best beer you ever had from a can

So tonight I went to a beer sampling class. It was extremely well organized and executed so I tip my glass to Total Wine!

One of the most valuable thing I learned there was that beer from a can can be unbelievably good.

If you don't believe me go pick up a can of Dale's Ten-Fidy Stout, Dale's Pale Ale, or Dale's Scotch Ale.

I am sure there are more great beers in a can but Total Wine really helped me shed my snobbish preconceptions of canned beer.

I think everyone understand the can is the ideal storage container, unfortunately more micro brews aren't available in can due to packaging costs. Kind of like how the dreaded wine box is a far superior package for the product than the bottle, but you have to get over the stigma of boxed wine.

21st Amendment IPA.

I had some Dales years ago and wouldn't pay to try it again.

Southern Star Brewing in Conroe Texas does all their brew in a can. Their Bombshell Blonde is one of my favorite (non-homebrew) summer-time brews. And their Buried Hatchet Stout is awesome.

Hop on the CO can bandwagon! Ska, Steamworks, Upslope, Avery, Oscar Blues, Breckenridge, etc

Surly. That is all.

slowbie said:

Surly. That is all.

Click to expand...

Surly is scary good. I only worry about the availability of bottles for homebrewers...

yep, there is some good craft in the can but can't get much here.

maui, 21st ammendment, new belgium, oskar blues, big sky etc......

What supposedly makes a can better (a more ideal storage container) than a bottle for beer, and a bag in box better than a bottle for wine?

billtzk said:

What supposedly makes a can better (a more ideal storage container) than a bottle for beer, and a bag in box better than a bottle for wine?

Click to expand...

The can completely blocks all UV rays that can skunk the hops, for one (same reason brown bottles are better than green). Sure there are other reasons, but that's one.

No light, no air and the metal can is coated on the inside so there is no contact to metal either. I assume it is the same with wine: As the bag drains I don't think it replaces the space with air/oxygen...? Not sure

It's all about the "grass is greener on the other side". If you go down to south america in the poorer regions, canned beer is considered superior to bottled, same with canned soda vs. bottled soda. Canning equipment is much more expensive, so the majority of beer is bottled in poorer nations, so they think cans of beer are way better.

and +1 on the surly, even though I can't reuse them for my brew :/

I think the main problem with cans is just that if you don't pour it into a glass, you taste the can, which is often unpleasant. Especially if you see stuff caught in the little groove around the edge.

I know we shouldn't drink directly out of the package, but sometimes it's the only option

Caldera in the can will change your view on cans real fast.

Germelli1 said:

No light, no air and the metal can is coated on the inside so there is no contact to metal either. I assume it is the same with wine: As the bag drains I don't think it replaces the space with air/oxygen...? Not sure

Click to expand...

I don't really know how cans are filled and sealed, but I would think that bottles have no more air in them than cans, and they need no special coating since beer does not take on a "glass" taste when exposed directly to the glass. I think the exposure to light is the only significant difference in the two forms of packaging.

Oenologists mostly hold that wine benefits from micro-oxidation (or micro oxygenation) through the cork, although too much oxygen is clearly bad for wine. So again, it is only the lack of exposure to light that would seem to be a relevant advantage that a bag in box has over a bottle for wine.

I can definitely taste and smell the can when I drink beer directly from the can, and it detracts from my enjoyment considerably. I'd love to be able to get a good craft or microbrew beer in both can and bottle and do a blind taste test to see if I could tell the difference and pick which one I like better. I suspect I'll be able to tell the difference and that I'll prefer the beer poured from the bottle. If I ever see the same good beer (not a BMC) in dual packaging, I'll try it.

Is a can "the ideal storage container" for beer? For now, I continue to doubt that.

I usually don't taste the can when I drink beer from one, and I personally prefer to drink beer from cans when I get the chance. I pour bottles into a glass, but beer from cans gets poured straight into my belly.

It's all about economy of scale. Canning takes more space, more expensive equipment, and thereby, requires all the requisite infrastructure to produce at a scale that support said equipment. I.E. capacity, and distribution. Which bring their own requirements at scale.

Once you get into canning, end product is higher beerackaging weight ratio, so is a good thing all the way to store shelves.

And ++ Caldera. **** I love drinking hoppy beer from a can. I think the 21st A Watermelon wheat is the only one I've had I didn't care for from a can. Though be damned if I'd drink a Ten Fidy out of the can.

Ok cans and bag in a box wine is considered better for the earth. I box of wine (the fancy ones not the crappy ones) costs the same to ship as 1 bottle of wine: HOWEVER the box of wine holds aprox 3 or 4 bottles of wine (volume wise) they are shipping a bladder and a little bit of cardboard and not all that glass.

Same with cans aluminum weighs alot less than glass so again the same amount of beer costs far less to ship.

Yes both block uv rays and as far as wine, the micro oxidation is minimal like only a couple days and then your supposed to out the bottle on it's side ti a oid any further oxidation...and oxygen has to pass through a cork so really I don't buy the argument that much!

Don't care about wine. For beer most evidence points to the can being better.

-No UV
-No oxidation slipping under the cap during temp/pressure fluctuations that even refrigerators are know for.
-Lighter and smaller so shipping is easier.
-Typically aluminum is cheaper then glass.
-Cans don't break (no one likes glass on the beach)
-Cans are easier to recycle.

All beer should be drank from a cup so you can experience the nose, therefore the smell of the can isn't a factor.

my .02

Pork Slap, tastes great and who wouldn't like drinking from a container with 2 pigs belly slappin. Gotta try the rest of the Butternuts lineup in cans, as well as Oscar Blues.Dales pale ale is awesome. And I've been seeing 21st amendment too, I'll give that a try.

Homebrewtastic said:

Southern Star Brewing in Conroe Texas does all their brew in a can. Their Bombshell Blonde is one of my favorite (non-homebrew) summer-time brews.

Click to expand...

+1 for the blond bombshell, although SWMBO is not a fan of the can (or at least gives me hard time about it).

IrregularPulse said:

I think everyone understand the can is the ideal storage container, unfortunately more micro brews aren't available in can due to packaging costs. Kind of like how the dreaded wine box is a far superior package for the product than the bottle, but you have to get over the stigma of boxed wine.

Click to expand...

slowbie said:

Surly. That is all.

Click to expand...

Yep. Best beer ever. Surly comes in 16 ounce cans. I don't taste any hint of metallic flavor in it, and it's fresh and non-skunked.

Surly's tag line on the can says, "Beer for a glass, from a can".

northernlad said:

21st Amendment IPA.

Click to expand...

I love that name....Im gonna be on the look out for it now!

Cans stack better.

GilaMinumBeer said:

Cans stack better.

Click to expand...

And are a lot of fun to plink with a .22

Not only is the investment in canning equipment greater, but the risk is higher since cans are purchased in bulk pre-printed. If the beer is mediocre and does not sell then it is more difficult to back out/change contents vs. bottling which uses simple, printed labels.

Though I like the modern, lined cans for craft beer, I agree that it sill needs to be poured into a glass - even a plastic one - to be fully enjoyed.

Colorado and Oskar Blues has lead the craft beer in a can charge in large part because of the active lifestyle of those who live here. Cans, being lightweight and of course unbreakable, are better for backpacking and camping; the outdoors demographic is what supported the OB effort in the first place. There's nothing like getting a buzz on from a couple of Old Chubs at 14,000 feet!

EDIT: "There is nothing like CELEBRATING the summit at 14,000 feet than with a can of Old Chub." Don't want anyone to get the wrong impression here.

+1 on the Pork Slap!

I bought a sixer because I'd just had the "no, cans really are a better container. There just aren't many good smaller brewers using them" discussion with my wife who accused me of being a beer snob (guilty as charged). My dad only drinks Miller Lite (and now MGD 64), so that's what she associated with cans.

TheWeeb said:

Colorado and Oskar Blues has lead the craft beer in a can charge in large part because of the active lifestyle of those who live here. Cans, being lightweight and of course unbreakable, are better for backpacking and camping; the outdoors demographic is what supported the OB effort in the first place. There's nothing like getting a buzz on from a couple of Old Chubs at 14,000 feet!

EDIT: "There is nothing like CELEBRATING the summit at 14,000 feet than with a can of Old Chub." Don't want anyone to get the wrong impression here.

Click to expand...

Oh, I almost forgot about Old Chub! I love Old Chub in the can.

Yooper_Brew said:

Oh, I almost forgot about Old Chub! I love Old Chub in the can.

Click to expand...

Would you settle for middle aged chub in the kitchen?

TheWeeb said:

Not only is the investment in canning equipment greater, but the risk is higher since cans are purchased in bulk pre-printed. If the beer is mediocre and does not sell then it is more difficult to back out/change contents vs. bottling which uses simple, printed labels.

Though I like the modern, lined cans for craft beer, I agree that it sill needs to be poured into a glass - even a plastic one - to be fully enjoyed.

Colorado and Oskar Blues has lead the craft beer in a can charge in large part because of the active lifestyle of those who live here. Cans, being lightweight and of course unbreakable, are better for backpacking and camping; the outdoors demographic is what supported the OB effort in the first place. There's nothing like getting a buzz on from a couple of Old Chubs at 14,000 feet!

EDIT: "There is nothing like CELEBRATING the summit at 14,000 feet than with a can of Old Chub." Don't want anyone to get the wrong impression here.

Click to expand...

That's a great photo!

I love to take a few old Chubs up to the hill when skiing. Hide a few under packed snow and you've got you and your buddies a great beer for lunch without the Apres prices!

Cans for camping, FTW! Just get a mesh shopping bag and plunk 'em down in a snowmelt runoff creek (lashed to a tree root of course) while setting up camp. Chills 'em super good.

Get 16's for less can to carry back, or even Foster's if you're not too particular.

Old Chub sets the standard for Scottish Ale, just as Ten Fidy does for Imperial Stout and The Gubna does for Imperial IPA. My humble opinion of course, but all Cans!

billtzk said:

What supposedly makes a can better (a more ideal storage container) than a bottle for beer, and a bag in box better than a bottle for wine?

Click to expand...

hard to take glass to the beach, that was my reason this last summer.

kunstler said:

Ok cans and bag in a box wine is considered better for the earth. I box of wine (the fancy ones not the crappy ones) costs the same to ship as 1 bottle of wine: HOWEVER the box of wine holds aprox 3 or 4 bottles of wine (volume wise) they are shipping a bladder and a little bit of cardboard and not all that glass.

Same with cans aluminum weighs alot less than glass so again the same amount of beer costs far less to ship.

Yes both block uv rays and as far as wine, the micro oxidation is minimal like only a couple days and then your supposed to out the bottle on it's side ti a oid any further oxidation...and oxygen has to pass through a cork so really I don't buy the argument that much!

Click to expand...

Shipping cost is not the only cost associated with the packaging of beer and wine. I'm not sure about bag in box wine compare to bottled wine as far as packaging costs and environmental impact. Bottles can be recycled and increasingly are in communities across the US. The cardboard box that a box wine comes in is recyclable, but the mylar bag inside is not.

But when it comes to cans vs bottles, bottles wins hands down from an environmental impact perspective. Both are recyclable and both commonly are recycled. But glass bottles are much cheaper to produce than aluminum cans when you consider the entire manufacturing process.

Laying a wine bottle on its side serves to keep the cork moist so it doesn't dry out. The micro-oxygenation through the cork continues regardless of the orientation of the bottle. This is why all wines eventually oxidize in the bottle and become unpalatable at some point.

Summer Shandy from a can under Devil's Tower for the win!

billtzk said:

But when it comes to cans vs bottles, bottles wins hands down from an environmental impact perspective. Both are recyclable and both commonly are recycled. But glass bottles are much cheaper to produce than aluminum cans when you consider the entire manufacturing process.

Click to expand...

This is an interesting debate; from what I have read it does take much more energy to produce aluminum cans than it does glass bottles, at least for that first iteration. Recycling each takes about the same energy, however. It costs less to recycle cans than bottles. Over 40% of beer cans are now made out of recycled aluminum vs. 20-30% for glass bottles. If you put this up against the fuel costs from shipping - estimated at 35% less than that of shipping glass - I think cans win the environmental debate. Plus, while aluminum can be recycled without much thought as to type, glass must be separated by color, by hand, which further increased the cost of recycling.

Not my own analysis, simply pulled from some sources;
http://www.slate.com/id/2186219/
http://www.elephantjournal.com/2010/05/the-environmental-beer-battle-cans-vs-bottles-katie-feldhaus/
http://www.kegworks.com/blog/2010/06/02/canning-craft-beer-saves-money-and-energy/

Nuff said

This is turning into a "SHOW US YOUR CANS" thread. That would be awesome, but probably end up in the boneyard.

Not Good Beer In A Can:

I think cans are great for distribution. What I hate is drinking from the can. Problem solved by pouring into a glass (not a plastic solo cup you frat boys)...

TheWeeb said:

This is turning into a "SHOW US YOUR CANS" thread. That would be awesome, but probably end up in the boneyard.

Not Good Beer In A Can:

Click to expand...

oh man, I had the guys that sell meat out of the back of their truck in a chest freezer show up while I was brewing in the front yard.

The guy asked if I could make him one of those???