Saranac Adirondack Light Beer
Matt Brewing Company / Saranac Brewery

Saranac Adirondack Light BeerSaranac Adirondack Light Beer
Beer Geek Stats | Print Shelf Talker
From:
Matt Brewing Company / Saranac Brewery
 
New York, United States
Style:
Light Lager
ABV:
Not listed
Score:
75
Avg:
3.08 | pDev: 17.21%
Ratings:
29 | reviews: 26
Status:
Retired
Rated:
Oct 22, 2017
Added:
Jul 06, 2002
Wants:
  0
Gots:
  0
No description / notes.
Recent ratings and reviews. | Log in to view more ratings + sorting options.
Photo of woodychandler
Reviewed by woodychandler from Pennsylvania

3.74/5  rDev +21.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.75
Ah, the joys of the Bottle Backlog! I have some in the basement's Beerfrigerator that I brought with me in the move from my parents' house over to Chez Woody that I have not looked at in a while. I was recently inspired to make today a New Saranac Beer Sunday (or New Beer Saraunacday (Week 661), if you will) & so this becomes my opening salvo.

From the bottle: "We wouldn't put our name on just any light beer - so many hours of development and tastings (the good part!) have resulted in what we are proud to call Saranac Light. Saranac Light is a light bodied yet flavorful light beer that is deliciously drinkable and very refreshing. Enjoy!"

I Pop!ped the cap & to describe my pour as "slow & gentle" would be an overstatement. I barely had it running out of the bottle & into the glass. Once sufficiently decanted, an in-glass swirl produced a finger of fizzy, bone-white head that quickly fizzed its way out of existence. At least the carbonation had held up! Color was a pretty Golden-Amber (SRM = > 5, < 7) with NE-quality clarity, prompting a visit from The Gelt Gang of Midas, Mammon & Croesus. Nose had a very cereal-like maltiness, reminiscent of the whole grain cereal that my late Pops used to eat for breakfast. Mouthfeel was thin-to-medium, not watery, but not much past that, either. The taste was pleasant enough. It was clearly a Lager at its base, given the honey-like sweetness that was especially prevalent. I just kept flashing on Pops' Cheerios and/or Wheaties, often mixed together in the bowl & drizzled with honey before he added milk. Finish was semi-dry, rather refreshing, but just not sustaining for me. It has held up really well & I am glad that I finally found the impetus to drink it, but now it is on to the next beer.
Oct 22, 2017
 
Rated: 3.5 by Cooker_stp from New York

Aug 18, 2013
 
Rated: 3 by generallee from Virginia

Jan 11, 2013
 
Rated: 3 by rab53 from Washington

Dec 02, 2011
Photo of TastyTaste
Reviewed by TastyTaste from Minnesota

2.5/5  rDev -18.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5
Medium gold color, with a very small white head. Not a lot going on in the smell department, mostly a sweet corn and malt scent. Pretty bland beer. Too little malt, hardly a trace of hops. It's better than macros, but even for a light beer it is boring. Average beer, at best.
Feb 07, 2004
Photo of Beastdog75
Reviewed by Beastdog75 from New Jersey

2.58/5  rDev -16.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5
(Saranac "12 Beers" Sampler, 2002 edition)

I thought that Saranac's holiday sampler packs usually showcased some of their more creative and flavorful beers, which is why I was a little taken back that they threw this in there. Anything to get people to try their light, eh? Turns out this is one of the better lights that I've had, and although it doesn't stand up to Sam Adams Light it certainly holds its own against the macro-brewed lights.

Saranac Light pours a light/pale straw color with a showcase of highly active carbonation. Very thin layer of foam bubbles forms and dissipates quickly. The smell is near non-existant, although the mildest of grains and fruitiness are slightly detectable. The mouthfeel is thin and fizzy. The standard light beer wateriness is present in the flavor, but there are some light malty/grainy notes here to save the day, with even a little bit of breadiness. Very light hop twang in the finish. Flavor is quite clean, and lacks many of the foul off-flavors that so many macro-lites have. Aftertaste is clean, and the finish lacks any alcoholic warmth.

I still wouldn't by this one on its own, but it does stand out flavorwise in an oversaturated light beer market. Kudos to Saranac for making a pretty decent light beer.
Nov 04, 2003
Photo of edchicma
Reviewed by edchicma from Massachusetts

3.13/5  rDev +1.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
Tried this just for the heck of it...hadn't had a light beer in some time. This one seemed a tad better than others I remember. Head was ok, but dissipated quickly. Color was a nice light gold color. Faint malt aroma, with a medium mouthfeel. It caught in the throat a bit, though...not as crisp and smooth as I would have liked. Overall, not bad for a light beer.
Sep 26, 2003
Photo of garymuchow
Reviewed by garymuchow from Minnesota

3.38/5  rDev +9.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Light refreshing slightly sweet mix of malt and hops to aroma. Fairly standard for style. Good looking, but again standard for style. Steady white head. Low flavor without being too watery. Mostly malt taste with slight lingering. Refreshing quality, but not too crisp. Softens and becomes fluffy as warms. Fine for what it's designed to be. Certainly better than most macros of style. Becomes unpleasantly bitter as warms.
May 25, 2003
Photo of RBorsato
Reviewed by RBorsato from Virginia

3.38/5  rDev +9.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Pale gold color with a low white ringed head and good carbonation. No "cooked-corn" aroma with light graininess - I am sure this is an all-malt brew. Crisp and dry with a low level of sweetness. Light bodied but fuller than most lights ... not suprised based on calories.

I guess I preferred Sam Adams Light to this one but overall not bad.

Per label: 130 cal, 9 g carbs, 1.7 g protein, 0.0 fat

Available in the 2002 Saranac Holiday Pack.
May 20, 2003
Photo of feloniousmonk
Reviewed by feloniousmonk from Minnesota

2.36/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5
Appearance: clear, honey gold color, kind of pretty and appealing, head is a treat for the eye, too, bubbly, snow white, leaving a little lace, slowly simmering.
After that, it's all downhill. Nose is nothing, though I searched and searched, my nostril aflared...nothing bad, anyway...
As for taste; a tiny hop drizzle appears for 1/1,000,000th of 1 second that fades away...body doesn't exist...in fact, it stands as the very hallmark of negligibility!
There are small specs of flavor here and there, very small, and not enough to merit the term "flavorful" as it appears on the label.
I don't understand the existence of this type of beer, though the majority of Americans seem to take them to their collective bosom. It's even more mysterious when a small brewery or a craft brewer farts one of these things out.
May 18, 2003
Photo of Scoats
Reviewed by Scoats from Pennsylvania

3.3/5  rDev +7.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
I don't know if I'd ever buy this but it came with the 12 pack. If I wanted a light beer though, I couldn't think of one better. It tasted a lot like Pabst Blue Ribbon, and I mean that as a compliment. Good lawn mower beer.

At 130 calories, this and Sam Adams Light aren't really that light.
Apr 22, 2003
Photo of NeroFiddled
Reviewed by NeroFiddled from Pennsylvania

3.41/5  rDev +10.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5
Wow! I was really surprised by how good this was for being a "light" beer. Then I read the label - "130 calories". Many of the standard macros are only 140 or just above, so I find it hard to consider this truly a light beer. However, it's good! It pours a crystal clear golden body that's topped by a foamy bright-white head. It has great head retention and keeps a thin surface covering throughout the glass, and it even leaves some spotty lace! The aroma expresses a grainy maltiness. It's a touch wort-like with no hops to be found, but it's clean and welcoming. I certainly prefer its overt maltiness to the vapid alcohol aroma of some of the heavily-attenuated mass-produced lights. The body is also surprisingly full for the style, falling clearly into the medium range; and the fine carbonation leaves it crisp in the mouth. Very nice! The flavor, like the aroma, concentrates on grainy malt without hop flavor, but does offer a gently backing bitterness. It finishes clean and smooth with a short-lingering note of residual malt that dissolves to reveal a moderate dryness. Really well done with the exception of it's full 130 calories.
Feb 08, 2003
Photo of RonfromJersey
Reviewed by RonfromJersey from New Jersey

2.74/5  rDev -11%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
Bright yellow-gold body, with some steady bubbling, topped by a large foamy white head. Some hay in the nose, but very little aroma. Beer hits the tongue with an opening splash of malt, but slides away quickly, before more details are detectable. Mouthfeel is surprisingly full. Beer goes does easy. Very easy, Maybe too easy. Probably the second best light beer available in my market, after Sam Adams. Could have a use as a quick quencher/lawnmower beer in the heat of the summer, but really not something most craft beer fans are likely to embrace. Here's hoping they leave it out of next year's 12 pack.
Jan 31, 2003
Photo of CharlesRiver
Reviewed by CharlesRiver from Connecticut

2.98/5  rDev -3.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
This is my second beer from the mixed twelve pack. Looks almost exactly like there Pilsner but the head doesn't last as long. The smell is very similar as well. This one seems much more carbonated than the last. Not much in terms of flavor. I can pick up a slight hint of hops in the end but that is about it. In the class that it is in, this one stands a bit taller. It definitely has more flavor than anything from A-B.
Jan 08, 2003
Photo of Suds
Reviewed by Suds from Missouri

2.71/5  rDev -12%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
I probably never would have tried this beer if it were not included in the holiday sampler. As suspected, it's not worth trying on its own.
The appearance is a slightly dark yellow-straw color, topped with a respectable white head. To be honest, it's a decent-looking beer. The aroma is almost non-existent, as is the taste....maybe a slight graininess and a very mildly sweet finish. Although this is arguably better than most light beers, it's still a waste of time.
Dec 18, 2002
Photo of BeerBuilder
Reviewed by BeerBuilder from Minnesota

2.98/5  rDev -3.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
Clear, brilliant straw color, with a white head. The aroma is light in malt, with a bit of grain. The flavor has a malt sweetness, as well as a grain flavor. The grain gives this beer a bit of a bite, and a flavor almost like sour apples. From this point the beer flows to a slight hop bitterness. It is light in body, smooth, and easy drinking. This brew has a decent flavor for an American Light Lager.
Dec 17, 2002
Photo of shirfan
Reviewed by shirfan from New York

2.52/5  rDev -18.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
This infidel was the first to die in the Christmas Sampler, to get it out of the way...

Pours golden yellow and clear, head doesn't even make an attempt.

Mouthfeel is the only redeeming feature of this creation... it's fairly bubbly and interesting, but there's very little to back it up. A thin, canadian-tasting macro lager. On the dry side. No off flavors or grossly detectable adjuncts, but it's very plainly aimed at big 3 swillers and I wouldn't drink this again unless it was both free AND the only thing available.
Dec 16, 2002
Photo of frank4sail
Reviewed by frank4sail from New Jersey

2.67/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
Fresh slightly sweet nose. No real head or retention with a carbonated clear (filtered) liik. Sour malt taste. The finish is slightly sweet. The sout taste just does not go away. Light to medium mouth. Lots and lots of carbonation (bigger bubbles force carbonation). there is taste there for a light beer... just not very good taste. And I would not really consider this a light beer at 130 calories.
Dec 12, 2002
Photo of Kwak
Reviewed by Kwak from New Jersey

1.61/5  rDev -47.7%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2
Not good only drank this one because it cam in a twelve-pack sampler.

It poured yellow not much head gone in a flash bad aroma.

The taste was nothing special like a saranac watered down. It also had a little metalic taste to it ?
Dec 08, 2002
Photo of ElGuapo
Reviewed by ElGuapo from New Jersey

2.87/5  rDev -6.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5
well, it's a light beer, so what can i really say. as a light, it is not to bad at all. i think only sam adam's is better. it has no real aroma and not too much flavor. it is not skunky like other lights, and it is nice and smooth. i will never get it again, but if you want a light beer, it is a good choice.
Dec 08, 2002