Canterbury Dark Mild | Pacific Western Brewing Company

Your Rating: None
Want it   Got it 
Canterbury Dark MildCanterbury Dark Mild
17 Ratings
Canterbury Dark MildCanterbury Dark Mild

Brewed by:
Pacific Western Brewing Company
British Columbia, Canada

Style: European Dark Lager

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.00%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
Caramel bodied with delicate aroma hops and a pleasant finish. Canada’s first copper-coloured lager, Canterbury Dark Mild is brewed with the finest hops, yeast and most importantly, two-row malted barley. This distinctive beer is an homage to the finest of British brews and a favourite of those want mouth-filling flavour when they’re in the pub or at home.

View: Beers
User Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Ratings: 17 |  Reviews: 8
Reviews by ChrisCage:
Photo of ChrisCage
3.35/5  rDev +6.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 5

A- This pours a nice dark amber color that is clear and has a slight orange hue to it when in front of a white backround. There looks to be lots of carbonation, which is apparent from the head. It's not a real thick head, contains bigger bubbles and settles rather quickly, trapping large bubbles underneath. Some mild lacing clings to the side of my glass.

S- Sweet smelling, with lots of caramel like malt. Once past this, there is some mild detectable metallic aromas. There are also some detectable light nut aromas mixed in with some grainy notes. I don't smell any hops to bitter the smell up.

T- Some subtle malt sweetness, the aforementioned mild metallic notes come through on the palate, some grassy/grainy flavor and not enough hops pretty much round out the character of the flavors here. There isn't any lingering flavors after the swallow either, however, this tastes better than a standard lager....marginally.

M- This is a thin, fairly watered down beer, even though this is being marketed as a dark mild (ale). The carbonation actually isn't as fizzy as I first thought it would be, providing a more creamy texture...unfortunately it doesn't have the body to go with it. Average at best.

D- Oh yeah, this is definitely a drinkable beer. Somewhat bigger flavor than your standard lager, due to some darker malt being used. It's not overly filling, the carbonation is quite mild and it's cheap for a single here in AB....paid $1.95 for this can so not to bad....slightly less than your across the board macros. Give it a try!

 1,544 characters

More User Reviews:
Photo of lipschitz
3.13/5  rDev -0.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Presentation: 355ml can, boldly emblazoned with crossed Union Jacks

Colour is deep amber, with nice clarity, but minimal head retention. Aromas of grass & faint nuts mix with a slightly sulfitic touch. The taste starts with a faint roasted malt flavour, overtaken by a wink of hops. Low vanilla sweetness is concealed throughout. The mouthfeel is rather watery, with low carbonation – although here is a slight tingle that remains on the back of your tongue.
This beer stays true to the label’s claim of it being “Dark & Mild”. It’s a good “dark” beer to introduce your pale lager-drinking friends to. There is more flavour than a mainstream “macro’ lager, but it is subdued enough not to scare them off. In fact, this beer was instrumental in switching me over to the “better” side of beer 15 years ago.

 882 characters

Photo of IronDjinn
3.15/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Tried this on-tap at a pub in Prince George, was told that this was the big local mainstay, like Big Rock's Traditional here in Calgary. My pint was served with a lime wedge on the lip of the glass, which I set to the side.

Appearance was a rich amber/walnut tone, or so what I could make of it until the locals started looking at me funny as I held it up to the light. On the nose I was able to pick up light toasted malt and slight nuttiness, with the faintest hint of fresh grassy hops. The flavour is also mild, toasted malt and grassy hop balance, it has a rather watery mouthfeel that also contributes to the mild flavour experience. This is a very easy-drinking, unoffensive beer. I tried my next pint with the lime wedge which helped boost the hop balance a bit more. It's a pretty one-dimensional beer, so it didn't hurt the flavour profile at all, in fact it helped add a bit more character.

 905 characters

Photo of BDTyre
3.57/5  rDev +13.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Strange nutty-brown colour but very clear. Good white head on it. Lager-ish smell, but lacking the skunkiness I tend to find in most of the lagers I drink.

Taste is a bit stronger on the malts than your typical lager, and the hops are a bit more mellow. Definitely does not taste like your typical Euro lager. Malts with a good does of hops and a certain amount of nuttiness. Reminsicent of a hoppier nut brown ale. (I was always under the impression that "dark mild" was on older name for nut brown ale).

A little thin, but perhaps this is due to it being a lager. Overall, quire drinkable.

 597 characters

Photo of FinnHawk
3.5/5  rDev +11.1%

Photo of Graham5161986
1.82/5  rDev -42.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

A relatively aggressive pour yields a beer with a clear, dark red-ish amber colour with a 1 finger, soapy off-white head that dissipates quickly to a whispy film but leaves nothing in terms of lace.

Smell is, interestingly enough, of light berry fruits (I get raspberry and strawberry) up front with a light touch of caramel malt and some metal.

Taste is more adjunct than euro with a big hit of corn-y sweetness right away leading too an almost cloyingly sweet, brown sugar malt backbone. There is really nothing traceable in terms of hops or balance in this brew. The finish is sugary and metallic - not great to say the least.

Mouthfeel is light in body with lots of carbonation but leaves quite and unpleasant sugary, oily texture on the finish and linger. Honestly, it kinda hurts my teeth.

Because this beer is so sweet and unbalanced, its drinkability takes a major hit in my books. Really, the only thing of interest going on in this beer is the nose- but everything after that goes downhill. It's a sugar bomb. Not only would I never purchase this beer (luckily I got this one for free), I wouldn't reccomend high levels of it to anyone who cares for their health. This brew can't be good for you.

Sorry Pac West, I wish I could say I'm surprised. But I'm not.

 1,274 characters

Photo of biboergosum
3.35/5  rDev +6.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

355ml can, looking like something straight outta her Majesty's East-ender pub, roight, then?

This beer pours a clear, medium orange brick amber hue, with two fingers of weakly puffy, and thinly foamy off-white head, which leaves some broken mesa-like lace around the glass as it quickly falls away.

It smells of semi-sweet biscuity malt, a touch of gritty corniness, some dry black fruitiness, and mild earthy, and grassy hops. The taste is sugary, fruity, and somewhat caramelized malt, a soft metallic edginess, hints of cheap chocolate, and plain earthy, leafy, and weedy hops.

The carbonation is moderate, mostly just in the form of an underwhelming frothiness, the body medium-light in weight, a tad thin, but hardly watery in its overall smoothness. It finishes off-dry, a middling caramel biscuit malt most prevalent.

Weird classification for this one - it's more akin to a typical Canadian red lager, and rather less than mild. Given that, it is indeed pretty much just a bit above average - drinkable, but not all that memorable.

 1,044 characters

Photo of wordemupg
3.27/5  rDev +3.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.25

355ml can poured into tulip 24/10/13

A brownish amber with a fast falling two finger light mocha foam that leaves some polka dot lace

S faint milk chocolate, a little raisins and prunes, dried grass and some earthy notes

T more of the same really, nothings wrong with it but it lacks intensity, everything's faint

M light bodied, almost creamy from he bubbles, a little slick, maybe a little nuttiness on the finish

O pretty basic but drinkable, just a little weak, not a whole lot of flavor but whats there's decent

considering this is a dirt cheap 12 pack I thought it would be much worse, there's flavor there just not enough of it, "mild" one could say

 666 characters

Photo of bumchilly25
3/5  rDev -4.8%

Photo of Josievan
4.14/5  rDev +31.4%
look: 3.75 | smell: 4 | taste: 4.25 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.25

Had Monday, 07/18/16

20 characters

Photo of papawu76
3/5  rDev -4.8%

Photo of schopenhauerale
3/5  rDev -4.8%

Photo of KStark
3/5  rDev -4.8%

Photo of yancot
3.25/5  rDev +3.2%

Photo of Derf36
3.11/5  rDev -1.3%
look: 2.75 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Photo of Bunman3
3.33/5  rDev +5.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.25

When one considers how much this beer costs, one can begin to forgive some of its shortcomings. It looks and smells relatively good. The taste is, well, a bit thin and lacking overall. It's far from the worst beer I've had. If I had to choose between a macro lager and Canterbury, I'd go Canterbury every time.

 310 characters

Photo of chase884
2.59/5  rDev -17.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.75

Canterbury Dark Mild from Pacific Western Brewing Company
Beer rating: 3.15 out of 5 with 17 ratings