HOME > Chowhound > Beer >

Discussion

Mountain Crest Beer

  • 6

This stuff ain't half bad. While it doesn't have anything particularly tasty about it, that's also what makes it so inoffensive and refreshing. Smooth, watery taste. 5.5% alcohol. And dirt cheap. Normally I hate supporting mediocrity but when somebody comes out with a beer that's, in all fairness, on par with typical mainstream offerings (Molson, Labatt, Bud etc.) and costs as little as half the price, they should at least get some credit.

Anybody agree/disagree? How are the other beers in this "family", specifically Jack's American Lager, Mountain Crest Gold, Classic Pilsner, or Rani Indian Lager?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. don't quote me on this....but i saw some tail end of a tv news special on crest beer saying that the reason that it is so cheap is because the ingrediants used in it are of the lowest quality for beer and thus is not recommended to drink by doctors. no shit...saw it last year some time. i used to drink it at the old karaoke nights at station 52...it was like 2 bucks a bottle. just sayin

    2 Replies
      1. re: John Manzo

        Way back when in Ireland and the UK, I believe doctors recommended Guinness for young mothers due to the iron in it....those days are over now. If the mothers were going to drink beer, Guinness was the one that was recommended.

    1. I always think that if I were to spend my hard earned cash, I would do so on a beer that is not a marketing project (nor corn based... only my bourbon is allowed to be corn based). Mountain Crest is not local, it is contract brewed in Wisconsin and then imported. Admittedly, I am very much a beer snob. A 6 pack of lovingly crafted local beer can be had in BC or Alberta for $10-12 per six pack. Other than the aforementioned Mountain Crest, it's hard to spend under $10. So, why go for mediocrity when you can find solid session ales (or lagers... if you so choose)?

      But, then again, each to their own.

      2 Replies
      1. re: peter.v

        I'm actually a huge fan of any "interesting" beer, which tends to include all microbrews, and I've supported many of them and will continue to do so. There is no way Mountain Crest can or will ever compete with these products, nor is it trying to.

        Any respect for MC that I was trying to show in the last post is for how favourably it compares against the most popular mainstream beers in North America (the aforementioned Molson, Labatt, Bud, etc.). These beers use the same ingredients ("low quality" according to rafer) as Mountain Crest, and don't taste any better, but by shoving marketing down our throats are trying to convince us that they're "premium". Notice how the big brewers never talk about the actual taste of the beer, other than to use generic words like "crisp, cold, clear, refreshing"? WTF is a "cold" taste? I have actually heard that in commercials before.

        At least MC is honest about what it is...basic beer made with commodity-grade ingredients, probably including tons of adjuncts such as corn and rice as you alluded to, or maltose syrup, which is used as a cheater to add more sugar which will turn into alcohol, vs. using proper brewing techniques. They're just being realistic with their pricing/marketing proposition.

        1. re: egon61

          Ah... I see where you're getting at. That's how far removed I've gotten from the mass beer market, not even thinking of marketing... But yes, your position makes perfect sense. Harmless, unpretentious beer.

          I like my cold tasting beers... hahaha!