Flying Horse Royal Lager - United Breweries - UB Group

budgood1

Minnesota

2.3/5  rDev -23.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

pours out a slightly hazy pale straw yellow colour with a faomy white head which reduces quickly to a light lacing on the glass. light grainy aroma, hints of grass and hay. rather non-descript. the taste is rather non-descript, too. a generic lager sweetness and no really discernible hop bitterness makes this "royal" beer pretty plain. very bland...i just had the taj mahal before this flying horse offering and this comes off as a characterless clone devoid of any soul. the body is a bit sturdier and the mouthfeel does come across a tad slicker but that doesn't make up for the lack of overall character. drinkability is ok. you don't have to think when you drink this, especially if you're pairing this with Indian cuisine.

boring and not recommended.

Serving type: bottle

03-21-2010 23:33:00 | More by budgood1

BeerResearcher

Massachusetts

2.45/5  rDev -18.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

With a little note tied to the bottle and a brewed on date, I sort of anticipated something special, but alas a Flying Horse relieves itself the same as a field horse. Straw/Gold in color with a thin to medium corn malt body. A cornhusk and cardboard-like aroma leaves something to be desired...hops. The white head disappeared before I could fully examine it. The hops appear to be an afterthought. That said, this mildly sweet and dry beer is still quite drinkable

Serving type: bottle

04-02-2003 07:35:31 | More by BeerResearcher

beerguy101

California

2.45/5  rDev -18.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Light gold color, small white foamy head. Aroma is grainy and sweet. A malt liquor/lager. Light malt taste, with a very definite alcohol tang. Good malt/hop balance. Mouthfeel is crisp. Finish is also crisp. Aftertaste is slightly bitter. Better than Kingfisher, I think..

Serving type: bottle

08-14-2003 03:46:53 | More by beerguy101

Beerandraiderfan

Nevada

2.45/5  rDev -18.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Faint yellow, has the fizzy yellow beer cliche down pat. Aroma was corn. Made me think of the old scoring system's "not impressed" when I gave it a 2.

Almost no taste to this thing, a good palate cleanser. Very light, crisp mouthfeel. Really lots of water in this beer. A little bit of corn sweetness.

I don't see any reason to pay the relative expensive price for yellow beer that doesn't even have a funny/stupid ad campaign. I mean, what exactly does this stuff cost more than Sierra Nevada for anyways? Might fool some chicks into thinking you drink exotic palatable beer, but I can't recommend that greasy lifestyle based on a lie.

Serving type: bottle

01-08-2012 08:23:43 | More by Beerandraiderfan

RoyalT

Ohio

2.5/5  rDev -16.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Appearance – This came out a light yellow in color with an orangish tinge and a quick white head.

Smell – The grain is light and husky but not overly offensive.

Taste – The grain mellows at the taste and isn’t all that bad as far as American Macros are concerned. There’s a faint corny sweetness as well that, again, isn’t really that good but isn’t really that bad.

Mouthfeel – This is light-bodied with a nice crispness at the very end.

Drinkability – This was drinkable. Barely so, but drinkable.

Serving type: bottle

08-16-2006 02:59:28 | More by RoyalT

clvand0

Kentucky

2.58/5  rDev -14%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This came in a big 22oz bottle with a little note attached - very impressive and made me expect a good, quality beer. To the review: Pours a boring yellow/golden color with little head and leaves no lacing. The aroma is a bit skunky and yeasty with a bread-like appeal. The flavor is a little sweet, but still has a slight bit of skunkiness to it. Clean taste. Mostly malt in the flavor - very average for a lager. Not hard to drink, but not wonderful either. Nothing special here.

Serving type: bottle

12-02-2003 16:35:01 | More by clvand0

DogFood11

California

2.58/5  rDev -14%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Picked this baby up at Vendomes in Beverly Hills. Thought the label looked interesting and I am a fan of a good lager so I thought I'd give it a try.

Wheat or dry grass type of taste but its accented by a light malty flavor...This is suitable for a session beer as it has more character than the macro's and finishes clean enough for enjoyment for an evening. Not much else to say...so so.

Not much to speak of, bland, adjunct crap.

Serving type: bottle

07-23-2005 03:13:55 | More by DogFood11

fdrich29

Massachusetts

2.63/5  rDev -12.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

21 oz bottle at Rangoli's, Brighton, Massachusetts.

Ok after finishing my bottle of Taj Mahal I decided to try something different, and picked this baby. Oh my was it bad. Taj Mahal is not a great beer, but paired with Indian food I find it tasty and satisfying. This was neither. Pale, tasteless and the faint smell of straw was all this beer could muster. They can't all be 5's...or 4's for that matter. Maybe the Kingfisher will be better, I'll try that next time.

Serving type: bottle

02-16-2005 04:23:22 | More by fdrich29

Sheeeeeeep

Mississippi

2.78/5  rDev -7.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Almost unexceptional in comparison to it's peers, but the fruity aftertaste cuts through when drinking with it's intended cuisine. Indian.

Tasted a week ago at a Northern India/Pakistan restaurant. It replaced Taj Mahal, which I was not impressed with. Pairs better with the food. Ideal, similar to Dos Equis and Tex-Mex.

Drinkable alone, but if that's the case you can do better. But if you're having a curry, then your meal will benefit from this beer.

Serving type: bottle

10-06-2009 22:36:39 | More by Sheeeeeeep

KeefD

Minnesota

2.83/5  rDev -5.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Pale Yellow, with huge carbonation bubbles coming up keeping a firm cap on top of the beer that didn't last long. Aroma is very interesting. It's not quite skunked, but has some very herbal, earthy, and grassy aromas. There's also a certain toastiness to the nose. Flavor matches up with the nose. Some sweet honey like malts, cooked veggieness, with a dose of herbal earthy hoppiness. Not tasting much in the way of adjuncts such as corn. This is light to medium bodied, utterly drying and crisp. Fairly drinkable, but these particular flavors aren't really my thing.

Serving type: bottle

01-05-2009 23:08:11 | More by KeefD

Suds

Pennsylvania

2.83/5  rDev -5.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

This is a olden colored beer, slightly hazy, with a very slight head. There is a serious cereal smell...vegetable, grass, and healthy dose of sulfur-like scents. Dry and grainy, this beer is not really complex. Still, the slight pale malt and bitterness is not distasteful. It's a typical macro-style lager. Light in body, moderately effervescent, and soft. Not a bad particularly beer, although also not very drinkable.

Serving type: bottle

03-26-2011 01:06:20 | More by Suds

morebeergood

Massachusetts

2.85/5  rDev -5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Ordered for $6.75 while at Himalayan Bistro in West Roxbury. Split with my wife and poured into pilsner glasses. Average looking beer, clear yellow color, lots of carbonation. Smells like a macro, lots of rice and corn qualities. Taste was not horrible, but nothing great. Matched well with spicy food, as it did not overpower. Slightly sticky on the palate at the end. Worth trying once, but price would probably steer me towards a different alternative with my next meal.

Serving type: bottle

01-25-2010 19:10:26 | More by morebeergood

hotstuff

Indiana

2.9/5  rDev -3.3%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

When poured into my glass, this beer had a medium sized white creamy head with small bubbles. The body was clear with carbonation present. The hue was light gold and the lacing was only fair on the sides of glass. the nose was citrusy and fruity. The flavor was bitter with an aftertaste and the mouthfeel was tingly.

Serving type: bottle

07-21-2003 17:36:07 | More by hotstuff

orangemoustache

Illinois

2.95/5  rDev -1.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

This one pours a bright straw yellow with a tall slightly off-white head that retains suprisingly well and also leaves small amounts of lace.The nose is sweet with hints of corn and grains.The taste upfront is similar to the nose with malts controling the start,midway a nice shift to some slightly spicy hops blends with a earthy dryness that lasts longer than expected.The finish is semi burnt feeling(strange for such a light brew) and very dry.Unique,but not offensive or that interesting either.

Serving type: bottle

05-23-2008 04:28:04 | More by orangemoustache

merryjoulton

Arkansas

2.98/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Took this from a 22 oz. bomber into a pilsener. Pours a nice crystal clear light straw yellow with a wispy head and minimal lacing. Smells like superficial and light malt, the some citrusy notes, noble hops. Taste is just average. Not too much more than a mass produced lager. Mouthfeel is thin, drinkability isn't bad.

Serving type: bottle

07-11-2009 08:39:22 | More by merryjoulton

GarthDanielson

New Hampshire

2.98/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured from a 22oz bomber, this beer presents with a decent 1-1/2" head on top of a gold-ish color beer. There is a dank, light barley smell on the pour, which is followed by the typical lager taste. There is a malt undertone to the crisp flavor that is present in this brew. Sour undertones to the effervescent nature of this beer. It is very light and smooth on the tongue and in your mouth, and there is little to no aftertaste. It would be easy to consume multiple bottles of this beer, but I can think of many better ways to spend an afternoon...

Serving type: bottle

12-04-2010 04:40:34 | More by GarthDanielson

mactrail

California

2.98/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Clerar straw-yellow in the tall glass. Nice head, for what that's worth. They've got this carbonation thin nailed in Bangalore. Strangely sweet. Insipid seems to be the one word description. Slight dirty flavor that may be hops. Diet soda pop aftertaste. Nice name for a lame nag.

Tried this out of curiosity, but I'd have to call it even worse than usual deck wash. Apparently countries can do without a national airline, but they still have to have a cheap lager (apologies to Frank Z.)

Serving type: bottle

05-22-2011 04:56:37 | More by mactrail

Gusler

Arizona

3/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

The prototypical lager pour, a translucent gold color, the head impressive, the color bright white and the texture frothy. As it evanesces the lace left behind is a fine covering sheet upon the glass. Quintessential lager nose, all malt, somewhat sweet, with the start also mostly malt and lightly sweet, the top thin and unimpressive, the finish lightly hopped, mild on the carbonation, the aftertaste dry and lingering. Another “Average" lager, drinkable, but nothing that would make me buy it again.

Serving type: bottle

02-05-2003 16:32:51 | More by Gusler

beersarang

California

3/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a light straw with ridiculous carbonation barely keeping the white head alive. Standard.

Sweet corn aroma mixes with some spicy grassy hops.

Ultrathin malts struggle against the slight punchy bitterness and overall minimal hop flavor. A little bit of corn on the exhale, but overall finishes dry and clean. Pretty standard.

Light bodied and heavily carbonated with small bubbles.

I wouldn't buy this again, standard run of the mill lager, but my first from India. Why is it that everyone but Europe and America makes ultralight beers?

Serving type: bottle

07-14-2005 05:51:55 | More by beersarang

BlackAngus

Indiana

3/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Meh. An overall average beer. Nothing special, but not terrible, either. I'd drink it again, but it wouldn't be my first choice. I will mention that it went very well with my lamb curry. I did notice that the carbonation level was a bit high, as noted by other reviewers, but I didn't have a problem with it. The hop flavor and aroma was definitely superior to NAILs, but that's about the highest praise I can give it.

Serving type: bottle

07-17-2006 13:57:20 | More by BlackAngus

thekanna

Maryland

3/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Pale, clear yellow with a very large head upon turbid pour.

S: Clean adjunct malts and yeasts.

T/M: Crisp, slightly sweet adjunct malts; then diacetyls shine through and give it a bit of butteriness before ending in a nice, carbonated finish.

D: Very much your run-of-the-mill Indian macro-lager, but refreshing nonetheless (not as torturous to drink as one might think), and also a good complement to flavorful Indian food.

Serving type: bottle

10-28-2010 05:07:21 | More by thekanna

Aaron_Ramson

California

3/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Somewhere between a German pilsner and an American light adjunct lager, this beer was light and easy drinking with German bittering hops, a nice strain of lager yeast, and corn being the predominant flavors. The color and nose were nothing special, inoffensive at best, boring at worst. Mouthfeel was what you would expect; heavy carbonation and thin without being watery. Not a bad beer by any means and much better than Taj Mahal brand lager, but not something would willingly drink again, as pedestrian light lagers aren't my thing.

Serving type: bottle

01-07-2013 16:03:36 | More by Aaron_Ramson

mfnmbvp

Illinois

3/5  rDev 0%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

650 ml (1 pint 6 fl oz) bottle, with manufacted date reading 04/2011 batch no. 3468, so this brew is about two years old. Been hitting the India imported American adjunct lagers at my local beer store lately, and I quite enjoyed the Taj Mahal Premium Lager by the same brewery, so I figured I would give this one a shot. An American pale lager, at a moderate 4.70% abv, no need to drag this out any longer, so on with it.

Poured into a Firestone Walker pint glass.

A - Semi-aggressive pour yields two fingers of eggshell white bubbly head on top of the typical clear apple juice urine colored body. No lacing.

S - Some sour tart apple champagne like presence in the nose. Has cider qualities to it. Some bready yeast. Honey.

T - Very sweet, clean taste. Honey sweetness. Apple. Carbonated, medium bodied feel. A drinkable tasty beer for being what it is: a four dollar bottle of imported beer from India.

M - Smooth, light, and sweet mouth feel. Clean, and somewhat carbonated.

Overall, a highly drinkable beer. I think I might prefer the Taj Mahal Premium Lager just a bit more, but both beers would be nice to try if you ever manage to spot a bottle. Beats the hell out of the awful adjunct swill Bud Light and Coors Light being made in America, and if beers like Flying Horse Royal Lager Beer were more widely available, I would probably be drinking them more often.

Flying Horse Royal Lager Beer ---3/5.

Serving type: bottle

03-26-2013 01:25:32 | More by mfnmbvp

BuckeyeNation

Iowa

3.03/5  rDev +1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Bright yellow-gold with a sparse cloud of fine particles. The cap practically exploded off the bottle, but the amount of carbonation doesn't look to be out of the ordinary. A decent looking cap of simple white sits atop the beer and leaves a few arcing streamers of sudsy lace when it descends. More than passable.

As is the nose. Sure it's simple. Sure it's grain-like. It's also devoid of any off-aromas that would make me assign a less than average score. It smells more musky than many Indian lagers, but not exactly more hoppy. Although where musky would come from other than hops, I have no idea.

This is okay beer. It tastes similar to the two other offerings from this brewery that I've had (from what I can remember anyway). Lightly sweet grain countered by grassy, lightly spicy noble hops... you know the drill. Like the nose, there's no hint of nastiness, even as there's little hint of pleasantness. The finish is short and reasonably clean.

I didn't expect much on the body/mouthfeel front and that's exactly what I got. It's light without being watery and is carbonated well enough to keep the mouthfeel from feeling lackluster. In short, it's as unoffensive and as unremarkable as the rest of the beer.

As far as United Breweries beer goes, Flying Horse loses to Taj Mahal by a nose and finishes quite a few lengths ahead of Kingfisher. Like most beer from this country, I would never buy a bottle to enjoy on its own, but would have no problem ordering it in an Indian restaurant to douse the heat from a plate of vindaloo curry.

Serving type: bottle

08-25-2006 13:07:42 | More by BuckeyeNation

msubulldog25

Oregon

3.03/5  rDev +1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This beer is on the menu for October 2006 at Mother's Bistro in Portland, OR (happy birthday to both Moms...). The theme of their specials this month is 'Indian', so the special import is Flying Horse Royal Lager. I thought it'd be worth a try - though not cheap at $7 for a 650ml bottle. Poured to a pint glass. Label has a cartoon image of Pegasus, the flying horse of Greek mythology.

A: Pale yellow and crystal clear with some steady carbonation. A one-finger rocky white head crowns the glass...

S: Hmmm...not much smell. Mild grains & malt...clean hops for some miniscule bittering. At least it's not off-smelling...

T: Decent flavor for the macro-styled beer. Gentle toasted grain and a hint of nuttiness. A touch bitter...nothing 'awful' & nothing 'exceptional'...I guess that makes it pretty 'average'...

M: Clean and crisp, light mouthfeel.

D: This beer must go with food, which is how I enjoyed it - I scored it slightly above average for that reason. My dinner was masala-spiced prawns and aromatic rice; the beer provided a nice clean backdrop on which to enjoy those flavors. I suppose I could have said the same about any of a number of macro lagers, still it was a novelty trying one from India and having it paired with Indian cuisine...though probably my first AND last Flying Horse, it was good enough for me on this night.

Serving type: bottle

10-09-2006 19:44:30 | More by msubulldog25