5.2/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 4
Flavor 5
Texture 8
Overall 5
On tap. Pours a copper color with light carbonation but little head. Light malt aroma. Flavors of toasted malts and honey. Where’s the hops? Not a pilsner but quite quaffable.
Tried
from Draft
on 17 Aug 2012
at 19:26
4.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 4
Texture 4
Overall 4
Draught at Hops, New Westminster
Hazy blond color. Light aroma of wheat, spices and bread. Light body, with some wheat flavor, as well with some chemicals; light spices, and no bitterness.
Artificial.
Hazy blond color. Light aroma of wheat, spices and bread. Light body, with some wheat flavor, as well with some chemicals; light spices, and no bitterness.
Artificial.
Tried
on 25 Jul 2012
at 19:22
4.2/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 4
Flavor 5
Texture 4
Overall 4
Draught at The Met, New Westminster, as The Met 1892 Lager
Blond color; creamy head. The aroma is too fade. The flavor is almost missing too, the bitterness is low.
Side to side with a Sleeman, it’s an interesting race to end second.
Blond color; creamy head. The aroma is too fade. The flavor is almost missing too, the bitterness is low.
Side to side with a Sleeman, it’s an interesting race to end second.
Tried
on 25 Jul 2012
at 19:20
5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 5
Texture 4
Overall 5
Draught at The Met, New Westminster, as The Met 1892 Pale Ale
There is a light fruity malt aroma, simple. Poor flavor, almost no malt, very light sweetness and light butter, very light fruity trace; the bitterness is low.
Not offensive, but too simple.
There is a light fruity malt aroma, simple. Poor flavor, almost no malt, very light sweetness and light butter, very light fruity trace; the bitterness is low.
Not offensive, but too simple.
Tried
on 25 Jul 2012
at 19:17
4.9/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 5
Flavor 5
Texture 4
Overall 5.5
Blond color. The aroma is vulgar, the flavor is dry, not too weak, and a bit crisp; correct bitterness. Maybe boring, but not too bad.
Tried
on 11 Mar 2012
at 13:07
3.6/10
—
Appearance 2
Aroma 2
Flavor 6
Texture 4
Overall 3.5
Pours with pop-like head and a ginger-ale-esque body. Aroma is weak cardboard grains with some macro hops thrown on top. Flavour is slight nutty lager-ness with a slightly dry finish. Poor on looks, average on taste.
Tried
on 14 Aug 2011
at 21:56
3.2/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 3
Flavor 3
Texture 2
Overall 3
Can....sparkling giolden with a nice white head. That’s about the only good thing here.Somewhat skunky grainy nose . Heavily oxidized palate, with skunk cabbage tones as well Why bother making something this poor?
Tried
from Can
on 28 Jul 2011
at 15:39
4.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 4
Texture 4
Overall 4
Draught in Vancouver
Amber color. Aroma of refined sugar. Dry mouthfeel, with a light nutty touch. Ordinary bitterness. The finish is a bit papery and metallic. Poor.
Amber color. Aroma of refined sugar. Dry mouthfeel, with a light nutty touch. Ordinary bitterness. The finish is a bit papery and metallic. Poor.
Tried
on 29 Mar 2011
at 17:08
3.9/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 2
Flavor 5
Texture 4
Overall 3.5
Aroma is cardboard and armpits. Has a bright carbonated gold body, and a reasonably solid head. Flavour is soft grains and corn adjuncts. Weak palate. Completely uninteresting - why was this beer made? Who are they marketing it to? It doesn’t differentiate from all the other pale lagers on the BC market and tastes boring. Who, in fact, do they expect to buy this stuff?
Tried
on 30 Dec 2010
at 18:06
3.5/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 3
Flavor 3
Texture 4
Overall 3
Bottle. Honeyish sweet malt aroma. Amber, off-white head. Spicy, dms flavour, honey. Flat mouthfeel. Spicy aftertaste Brewing flaws stacked on a bad recipy.
Tried
from Bottle
on 14 Sep 2010
at 18:28