Budweiser in excess of 3.2% coming to Oklahoma liquor stores!

[inactive]

I have been making beer runs to Arkansas for the same reason, no headache and better taste for standard Miller products. 3.2 is pulled off before it has fully fermented and some of the hops are still raw. Try eating raw hops and see how they taste.

Making a trip to TX this weekend and will stock up before hitting the river on the way back.

The beer doesn't ferment while the wort is cooking. It ferments during the weeks it sits with the yeast in bottom of the lager tank. The hops added during cooking are just as raw or cooked at the start of the lager fermentation as they are the end of it.

The 3.2 beer may taste deficient, I agree, but too much hops sure as heck ain't the problem.

 

[p238shooter]

"You can't tell a difference in taste. Sorry, but if you did a blind taste test between them you couldn't tell but you might guess right. After all, you'd have a 50/50 shot. Everyone being full of **** on this site(including myself) is one of my favorite things about it."


I beg to differ. I run out of out of state Miller occasionally. The Oklahoma beer is pulled off early and the hops are not fully fermented. Do some research on how it is brewed to meet the 3.2 requirement. For me it is not the alcohol content, it is the taste. I like a few hoppier beers occasionally, but for serious beer drinking over a period of time I prefer Miller. I did the taste test several times myself just to make sure, and I was never wrong. I had ran out of "imported" and bought some locally. I accidentally mixed some local cans in the ice chest to take to the lake a while back. One taste made me look at the fine print on the can. Oklahoma. Drank it anyway, but it was definitely different.

 

[SoonerBorn]

I have been making beer runs to Arkansas for the same reason, no headache and better taste for standard Miller products. 3.2 is pulled off before it has fully fermented and some of the hops are still raw. Try eating raw hops and see how they taste.

Making a trip to TX this weekend and will stock up before hitting the river on the way back.

Uh huh....

 

[SoonerBorn]

"You can't tell a difference in taste. Sorry, but if you did a blind taste test between them you couldn't tell but you might guess right. After all, you'd have a 50/50 shot. Everyone being full of **** on this site(including myself) is one of my favorite things about it."

I beg to differ. I run out of out of state Miller occasionally. The Oklahoma beer is pulled off early and the hops are not fully fermented. Do some research on how it is brewed to meet the 3.2 requirement. For me it is not the alcohol content, it is the taste. I like a few hoppier beers occasionally, but for serious beer drinking over a period of time I prefer Miller. I did the taste test several times myself just to make sure, and I was never wrong. I had ran out of "imported" and bought some locally. I accidentally mixed some local cans in the ice chest to take to the lake a while back. One taste made me look at the fine print on the can. Oklahoma. Drank it anyway, but it was definitely different.

Sure.

 

[ExtremistPullup]

I thought Budweiser always sells there product cold.

 

[GlockPride]

Lets just go for beer everywhere of all points, liquor wherever and on Sundays/Holidays, multiple stores (ala Spec's), and cold products.

I know I'm asking for a lot, but you gotta aim high. Texas liquor laws are tight, but man OK can make a man cry. And I don't even drink that much.

Also, I'm a Shiner Bock fan and have been since elementary school, but it sucks in Oklahoma. Much better at full alcohol level.

Cheers!

 

[HarveyDanger]

No beer would spoil without refrigeration, it will age faster but there is no way it would spoil in a week. In non super commercial brewing you out beer in the bottle with sugar and it makes co2 and carbonates.

I die a little every time people talk about blah blah HAS TO BE REFRIDGERATED

 

[SoonerBorn]

No beer would spoil without refrigeration, it will age faster but there is no way it would spoil in a week. In non super commercial brewing you out beer in the bottle with sugar and it makes co2 and carbonates.

I die a little every time people talk about blah blah HAS TO BE REFRIDGERATED

Lol!!

 

[HarveyDanger]

"You can't tell a difference in taste. Sorry, but if you did a blind taste test between them you couldn't tell but you might guess right. After all, you'd have a 50/50 shot. Everyone being full of **** on this site(including myself) is one of my favorite things about it." I beg to differ. I run out of out of state Miller occasionally. The Oklahoma beer is pulled off early and the hops are not fully fermented. Do some research on how it is brewed to meet the 3.2 requirement. For me it is not the alcohol content, it is the taste. I like a few hoppier beers occasionally, but for serious beer drinking over a period of time I prefer Miller. I did the taste test several times myself just to make sure, and I was never wrong. I had ran out of "imported" and bought some locally. I accidentally mixed some local cans in the ice chest to take to the lake a while back. One taste made me look at the fine print on the can. Oklahoma. Drank it anyway, but it was definitely different.

hops don't ferment and they water the 3.2 down. Hops bitter and add flavor, malted barley converts to sugar, and yeast ferments it (ale from the bottom, lager from top). If they pulled it off early it would be sweet.

You are drinking the same beer with more water

 

[vvvvvvv]

You are drinking the same beer with more water

Which can significantly alter the flavor.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2