impressed with.

Tastes- Very light... Some corn/rice and a very light hop bitterness. Very one-dimensional as expected, but drinkable as it goes down pretty easy with no awful tastes coming through. Another positive is that it's pretty fresh tasting.

 507 characters

Photo of Rumpole
3.65/5  rDev +50.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

There was a time when I snobbishly cast aspersions upon this beer, but that was ages ago when I was drinking expensive microbrews and imports. With the change of the economy, and more enlightened attitudes towards the middle and working classes amongst our betters in government, I now look upwards, financially at least, at what I formerly scorned down upon. I have also come to admit that what I then denigrated was more the marketing image of Budweiser rather than the brew itself.

The King of Beers, whether in the bottle or the can, comes with arguably the best label in the business. It is iconic in the whole realm of commercial art, let alone that of beer, and over the years it has been tweaked by A-B to keep it looking contemporary without losing its traditional look and with it the connection with all those previous decades; the result is nothing short of spectacular.

Budweiser pours pale and clear gold, so pale and clear that it surprised me at first. It’s nothing to worry about, as it simply reflects A-B’s use of rice as the adjunct grain for the brew. For all its clarity, it still delivers a solid 5% abv, and once that has been proven, and time is spent with the beer, the color takes on a bright cheeriness.

The scent is very light and faint, pretty much just a beer smell but with a light herbal and floral quality floating over it. It has a light body and light maltiness too, with a wisp of hop to balance the upper register. For most of the tasting, it’s just that light flavor, but there can be an ethereal sweet fruitiness that flickers in and then back out almost as quickly, almost before you can grasp it. It’s like a cross between green grapes, green apples, and Wrigley’s Juicy Fruit, which I admit doesn’t sound very appetizing, but it sure does work in this beer, and with practice you can get so you can look for and anticipate it. It wraps up dry, neat and tidy. Throughout, the texture is just plain wonderful; it has a very consistent softness, like they used top-flight spring water, and the carbonation is energetic but fine, as if they specified only very small bubbles, but a lot of them. The result is lively but never harsh, and it becomes very easy to keep going for more. Endlessly potable; the Rumpole palate has gone through many cases without wearying of it.

King indeed! Maybe it isn't the best beer available, but it may very well be the easiest beer to drink, and its popularity no longer mystifies me. It is underrated on this site, I think, but mostly because of the tarnished reputation of the mega-brewer that makes it, and its tendency towards crass, lowest common denominator marketing. That’s easy to overlook though, with the beer this enjoyable and the label this classy. Budweiser’s biggest drawback is it’s hefty price; outside of special sales, a 30-pack costs $21 in glamorous Worcester, MA. A-B engages in a regular price increase for its brews, and as a result it may eventually be in danger of pricing its bread and butter brand out of its intended market.

 3,051 characters

Photo of CNeilP09
3.8/5  rDev +56.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

I can drink this beer for days. Budweiser is what it is: a mass-produced lager fit for the working man. It is certainly light, lacking any of the characteristics most beer connoiseurs ask for in a beer. But Budweiser is the everyday man's beer. It's made of rice, and the finest hops anyone can grow in their backyard, but it's still good. I've spent many a sweaty day, working in my yard, or on my truck, just waiting for the reward i would get from Budweiser. Call the beer simple, or call me simple, i love this beer. It's ultra light straw color, utterly scentless nose, and rustic grainy flavor do nothing for me but quench the thirst in my belly. I'm certainly not writing this to advertise for them, they do enough of that on their own. Simply put, it's the best worst beer out there. And to get a taste of America, crack open a cold Bud.

 845 characters

Budweiser from Anheuser-Busch
2.43 out of 5 based on 6,084 ratings.
  • About Us

    Your go-to website for beer (since 1996), publishers of BeerAdvocate magazine (since 2006) and hosts of world-class beer events (since 2003). Respect Beer.
  • BeerAdvocate Microbrew Invitational

    Join us June 2-3, 2017 in Boston, Mass. for beer, cider, mead, kombucha and sake from over 70 small producers.

    Learn More
  • Subscribe to BeerAdvocate Magazine

    Support uncompromising beer advocacy and award-winning, independent journalism with a print subscription to BeerAdvocate magazine.