As a new resident of this state, can someone clear up the 3.2 beer rules for me.
If I buy beer at the liquor store, none of it's 3.2 beer, right?
What about at the bar? Is all American macro-brewed beer (Bud, Miller, Coors) sold at the bar the 3.2 variety?
If I purchase a draft or bottle of import beer at the bar, is it 3.2? What about Boulevard and other small-scale breweries' beer bought at the bar?
Here is a link to a previous thread on this topic.
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2526
I know the beer that you buy in a liquor store is higher than 3.2 . I don't know about the beer at the bars.
When I sold Bud back in the late 70's, we delivered 3.2 to the bars. I don't think that has changed any.
(http://www.fotothing.com/photos/736/736ff0fa23d8cf5850afb1a99166cb78.jpg?ts=1159915692)
My job at Budweiser got me far....... [:o)]
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
As a new resident of this state, can someone clear up the 3.2 beer rules for me.
If I buy beer at the liquor store, none of it's 3.2 beer, right?
What about at the bar? Is all American macro-brewed beer (Bud, Miller, Coors) sold at the bar the 3.2 variety?
If I purchase a draft or bottle of import beer at the bar, is it 3.2? What about Boulevard and other small-scale breweries' beer bought at the bar?
the devil is in the details it is all wt. vs. vol... it is a silly debate...
to answer your question- domestic microbrews purchased in bars are not required to be nonintoxicating (i.e. <3.2%) but sometimes are...
Why is it a silly debate Bruno? I can tell the difference between 3.2 and the "other" stuff like night and day. Maybe it IS just me (seriously), but 3.2 tastes like water to me. I travel alot and experience both and I totally stay away from 3.2 if possible.
I have always called it Beerwater.
quote:
Originally posted by snopes
Why is it a silly debate Bruno? I can tell the difference between 3.2 and the "other" stuff like night and day. Maybe it IS just me (seriously), but 3.2 tastes like water to me. I travel alot and experience both and I totally stay away from 3.2 if possible.
i'll steal my post from a previous thread...
quote:
3.2 beer is a percent of alcohol by mass....
liquor store beer is labeled by volume, and most of that is about 5 percent alcohol by volume... converting from weight to volume you find that the "3.2" beer is really 4 percent alcohol by volume... so it really is a 1% difference it is there but not as big as many people think... there have been taste tests with beer snobs- many of whom would never normally drink one of our common domestic lagers- and they can't tell a difference in the AC...
cause, yeah man, that guinness is weak ****... (all guinness draught/original varities are are 4.0% AC by volume or about 3.2% by weight)...
so yeah, it must be you... but the only way to know is a blind taste test, i'd bet you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between a 3.2 budweiser and 4.0 budweiser... i've tried, i could not tell the difference...
i love beer and i love people that love beer... i've got a keg at home and literally 15 different varieties of beer including many out-of-state micros/regional that i "import" in.... and every couple of months i brew a corny keg full of one of my own varities...
but ultimately i like beer, all beer... i'd take a weihenstephan dunkel over a michelob and a natty bo over a natural light anyday... but i'll still drink a cold can of old style instead of water, and i'd be happy about it...
Hey bruno...when can we come over?
We each promise to bring an exotic six-pack and share...
Give us directions BRUNO! [^] But I swear, I can tell the difference easily. If we ever meet, I'll demonstrate. So, back to the serious stuff. Directions please?
Bruno? Bruno? Directions please. It's almost happy hour! [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
As a new resident of this state, can someone clear up the 3.2 beer rules for me.
If I buy beer at the liquor store, none of it's 3.2 beer, right?
What about at the bar? Is all American macro-brewed beer (Bud, Miller, Coors) sold at the bar the 3.2 variety?
If I purchase a draft or bottle of import beer at the bar, is it 3.2? What about Boulevard and other small-scale breweries' beer bought at the bar?
It is my understanding that all beers sold in liquor stores here are strong beers, not the 3.2 stuff. Liquor stores are prohibited from selling 3.2 beer; groceries and convenience stores can ONLY sell 3.2 beer.
If you buy a Bud, Miller or Coors at any outlet in Oklahoma, be it a store, bar, or restaurant, it is 3.2 ONLY. These national breweries stopped selling strong beer in Oklahoma about 25 years ago over disputes with Oklahoma's liquor franchising prohibitions. If you buy imported, or other domestic beer at a bar, it may or may not be 3.2, chances are it is strong beer. Best to ask the barkeep what they are selling. Any bar that has a valid liquor licence can sell strong beer. If they sell 3.2 beer also, they need a separate license, as 3.2 beer in OK is governed by a whole different set of laws. Silly I know.
It all stems back from when prohibition was repealed nationally in the early 1930s. The US Congress legalized 3.2 beer shortly before national prohibition was repealed to appease the masses. Oklahoma did likewise, calling 3.2 beer "non-intoxicating" to skirt the state prohibition laws. But Oklahoma kept hard liquor prohibition until April 1959; up until then, the only alcoholic beverage available legally in OK was 3.2 beer. When OK finally repealed prohibition, we kept the older 3.2 beer laws that were already on the books and the new liquor laws only applied to stronger beers, wines and liquors. And that is pretty much how it still stands today. The big national breweries still make the 3.2 stuff for the few states like Oklahoma, Colorado, Missouri(?) that still have 3.2 beer laws and regs. They won't sell their strong beer in Oklahoma because they can not have exclusive franchise agreements with a single wholesaler. They say they need this for quality control issues (refrigeration, delivery, product age, etc.), but the Oklahoma constitution strictly prohibits the franchising of intoxicating alcoholic beverages to a single wholesaler.
Oklahoma wasn't the very last state to repeal liquor prohibition, although it was the only state to enter the union with constitutional liquor prohibition. Mississippi didn't repeal liquor prohibition until 1966. We may have what some people feel as outdated, overly-restrictive liquor laws, but we certainly don't have a monopoly on these. You learn to adapt.
Steve, the other states that allow grocery stores and gas stations to sell only 3.2 beer other than Oklahoma are Kansas, Colorado, Utah and Minnesota. Missouri still restricts beer to 3.2% alcohol by weight on certain areas, but much of the state allows gas stations to sell liquor, beer and wine.
Utah is the only other state that prohibits liquor stores from selling cold alcoholic beverages, and all liquor stores are owned and operated by the Utah Department of Beverage Control.
And, Utah is also the only other state where Anheuser-Busch, Coors and Miller refuse to sell strong beer for the same reasons they don't sell strong beer in Oklahoma. Difference between Oklahoma and Utah? Oklahoma has a better chance of changing this law. A much better chance, because we're actively pursuing that goal as we speak.
Action on this issue was considered by the OKC Chamber, but the governing board chose to stay out of this, even though economic growth in downtown OKC has been hurt by this law. We'd like a Whole Foods, wink-wink...
And plus, if I'm going to be picking between Istook and Henry in a couple weeks, I'd better be hammered! [;)]
I plan on purchasing all of my package liquor out of state. With laws such as these, I refuse to give Oklahoma any of my package liquor tax revenue.
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
I plan on purchasing all of my package liquor out of state. With laws such as these, I refuse to give Oklahoma any of my package liquor tax revenue.
Not much of a "drinker" are you....?
quote:
Originally posted by SoonerRiceGrad
Action on this issue was considered by the OKC Chamber, but the governing board chose to stay out of this, even though economic growth in downtown OKC has been hurt by this law. We'd like a Whole Foods, wink-wink...
I think not being able to sell beverage alcohol is a pretty lame excuse for a grocery chain not to do business in a state. That just says to me that either they don't have a high opinion of their grocery products, or the mark-up they put on booze is much too high. From what I know and have read about Whole Foods, they are just an over-priced Reasors with a lot more pretention.
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
I plan on purchasing all of my package liquor out of state. With laws such as these, I refuse to give Oklahoma any of my package liquor tax revenue.
Not much of a "drinker" are you....?
That does seem like a pretty irrational reaction. Unless you can't find a particular strong beer or hard liquor brand here that you like, that would be silly. Prices here are quite reasonable, often lower than most other states.
quote:
posted by Steve
...Unless you can't find a particular strong beer or hard liquor brand here that you like, that would be silly...
It's the principal of the matter.
Me, I just look at the label: if it has the OK+ than in the cart it goes.
jdb
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by SoonerRiceGrad
Action on this issue was considered by the OKC Chamber, but the governing board chose to stay out of this, even though economic growth in downtown OKC has been hurt by this law. We'd like a Whole Foods, wink-wink...
I think not being able to sell beverage alcohol is a pretty lame excuse for a grocery chain not to do business in a state. That just says to me that either they don't have a high opinion of their grocery products, or the mark-up they put on booze is much too high. From what I know and have read about Whole Foods, they are just an over-priced Reasors with a lot more pretention.
you may think it's lame but when a business model elsewhere is built with alcohol figured in it makes a lot of sense...
and it is the same damn reason we don't have costcos here... guess who does not want them to move into the state? hint: it's the same people who don't want any other grocery chains to move in...
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by SoonerRiceGrad
Action on this issue was considered by the OKC Chamber, but the governing board chose to stay out of this, even though economic growth in downtown OKC has been hurt by this law. We'd like a Whole Foods, wink-wink...
I think not being able to sell beverage alcohol is a pretty lame excuse for a grocery chain not to do business in a state. That just says to me that either they don't have a high opinion of their grocery products, or the mark-up they put on booze is much too high. From what I know and have read about Whole Foods, they are just an over-priced Reasors with a lot more pretention.
you may think it's lame but when a business model elsewhere is built with alcohol figured in it makes a lot of sense...
and it is the same damn reason we don't have costcos here...
If Costco or Whole Foods didn't come here because of overly-restrictive zoning or high tax burden, I think that would be different. But because they can't sell wine & hard liquor? If this is their reason, then so be it. We will just have to muddle through with Reasors, Wild Oats, Target and Sam's Club. I think we will make it somehow, someway.
Besides, the last thing Tulsa needs is more big-box chain stores destroying the landscape with their hideous buildings and acres of asphalt parking lots. I miss the local neighborhood Humpty Dumpty and TG&Y. Tulsa had more character and identity then.
^My understanding is that liquor is the most profitable product that grocery stores sell. The mark up is extremely high. If you eliminate the most profitable product, it makes sense that a company would not come into this state. It would be like telling Quicktrip they could no longer sell soda.
Does anyone know if Oklahoma still has the ridiculous laws about breweries? That you can only brew & sell 3.2 beer on premises?
As for the difference in taste between 3.2 and other beers, I am no expert, but I have been told that the difference in taste has less to do with the amount of alcohol, but with the process itself. To ensure that alcohol levels don't reach a certain level, often the brewing must be cut short, before too much sugar is converted.
I like the artificial beer called O'Doules. It is non-alcoholic.
I once drank a six-pack and got into a fake fight.
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by SoonerRiceGrad
Action on this issue was considered by the OKC Chamber, but the governing board chose to stay out of this, even though economic growth in downtown OKC has been hurt by this law. We'd like a Whole Foods, wink-wink...
I think not being able to sell beverage alcohol is a pretty lame excuse for a grocery chain not to do business in a state. That just says to me that either they don't have a high opinion of their grocery products, or the mark-up they put on booze is much too high. From what I know and have read about Whole Foods, they are just an over-priced Reasors with a lot more pretention.
you may think it's lame but when a business model elsewhere is built with alcohol figured in it makes a lot of sense...
and it is the same damn reason we don't have costcos here...
If Costco or Whole Foods didn't come here because of overly-restrictive zoning or high tax burden, I think that would be different. But because they can't sell wine & hard liquor? If this is their reason, then so be it. We will just have to muddle through with Reasors, Wild Oats, Target and Sam's Club. I think we will make it somehow, someway.
Besides, the last thing Tulsa needs is more big-box chain stores destroying the landscape with their hideous buildings and acres of asphalt parking lots. I miss the local neighborhood Humpty Dumpty and TG&Y. Tulsa had more character and identity then.
"tulsa was better when all we had were corner stores...." blah, blah, blah... the ****ing big-box cow is out of the barn...
these other big boxes and chains would provide a welcome alternative for many consumers to our current limited options...
the reason they are not here is because our market is not significant to them... they aren't here because we've fought to keep them out... the population is here, the household income is here, the numbers should work but yet they don't come...
somehow, austin, kansas city and colorado springs have managed to deal with the big-box scourge yet remain cool...
limiting the hideous buildings and acres of asphalt is tulsa's task and should not be left up to individual companies regardless of their trade...
do what you want, i don't want to "muddle through" anything, i want to know why we don't have access to the things that other cities have... and those "things" include retailers... i by no means am suggesting these stores are some kind of panacea but i think we should ask why they are not here and if the reason is arcane liquor laws then fix them...
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
^My understanding is that liquor is the most profitable product that grocery stores sell. The mark up is extremely high. If you eliminate the most profitable product, it makes sense that a company would not come into this state. It would be like telling Quicktrip they could no longer sell soda.
And that is their choice. They still have to comply with state laws. Oklahoma laws have not stopped Target, KMart, Wal Mart, Sam's Club, and others from doing business here.
Alcohol is an addictive drug. It merits regulation of sale and availability the same as prescription drugs and narcotics. It is just that society has made alcohol the social drug of choice and some don't see it as harmless. Comparing liquor sales to soda sales is not a fair comparison. Although some are "addicted" to soda and it does contribute to overweight health problems, I have never heard of families ruined, lives destroyed, or drivers killed because someone was high on soda.
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
^My understanding is that liquor is the most profitable product that grocery stores sell. The mark up is extremely high. If you eliminate the most profitable product, it makes sense that a company would not come into this state. It would be like telling Quicktrip they could no longer sell soda.
And that is their choice. They still have to comply with state laws. Oklahoma laws have not stopped Target, KMart, Wal Mart, Sam's Club, and others from doing business here.
Alcohol is an addictive drug. It merits regulation of sale and availability the same as prescription drugs and narcotics. It is just that society has made alcohol the social drug of choice and some don't see it as harmless. Comparing liquor sales to soda sales is not a fair comparison. Although some are "addicted" to soda and it does contribute to overweight health problems, I have never heard of families ruined, lives destroyed, or drivers killed because someone was high on soda.
Yet they can still sell cigarettes in the grocery stores. Between the two, cigarettes are more dangerous. Alcohol in moderation can be healthful. Cigarettes are dangerous at every level, and are dangerous to those nearby. Let's not pretend that has anything to do with our government's concern with our health--its all about who has the best lobbyist.
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by snopes
Why is it a silly debate Bruno? I can tell the difference between 3.2 and the "other" stuff like night and day. Maybe it IS just me (seriously), but 3.2 tastes like water to me. I travel alot and experience both and I totally stay away from 3.2 if possible.
i'll steal my post from a previous thread...
quote:
3.2 beer is a percent of alcohol by mass....
liquor store beer is labeled by volume, and most of that is about 5 percent alcohol by volume... converting from weight to volume you find that the "3.2" beer is really 4 percent alcohol by volume... so it really is a 1% difference it is there but not as big as many people think... there have been taste tests with beer snobs- many of whom would never normally drink one of our common domestic lagers- and they can't tell a difference in the AC...
cause, yeah man, that guinness is weak ****... (all guinness draught/original varities are are 4.0% AC by volume or about 3.2% by weight)...
so yeah, it must be you... but the only way to know is a blind taste test, i'd bet you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between a 3.2 budweiser and 4.0 budweiser... i've tried, i could not tell the difference...
i love beer and i love people that love beer... i've got a keg at home and literally 15 different varieties of beer including many out-of-state micros/regional that i "import" in.... and every couple of months i brew a corny keg full of one of my own varities...
but ultimately i like beer, all beer... i'd take a weihenstephan dunkel over a michelob and a natty bo over a natural light anyday... but i'll still drink a cold can of old style instead of water, and i'd be happy about it...
Bruno, in Texas they don't sell 3.2, so when I have a beer it's the stronger variety, whether it's by volume or whatever. When I'm in Ok City on business I have had 3.2 beer (of the same brand that I drink at home) and I can tell the difference a mile away. The taste isn't quite as strong, and add to that I've found that only a few of the 3.2 beers the night before give me a really bad headache the next day. So you can lump me in as one of those that can tell the difference.
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
^My understanding is that liquor is the most profitable product that grocery stores sell. The mark up is extremely high. If you eliminate the most profitable product, it makes sense that a company would not come into this state. It would be like telling Quicktrip they could no longer sell soda.
And that is their choice. They still have to comply with state laws. Oklahoma laws have not stopped Target, KMart, Wal Mart, Sam's Club, and others from doing business here.
Alcohol is an addictive drug. It merits regulation of sale and availability the same as prescription drugs and narcotics. It is just that society has made alcohol the social drug of choice and some don't see it as harmless. Comparing liquor sales to soda sales is not a fair comparison. Although some are "addicted" to soda and it does contribute to overweight health problems, I have never heard of families ruined, lives destroyed, or drivers killed because someone was high on soda.
Yet they can still sell cigarettes in the grocery stores. Between the two, cigarettes are more dangerous. Alcohol in moderation can be healthful. Cigarettes are dangerous at every level, and are dangerous to those nearby. Let's not pretend that has anything to do with our government's concern with our health--its all about who has the best lobbyist.
I agree with you generally. (I am both a smoker and a drinker, 2 strikes against me.) Lobbyists and money drive everything in government and society today. As far as the original topic of this thread, 3.2 beer, I am not much of a beer drinker so the beer laws don't concern me that much. I have lived in Tulsa all of my 50 years, so maybe I am just used to "business as usual."
Tobacco and alcohol are both potentially damaging substances, but to the best of my knowledge, tobacco does not impair judgement, dull reflexes, and is not a major contributor to crime like alcohol is. It is these reasons that I think justify stricter regulation of alcohol sales. They are both health hazards, no question about that.
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaFan-inTexas
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by snopes
Why is it a silly debate Bruno? I can tell the difference between 3.2 and the "other" stuff like night and day. Maybe it IS just me (seriously), but 3.2 tastes like water to me. I travel alot and experience both and I totally stay away from 3.2 if possible.
i'll steal my post from a previous thread...
quote:
3.2 beer is a percent of alcohol by mass....
liquor store beer is labeled by volume, and most of that is about 5 percent alcohol by volume... converting from weight to volume you find that the "3.2" beer is really 4 percent alcohol by volume... so it really is a 1% difference it is there but not as big as many people think... there have been taste tests with beer snobs- many of whom would never normally drink one of our common domestic lagers- and they can't tell a difference in the AC...
cause, yeah man, that guinness is weak ****... (all guinness draught/original varities are are 4.0% AC by volume or about 3.2% by weight)...
so yeah, it must be you... but the only way to know is a blind taste test, i'd bet you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between a 3.2 budweiser and 4.0 budweiser... i've tried, i could not tell the difference...
i love beer and i love people that love beer... i've got a keg at home and literally 15 different varieties of beer including many out-of-state micros/regional that i "import" in.... and every couple of months i brew a corny keg full of one of my own varities...
but ultimately i like beer, all beer... i'd take a weihenstephan dunkel over a michelob and a natty bo over a natural light anyday... but i'll still drink a cold can of old style instead of water, and i'd be happy about it...
Bruno, in Texas they don't sell 3.2, so when I have a beer it's the stronger variety, whether it's by volume or whatever. When I'm in Ok City on business I have had 3.2 beer (of the same brand that I drink at home) and I can tell the difference a mile away. The taste isn't quite as strong, and add to that I've found that only a few of the 3.2 beers the night before give me a really bad headache the next day. So you can lump me in as one of those that can tell the difference.
your experience is unique, to say the least, and hard to incorporate into the broader picture of alcohol content, unfermented sugars, conegers, fusel oils and batch variability...
it is an interesting anecdote... i still contend if one participated in a double-blind controlled study, most people would be shocked... because when they've been done, the participants are quite suprised at the results...
The only way I can tell the differece between 3.2 or stronger beer is how I feel after a 6-pack. [8D]
Ironically, I feel worse after a 6 pack of the weaker stuff (serious).
everyone seems to equate "cheap beer" with "weak beer" that is simply a misperception...
regardless of what state you purchase them in-
beamish
boulevard wheat
guinness
murphy's stout
pilsner urquel
sierra nevada wheat
widmer blonde
yuengling (got some in the bar now)
and nearly all of the domestic "lights" (i.e. coors light, bud light)
and many, many more
are all 4.0-4.4% alcohol (or lower) by volume or 3.2% by weight...
i'd hate to try and drink a sixer of any of the first 8...
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
everyone seems to equate "cheap beer" with "weak beer" that is simply a misperception...
regardless of what state you purchase them in-
beamish
boulevard wheat
guinness
murphy's stout
pilsner urquel
sierra nevada wheat
widmer blonde
yuengling (got some in the bar now)
and nearly all of the domestic "lights" (i.e. coors light, bud light)
and many, many more
are all 4.0-4.4% alcohol (or lower) by volume or 3.2% by weight...
i'd hate to try and drink a sixer of any of the first 8...
You seem to really know your beers. I never cared much for beers or any malt beverage, but I do know the current local laws and regs regarding such. I think you are right about "weak = cheap," or "weak = inferior." It is all a matter of marketing and cachet.
When I see someone buying a can of Steel Reserve or some other such malt beer in Quik Trip, I just want to ask them what the hell they're thinking?
Nobody drinks malt liquor for its taste, so why would you drink the 3.2 variety of it? If you're drinking 3.2 beer, you might as well get a beer that doesn't taste like elephant urine.
Guinness, my beer of choice, is worthless in the watery version.
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
Guinness, my beer of choice, is worthless in the watery version.
I'm not aware that there is a 3.2 Guiness. Stouts usually aren't terribly high in alcohol content anyway, they retain too much of the unfermented sugars. Guinness is even low among stouts.
http://www.realbeer.com/edu/health/calories.php
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
everyone seems to equate "cheap beer" with "weak beer" that is simply a misperception...
regardless of what state you purchase them in-
beamish
boulevard wheat
guinness
murphy's stout
pilsner urquel
sierra nevada wheat
widmer blonde
yuengling (got some in the bar now)
and nearly all of the domestic "lights" (i.e. coors light, bud light)
and many, many more
are all 4.0-4.4% alcohol (or lower) by volume or 3.2% by weight...
i'd hate to try and drink a sixer of any of the first 8...
Why, then, can't they sell any of these beers in grocery stores? Correct me if I am wrong, but I never see anything but a few (mediocre) American brands in the stores. Is it because they don't want to bind themselves to the claim that they are 3.2%? As I said before, I have been told that brewers hate the 3.2% because it removes their ability to be flexible--they have to stop the process as soon as it reaches a certain alcohol level. If they simply put "exceeds 4%" and sell only in liquor stores then they are legal no matter what alcohol level.
My point is simply perhaps the reason people think 3.2 beer is cr*p is because it is generally mass produced, and produced simply to meet the 3.2 restrictions, while beer sold in liquor stores can be more crafted--paying more attention to the process and flavor than the ultimate alcohol content.
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
everyone seems to equate "cheap beer" with "weak beer" that is simply a misperception...
regardless of what state you purchase them in-
beamish
boulevard wheat
guinness
murphy's stout
pilsner urquel
sierra nevada wheat
widmer blonde
yuengling (got some in the bar now)
and nearly all of the domestic "lights" (i.e. coors light, bud light)
and many, many more
are all 4.0-4.4% alcohol (or lower) by volume or 3.2% by weight...
i'd hate to try and drink a sixer of any of the first 8...
On one third of the Boulevard Wheat six pack as we speak. It's like a little meal...
And Sierra Nevada is awfully good too. It's essentially the West Coast Boulevard brewery, as they mirror damn near every variety of beer each other has.
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
When I see someone buying a can of Steel Reserve or some other such malt beer in Quik Trip, I just want to ask them what the hell they're thinking?
Nobody drinks malt liquor for its taste, so why would you drink the 3.2 variety of it? If you're drinking 3.2 beer, you might as well get a beer that doesn't taste like elephant urine.
I don't know Ted; the stuff I get at 31st and Harvard is pretty good for a malt (Mickey's Bigmouth). I sat around one night and drank about 12 of em before I realized it.
I realized it the next morning, though...
quote:
Originally posted by pmcalk
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
everyone seems to equate "cheap beer" with "weak beer" that is simply a misperception...
regardless of what state you purchase them in-
beamish
boulevard wheat
guinness
murphy's stout
pilsner urquel
sierra nevada wheat
widmer blonde
yuengling (got some in the bar now)
and nearly all of the domestic "lights" (i.e. coors light, bud light)
and many, many more
are all 4.0-4.4% alcohol (or lower) by volume or 3.2% by weight...
i'd hate to try and drink a sixer of any of the first 8...
Why, then, can't they sell any of these beers in grocery stores? Correct me if I am wrong, but I never see anything but a few (mediocre) American brands in the stores. Is it because they don't want to bind themselves to the claim that they are 3.2%? As I said before, I have been told that brewers hate the 3.2% because it removes their ability to be flexible--they have to stop the process as soon as it reaches a certain alcohol level. If they simply put "exceeds 4%" and sell only in liquor stores then they are legal no matter what alcohol level.
My point is simply perhaps the reason people think 3.2 beer is cr*p is because it is generally mass produced, and produced simply to meet the 3.2 restrictions, while beer sold in liquor stores can be more crafted--paying more attention to the process and flavor than the ultimate alcohol content.
break it down however you want but alcohol content, whether legally mandated or a result of a particular recipe, is not an indication of the quality of a beer...
as to why those beers are not readily available at grocery stores, you can find boulevard, shiner and guinness at some grocery stores beyond that i'd suggest you go ask the liquor distribution cartels...
quote:
by swake
...I'm not aware that there is a 3.2 Guiness...
I have no idea the content of Guiness, or what's missing from one to the other.
All I am saying is if it's not in a little brown, glass bottle I don't drag it home.
There's also a whimpy keg version, but it's been a bit since I've bought a keg.
For minerals, I drink Guiness, jdb
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
When I see someone buying a can of Steel Reserve or some other such malt beer in Quik Trip, I just want to ask them what the hell they're thinking?
Nobody drinks malt liquor for its taste, so why would you drink the 3.2 variety of it? If you're drinking 3.2 beer, you might as well get a beer that doesn't taste like elephant urine.
I don't know Ted; the stuff I get at 31st and Harvard is pretty good for a malt (Mickey's Bigmouth). I sat around one night and drank about 12 of em before I realized it.
I realized it the next morning, though...
Mickey's and Little Kings- a hang-over waitin' to happen.
When I have trouble deciding between a high or low octane beer, I just get out the John Powers and let him settle it. [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
When I see someone buying a can of Steel Reserve or some other such malt beer in Quik Trip, I just want to ask them what the hell they're thinking?
Nobody drinks malt liquor for its taste, so why would you drink the 3.2 variety of it? If you're drinking 3.2 beer, you might as well get a beer that doesn't taste like elephant urine.
I don't know Ted; the stuff I get at 31st and Harvard is pretty good for a malt (Mickey's Bigmouth). I sat around one night and drank about 12 of em before I realized it.
I realized it the next morning, though...
Mickey's and Little Kings- a hang-over waitin' to happen.
When I have trouble deciding between a high or low octane beer, I just get out the John Powers and let him settle it. [:P]
ahhh, powers... good times, careful though, sometimes it turns into "stupid in a bottle"... personally, i'm more of paddys fan (which through some hoops you can get shipped to the states) but powers'll do... lately i've been impressed by michael collins
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
quote:
by swake
...I'm not aware that there is a 3.2 Guiness...
I have no idea the content of Guiness, or what's missing from one to the other.
All I am saying is if it's not in a little brown, glass bottle I don't drag it home.
There's also a whimpy keg version, but it's been a bit since I've bought a keg.
For minerals, I drink Guiness, jdb
perhaps you've confused guinness and guinness extra stout... ES only comes in bottles...
Guinness is SUPPOSED to be poured from a Keg. Glass flat under the tap and letting the head rise. You should end up with at least an inch of head in a pint glass.
The glass bottle version is so far off of what Guinness wants to supply that they have created a can of Guinness with a CO2 charge in the bottom so you get a proper head when you pour. You open the can and it opens the CO2 charge in the bottom at the same time.
The glass bottle version is fine, but it's not the real deal. And there is no "watered" down version to meet alcohol content rules.
Hey Swake,
Question:
Is it true that you get a much better pint of GUINNESS® beer in Ireland?
Answer:
GUINNESS® is GUINNESS® - wherever you are. We always use pure, fresh water from natural local sources for the GUINNESS® beer brewed outside Ireland. That said, in blind tests (with a bunch of highly cynical journalists) none of our sample could tell the difference between Irish-brewed GUINNESS® and the locally produced variety. All the GUINNESS® sold in the UK, Ireland and North America is brewed in Ireland at the historic St. James's Gate Brewery in Dublin.
Site say's it's 5% ABV.
http://www.guinness.com/us_en/bottomnav/leftnav/faqs/default.aspx#q13
To clarify, I have been refering to the EXTRA STOUT as my beer of choice, without having actually said as much. Silly me.
Now I have a sudden itch to scratch, jdb
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by Hoss
quote:
Originally posted by TheTed
When I see someone buying a can of Steel Reserve or some other such malt beer in Quik Trip, I just want to ask them what the hell they're thinking?
Nobody drinks malt liquor for its taste, so why would you drink the 3.2 variety of it? If you're drinking 3.2 beer, you might as well get a beer that doesn't taste like elephant urine.
I don't know Ted; the stuff I get at 31st and Harvard is pretty good for a malt (Mickey's Bigmouth). I sat around one night and drank about 12 of em before I realized it.
I realized it the next morning, though...
Mickey's and Little Kings- a hang-over waitin' to happen.
When I have trouble deciding between a high or low octane beer, I just get out the John Powers and let him settle it. [:P]
ahhh, powers... good times, careful though, sometimes it turns into "stupid in a bottle"... personally, i'm more of paddys fan (which through some hoops you can get shipped to the states) but powers'll do... lately i've been impressed by michael collins
Michael Collins is quite good- you have good taste!
DANGIT Bruno when are you gonna draw out a map to your place?
[}:)]
Bruno lives in the river and is currently awaiting a penthouse suite to be built to replace his shanty made with old Walmart baskets.
*Source Tulsa World [:D]
quote:
Originally posted by jdb
Hey Swake,
Question:
Is it true that you get a much better pint of GUINNESS® beer in Ireland?
Answer:
GUINNESS® is GUINNESS® - wherever you are. We always use pure, fresh water from natural local sources for the GUINNESS® beer brewed outside Ireland. That said, in blind tests (with a bunch of highly cynical journalists) none of our sample could tell the difference between Irish-brewed GUINNESS® and the locally produced variety. All the GUINNESS® sold in the UK, Ireland and North America is brewed in Ireland at the historic St. James's Gate Brewery in Dublin.
Site say's it's 5% ABV.
http://www.guinness.com/us_en/bottomnav/leftnav/faqs/default.aspx#q13
To clarify, I have been refering to the EXTRA STOUT as my beer of choice, without having actually said as much. Silly me.
Now I have a sudden itch to scratch, jdb
I know I've had this argument before, probably at Arnie's, it wasn't with you was it?
Guinness and a side shot of Whisky, now that's an evening.