I poured a 24oz can into a large mug. It had a best before date of 6/2/14 and cost $1.81 ($0.08 per ounce).
Appearance: Pretty amber/light copper hue. Clear body with visible,
consistent carbonation. Pours to a large, off-white, foamy head which
doesn’t retain or lace all that well.
Smell: Not much in the way of aromatics. Nothing off-putting, just a generic lager smell.
Taste: I’m not sure what Miller Fortune is supposed to be: an attempt at
a strong amber lager or a really classy malt liquor? I think it’s both,
actually. And I’m genuinely surprised by how well this beer turned out
(relatively speaking, of course). A lot of people recommended I review
this, and now I can see why. While it’s not a great beer, it’s far from a
bad one. Mostly it’s just interesting.
There’s a significant sweetness at the beginning of the palette: very
honey-like with additional notes of caramel or butterscotch. You don’t
tend to get that much flavor out of a strong lager made by a macro
brewery. This might be due to using corn syrup or some kind of added
sugar to the brew to up the gravity, but the result is still a sweet
beer. Not that I get a lot in the way of actual malt character, though. I
was almost ready to give this a thumbs up, but the second half couldn’t
complete the mission. There’s a significant tang and astringency as it
goes down - a trait often found in malt liquors and cheap adjunct
lagers. It’s not terrible, but it is strong enough to be annoying. What
it comes down to is this is one of the better-tasting strong cheap
beers, but not a good beer per se.
Drinkability: I was surprised by how smooth and easy-drinking Miller
Fortune was. The mouthfeel is thick, but soft and smooth. It’s not thin
and crisp like a standard lager. It finishes clean, though it’s not
refreshing (not that it’s supposed to be). At 6.9% ABV it’s rather light
on its toes with no alcohol presence, though there should be more
flavor for this much weight.