Augustiner Lager
Pittsburgh Brewing Co.

Augustiner LagerAugustiner Lager
Rate It
Beer Geek Stats | Print Shelf Talker
Pittsburgh Brewing Co.
Pennsylvania, United States
Vienna Lager
3.15 | pDev: 13.33%
Nov 30, 2014
Apr 18, 2002
Augustiner LagerAugustiner Lager
Notes: None
View: More Beers
Recent ratings and reviews. | Log in to view more ratings + sorting options.
Rated by TEKNISHE from Pennsylvania

4.25/5  rDev +34.9%
wish they would resurrect this beer
Nov 30, 2014
Rated: 4 by speedball33 from Pennsylvania

Oct 14, 2014
Photo of misternebbie
Reviewed by misternebbie from Pennsylvania

3/5  rDev -4.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
pretty sure its no longer brewed. Have not seen in ages, shame because it was a decent local PA brew, not Elliot Ness, but not toilet water either, a low cost example of its style. B ring it back and slow production on Iron.
Aug 27, 2014
Rated: 3.56 by GameOfBeers from Pennsylvania

Aug 19, 2014
Rated: 3.75 by yinz11 from Georgia

Aug 08, 2014
Rated: 2.5 by Latarnik from New Jersey

May 26, 2014
Rated: 3.5 by BrandonOakes from Pennsylvania

Jan 09, 2014
Rated: 4 by dgeffel15 from Pennsylvania

Jan 08, 2014
Rated: 3.5 by ejimhof from Pennsylvania

Oct 04, 2013
Rated: 2.75 by Griggsy from Colorado

Sep 20, 2013
Rated: 3 by calcnerd from Pennsylvania

Feb 01, 2013
Rated: 2.5 by bzach from Indiana

Oct 21, 2012
Rated: 3.5 by rolltide8425 from Pennsylvania

Jul 24, 2012
Rated: 3.25 by durwood64 from Ohio

Apr 25, 2012
Rated: 3.5 by sgttibbs from Minnesota

Jan 30, 2012
Photo of THECPJ
Reviewed by THECPJ from Delaware

3.03/5  rDev -3.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
Reviewed from notes:

appearance: golden yellow with a 1 finger white head

smell: citrus, floral, wheat, malts

taste: citrus, floral, malts, sweet,

mouthfeel: mild carbonation, thin to medium body,

overall: not a terrible lager. just another summertime beer. glad I finally go to try something from Pittsburgh.

May 29, 2011
Photo of zeff80
Reviewed by zeff80 from Missouri

2.93/5  rDev -7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3
A - Poured out a clear, amber color with caramel highlights. It had a small, off-white head of foam that little to no lace.

S - It smelled slightly floral with some caramel malt.

T - It tasted malty and sweet with a floral hop bitterness.

M - It was crisp, sharp and smooth. A light bodied ale with a dry finish.

O - This is an okay vienna lager. I've certainly had better, but it was worth a try.
Apr 09, 2011
Photo of secondtooth
Reviewed by secondtooth from Indiana

2.81/5  rDev -10.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5
Attractive copper in color, with medium white head. No lace here.

This medium-bodied lager's aroma is sweet and bready.

Flavor follows much in line, with a crisply malty taste up front, with very little discernible hops presence, sadly.

I get a bready, yeasty taste, more akin to an amber ale. Not bad, but not anything special either. An easy-drinker, nonetheless.
Mar 15, 2011
Photo of DerekP
Reviewed by DerekP from Pennsylvania

3.55/5  rDev +12.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4
Poured into my fat 20 oz weizen glass from Leinkenkugel's. Brew is a golden amber color with a cream colored head on top. Smells wet. A near-Oktoberfest aroma. Brown sugar on toasted wheat bread. Sweet malty smell spreads thin, but matches the taste. Attenuated with a balancing amount of bittering units. A mallty, honey-like sweetness in the taste. A touch of alcohol in the finish as it drys on the buds. I appreciate the head for sticking around.

Some people around my way like to compare this brew to Yuengling's Traditional Lager. While they've got a point, Iron City's Augistiner is more tepid and reserved. Still, a highly drinkable brew.

Because I work at a distributor, I paid around ten bucks for a case, but any customer can walk in and walk out with a case (a flat) of IC's Augistiner for roughly $13, and that is not at all a bad thing.
Feb 16, 2011
Photo of Adamthome1
Reviewed by Adamthome1 from Nebraska

3.2/5  rDev +1.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4
Pours a light amber color, mildly roasty in the nose

flavor follows suit, mild burnt caramel notes, very mild indeed, some black liquorish, not much hop bite to speak of, mostly all malt.

It is well balanced there's just not much flavor going on

It is pretty well balanced just not much flavor to speak of, a basic example of this style, comparable to a Leinenkugel's amber
Feb 06, 2011
Photo of SkeeterHawk
Reviewed by SkeeterHawk from Texas

3.36/5  rDev +6.7%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
I picked this beer up while I was in Pittsburgh a few months ago. It isn't the biggest beer, but it has been sitting in my fridge the whole time, so hopefully it held up.

Appearance: Pours a clear golden color with a 1/4" head of creamy white foam on top that faded to a small ring on top of the beer within about 30 seconds. There are numerous bubbles rising to keep a solid ring across the top of the beer. Even after the pour, there is already some pretty significant lacing left on the glass. Overall first impression is that this is a pretty nice looking beer.

Aroma: I initially got a decent amount of malt with a noticeable green apple aroma in there that isn't strong enough to remind me of a Jolly Rancher or anything, but it is there. As the beer sits some, the honey malt is becoming more apparent, and the hops are making an appearance as an earthy component.

Taste: The beer is really mild overall. The malt is the key player in the flavor, but there is the earthy hops and aldehydes here as a pretty big contributor as well. There is no alcohol noticeable at all, and the beer is medium-light bodied overall. It is somewhat dry, and the carbonation is high, which make the beer sail across your palate pretty quickly leaving a mild creaminess and some honey malt to linger in the finish. As the beer warms up, the aldehydes are either getting less apparent or I am getting used to them.

Opinion: This is a pretty decent beer. I would say that it comes in under the guidelines of a Vienna Lager. There are some fermentation characteristics that detract from this beer quite a bit since this is such a light style, there isn't much to hide behind. Overall this isn't a bad beer. I am going to finish my glass and I wouldn't mind giving it a go on tap or something, but I won't be seeking this one out.
Jan 15, 2011
Photo of emerge077
Reviewed by emerge077 from Illinois

3.28/5  rDev +4.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4
Single bottle from Friar Tuck.

Bright gold, a shade deeper than your typical lager. Thin skim across the top and some minor lacing. Retention is not the greatest but decent.

Smells like mild grains and hay. Fairly faint in the aroma department.

Dry with a mild cracker note, light apple astringency. Mildly sulfurous, not good not bad. Very light sweetness to it for a second, becoming dry almost immediately. Some papery notes, though it doesn't really taste oxidized. Well carbonated, with a solid bite to it. Easy drinking German style lager, a step up from the typical American lagers. Worth a try but not that exciting overall. The stylized "A" bottlecap is cool...
Sep 06, 2010
Photo of goatxpower
Reviewed by goatxpower from California

3.58/5  rDev +13.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 5
This beer is a really smooth drinking amber lager, on par with a Vienna or a Marzen. The beer smells like malt and caramel and the taste pretty much backs it up. The beer has huge malt in the beginning and then fades to...nothing. No hops, no real complexity, just a shot of malt and then water. BUT this is ok. This beer isn't trying to be the next barrel-aged, bourbon-spiked blah blah blah. It is just a humble amber lager that goes down smoothly. One that I could easily down 9 of on an average session.
Aug 18, 2010
Photo of Brad007
Reviewed by Brad007 from Vermont

2.1/5  rDev -33.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5
Pours a light amber color with a thin head into my glass. Not sure what to expect here.

Aroma is sweet, full of mainly caramel. Grainy. Not really characteristics of the style.

Taste is more of the same but it adds a third component: it's watery. Feels like they didn't really try here.

Why bother? Mouthfeel and taste are identical. Nothing changes.

Eh, you can do better. Find a locally-produced example because Iron City should stick to making lagers and light lagers. This is supposed to be a vienna lager but sure as hell isn't one.
Jan 10, 2010
Photo of dakeynr
Reviewed by dakeynr from Pennsylvania

3/5  rDev -4.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
I really wanted to LOVE this (used to be) a Pennsylvania beer, and in my humble opinion, the best of the Iron City lot, but...alas...I like this beer...but I don't love it. It's sweet, and for the most part, nondescript, although, in all fairness, I drank it out of the can, and not in a glass...but it was a sweetish, brownish, blandish lager. OK, that's it. It's drinkable...but not a beer that you would go out of your way to find - does this make sense to you? I hope so. I would drink this if it's there. I would buy it on a whim...because the price is right: cheap. But if I wanted a beer to really enjoy...this isn't it. Damn.
Nov 22, 2009
Photo of BuckeyeNation
Reviewed by BuckeyeNation from Iowa

3.03/5  rDev -3.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
Ripe apricot orange with a few fine floaters that settle to the bottom soon enough. A two finger slice of pale sand colored foam sits up top, fades as it should, and leaves the glass on the skimpily covered side.

The aroma is nothing to write home about. It has the light toasted-earthy notes of the style, though a little hoppiness would be nice. Let's see if things come together a little better on the palate.

Augustiner Premium Lager, like most beer with the word premium in the name, isn't. It isn't bad either, it's just... okay. That said, it's the best thing that I've had from PBC so far. When the others were I.C. Light, Iron City Beer and Eagle Malt, that isn't saying much.

The flavor profile includes whole grain toast with a thin layer of apricot preserves and a handful of spent tea leaves. It's odd to find fruity esters in a lager, but they're there. Neither sweet nor bitter add much of note. Unfortunately, this is lackluster beer that barely hangs onto its average score.

The mouthfeel manages to achieve that low bar as well. Can't complain about the size (given style and ABV), but the bubbles could work a little harder.

Augustiner Premium Amber Lager is far from the world's best Vienna lager. Or even the hundredth best. In fact, it's a barely passable effort that anyone who has enjoyed the real deal won't buy twice. I've not even sure that anyone should buy it once. The new packaging looks much better, for whatever that's worth.

*reviewed on 10-25-2009
Oct 26, 2009
Photo of yelterdow
Reviewed by yelterdow from New Jersey

2.95/5  rDev -6.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3
Sample from S.K.I. Beer in NY... freshness code 2708 is lasered on the neck. Served at just over fridge temperature in a SABL glass, appropriate enough since this is a Vienna style amber lager.

Appearance- Pours medium amber with a two-finger head that slowly desintegrates. After the crown is gone, it's a thin, feeble looking beer.

Smell- Caramel malt, with just a suggestion of cooked vegetables and a mild sweetness. It loses its luster more as the beer warms.

Taste- Tasting more like a richer, more flavorful macro, the malt and hops seem overpowered by some adjuncty sweetness. The beginning and middle are similar and balanced enough, but the swallow brings with it some cloying. It leaves me wanting something more out of it.

Mouthfeel/Drinkability- The wispy, thin texture doesn't hold up even enough to really last the enire tasting. The carbonation is smooth and unremarkable, but becomes flabby and lifeless midway through the sampling. For anyone who likes Iron City beer, this has more flavor but pretty much the same basic profile.
Oct 08, 2009
Photo of goblue3509
Reviewed by goblue3509 from Pennsylvania

2.69/5  rDev -14.6%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3
Pours a clear amber color with a one and a half finger white head that gives way to some okay lacing. The smell is of sweet caramel malt and a hint of breadiness. The taste is of caramel malt with breadiness as well, however, the taste is a little watery and weak. The mouthfeel is on the low carbnation scale and a little slick. Overall it is an okay beer you could go one or two deep but not much more than that. The taste needs to be a little bolder.
Sep 14, 2009
Photo of ThaBobfather
Reviewed by ThaBobfather from Ohio

3.32/5  rDev +5.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4
Pours a fairly clear amber color with a couple fingers worth of thin bodied bleach white head.
Smells great of grain and some malt on the back end.
Taste has some bready profile with a little sweetness through the middle.
Crisp finish with a refreshing drinkable smoothness.
May 04, 2009
Photo of FrothyBeverage
Reviewed by FrothyBeverage from Pennsylvania

3.16/5  rDev +0.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3
This beer has a rich amber color and pours smoothly into a glass. I leaves a nice soapy lace behind. It has a sutble smell of maltyness, bread, and yeast. The taste is pretty good. It has a semi sweet carmel taste and is full bodied. The mouthfeel is smooth yet crisp. This is my second time trying this beer, the first time i was not a fan. On second try this beer proved its self a noble beer from pittsburgh.
Jan 31, 2009
Photo of TommyBuckeye
Reviewed by TommyBuckeye from Ohio

2.83/5  rDev -10.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3
Had this on tap at a Primanti Bros in Pittsburgh (awesome place)!
A: Head was very light brown / white and went quickly. Beer was a clear amber
S: Sweet corn, caramel and malt
T: Malty, caramel with a light sour finish.
M: Light thin body with little carbonation
D: I like the original IC better, but this was good beer that I would have again. A good neighborhood drinking beer that goes well with huge Primanti sandwich!
Jan 18, 2009
Photo of clayrock81
Reviewed by clayrock81 from Florida

3.23/5  rDev +2.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3
Had from tap for cheap at a local Pittsburgh restaurant. Poured a hazy, dark gold with a cloying, sticky, one-finger head that was around for awhile due to good carbonation. A faint, leafy hop aroma along with minor sweet malts. Has some crispiness and sharpness on the tongue when you first drink it, and goes down almost medium-bodied with some minor citric and herbal hop notes along with a little bit of sweetness and breadiness from the malts. Finishes smooth and slightly dry. Not a bad beer to have once in awhile.
Oct 31, 2008
Photo of kinger
Reviewed by kinger from Ohio

2.88/5  rDev -8.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
Pours a pale copper color with a nicely formed head and steady carbonation. A nice malty aroma is detected, nothing too impressive but pleasant nonetheless. The mouthfeel is a little watery and thin, but the beer has a clean finish. The flavor is good to say the least. Sweet and malty, somewhat standard and plain, but it is definately much better than most commercial lagers. Overall I can say that this was a nice surprise, I found it down in the Ohio Valley on a recent trip for a rather cheap price. Good beer, solid lager.
Jul 31, 2008
Photo of IronCitySteve
Reviewed by IronCitySteve from Pennsylvania

3.08/5  rDev -2.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
Had on tap at a local establishment. Had in a bottle a while back, but never took notes on it.

A: A brownish amber color. A decent sized head, about one finger.

S: Not much happening here. There is definitely scents of toasted malt, but nothing too distinguishable.

T: Tasted better then the smell. Was suprising balanced. Lots of bready malts, some caramel with some citrus hop flavoring as well.

M: Provided a decent sweet flavor on the tongue and upper portion of the mouth.

D: It certainly is not the best Vienna Lager out there, but I like to give my support to PBC and would have this again.
Jul 22, 2008
Photo of Stinkypuss
Reviewed by Stinkypuss from Pennsylvania

3.01/5  rDev -4.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5
A. Served in a 22 oz. glass at Primanti Bros. Appeared light brown with a good inch of head.

S. Some malt and not much else.

T. Malty with the slighest hop bitterness. Slightly more watery and metallic, better in the bottled format. I rarely say that. Still solid and decent.

M. Medium to full bodied and slightly chewy.

D. Not really too great I had high expectations after the bottled version. Better than Iron City though. Can't really beat the price at $2.50 for 22 oz.
Jul 09, 2008
Photo of umtox
Reviewed by umtox from Pennsylvania

2.93/5  rDev -7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
A: Light in color golden-reddish. Head consists of small stark white bubbles with a lace retention.

S: Faint spice and caramel.

T: Very light and a bit watery. Nice carbonation, but any flavor that could have been worth noting quickly leaves the palate.

M: Too watery.

D: If you want a very light beer thats a shade above your average mass brew, then you may try this, but it is way too watered down for my taste.
May 03, 2008
Photo of lionking
Reviewed by lionking from Pennsylvania

3.16/5  rDev +0.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
Poured from a 16 oz aluminum bottle. Purchased on a family trip through Pittsburgh which included a brief tour of the Pittsburgh Brewing Co. Nice amber color with minimal head. Taste and smell are average for type of beer. Listed as a vienna lager. Closer to Yuengling Lager than a Sam Adams in terms of taste in my opinion. Not a bad beer but a bit of an after taste. Overall a solid lager and worth a try just for the bottle.
Feb 02, 2008
Photo of RblWthACoz
Reviewed by RblWthACoz from Pennsylvania

2.7/5  rDev -14.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
Pours an amber color with minimal head. Taste is sweet like fruit with an almost cherry tone with a hint of orange. Mouth feel is standard, but the drinkability factor is low because I felt the flavor tapered off to something less than I would want in any lager. Maybe the line was dirty; maybe the keg was old. Either way, it didn't impress me.
Dec 30, 2007
Photo of Ricochet
Reviewed by Ricochet from Ohio

3.14/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3
Got this in the 18 pack of 16oz aluminum bottles for 14.99. I thought I'd re-visit this beer with a different package and a year removed since I got a bad case that I had to dump.

This was, really decent this time, maybe it's the package, I love the thick bullet aluminum bottle package and how cold it stays. This was, a Yuengling in appearence, not as foamy with no lace, but for color, it would be about the same.

Smell was very different than the can. It smelled like a bourbon. A watered down bourbon, but none of the cheapness that I smelled in the canned version. Maybe this was fresher? Alcohol was strong, and mixed with the malt. It even stung a small bit. Great!

Mouth was creamy had an odd burnt marshmellow note as it washed, there was also a "dusty" feel to this, that's the best way I can say it. Ahh, 0827, so six months old. Maybe that detracted.

Taste is, not a Yuengling. When I got the bad batch of this, I went to Yuengling and never looked back. Yep, this is only amber in name.

Hops are quite up front and alcohol mixes well in taste. Doughy and chewy malt texture and none of the cheapness or bad can flavor came out. Still, that odd burned marshmellow end made this a little funky, thinking about it further, may be a musty water. Mixed feelings.

So, I would rate this decent, but I have moved on to a smoother drink when I want something cheap. The package makes this a plus.
Nov 06, 2007
Photo of PittBeerGirl
Reviewed by PittBeerGirl from Ohio

2.6/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3
bought a six pack of mixed domestic beers. I drank this one immediately after drinking Bud Select (not a fan) and I was so happy to be drinking this.

A- typical golden lager color with a white head that fades.

S- nothing special. hard to detect. malt.

T- highly unoffensive. clean finish.

D- this is pretty drinkable. I wasnt craving another when I was done but I would drink it again.
Apr 13, 2007
Augustiner Lager from Pittsburgh Brewing Co.
Beer rating: 74 out of 100 with 65 ratings