Video summary

ПИВОВАРНЯ БОЧКАРЁВ(ХАЙНИКЕН) ОБЗОР. РОССИЙСКИЕ ПИВНЫЕ ГИГАНТЫ #1

Main summary

Key takeaways

Product Review

Product reviewed

Bochkarev Brewery (formerly Heineken / largest Russian “giant” brewery assets, rebranded over time).

The video is essentially a tasting/review tour of Bochkarev’s lineup, with comparisons to other big Russian brands like Efes, Baltika, MPC, plus references to formerly-known Heineken brands such as Amstel, Krusovice, Hoegaarden, etc.

Main features / what the video focuses on

  • Multiple Bochkarev beers and one cider, mostly in small volumes (notably 0.33 and 0.40, plus some 0.43 and 0.4).
  • Consistent discussion of:
    • Foam quality
    • Aroma strength
    • Bitterness balance
    • “Body” / malt presence
    • Whether flavors taste “stable” or empty/defective
  • Ongoing criticism of pack size strategy (shrinking volumes like 0.33/0.40) and the reviewer’s preference for cans and/or more standard bottle sizes.

Key beer/cider opinions (unique points mentioned)

1) “Moskvich” beer (0.33)

  • The reviewer didn’t like it earlier and re-checks it in this video.
  • Notes malty sweetness, very low bitterness, slight sourness.
  • Calls it drinkable but very average/empty.
  • Rating: 6/10
  • Strong gripe: doesn’t see the point of 0.33—drinks too fast and doesn’t preserve freshness meaningfully.

2) Bochkarev “Live draft” / flagship line (generally disliked)

  • Reviewer repeatedly says they don’t like the entire line (even if one green variant is “not the worst”).
  • Overall impression: lineup failure / not worth buying.

3) “Arne” (Premium “camp” pretending to be Belgian), 0.4

  • Purchased around 100 rubles for 0.4 (implying it’s expensive vs typical expectations).
  • Says foam is good; aroma is light/clean malty, but flavor has:
    • Unpleasant bitterness
    • “Rusty / dried fish” off notes
  • Also argues the “Belgian” positioning doesn’t fit the style.
  • Rating: 6/10
  • Criticism: sold/discounted due to being unpopular; reviewer prefers fresh beer over near-expiry purchases.

4) “German” beer (Bochkarev brand) — grainy/cardboard/mushy

  • Says it looks like “May beer,” 2 months old.
  • Complains about labeling/ingredient order logic (salt appearing before malt).
  • Aroma: sweet, with rotting grass/compost-like impression.
  • Taste: grainy, mushy, cardboard-like, not interesting.
  • Overall: among the worst in the session (no clean positive rating given).

5) “Gosar” (Goßr / Austrian-style) — best among the darker/gray middle

  • Previously the reviewer didn’t think it was good, but:
  • In this tasting, says it is:
    • clean, malty
    • with a proper bitter finish (though bitterness slightly lacking for balance)
    • best beer of the day
  • Rating: 7/10
  • Notes it’s not perfectly balanced (bitterness low; hints of sourness) but still clearly above the rest.

6) “Goldbier” (former Amstel), 0.43

  • Historical context: reviewer liked Amstel before it was renamed to Goldbier; believes quality dropped after renaming.
  • Notes:
    • grainy/weak foam
    • aroma: “fine” but weak
    • taste: very dry, little malt body
    • alcohol smell noticeable at 4.8%
  • Rating: 4/10
  • Strong criticism: lacks malt flavor compared to “real” dry German pilsners that still have grain character.

7) “Kalinkin Bohemian Pilsner” (Czech/Bohemian pilsner), 0.4

  • Reviewer’s “best” traditional-style beer in this session after Gosar.
  • Hops are noticed first; good dense foam.
  • Bitterness present, but beer body is somewhat empty.
  • Calls it the best beer today earlier, and later clarifies it’s among his top choices, though not a purchase preference.
  • Rating: 7/10
  • Major practical con: the 0.4 glass/bottle format—reviewer strongly prefers cans for quantity purchases and storage stability.

8) “Krusovica” (reviewer compares it to Zhigulevskoe style), 0.43

  • Says Krusovica is one of his favorites from the set.
  • Notes:
    • caramel / two-malt / hop blend
    • good malt body; some grassy notes
    • flat/out of steam compared with older Czech Krusovice expectations
  • Compares against Kalinkin:
    • Krusovica has more body (denser malt feeling)
    • Downsides: more expensive
      • Zhiguli-style ~80 rubles
      • Krusovica ~100 rubles
  • Rating: 7/10
  • Overall: top pick of the video (best combination of taste + availability).

9) “Hunting” beer (strong / hunt-themed bottle), 8.1% ABV, density ~16.8

  • Claims it’s very good/awesome and fresher than many others.
  • Notes about stability and “pure grain” smell.
  • Compared to Baltika 9: says it’s better than Baltika 9.
  • No precise final numeric score shown in the provided text.

10) “Mr. Fox” cherry cider (0.4)

  • Ingredient list says reconstituted apple juice + sugar + coloring + natural flavoring, but no real cherries.
  • Reviewer is offended by “cherry” labeling because it’s mostly flavoring/dye.
  • Taste impression:
    • tastes like candy-like flavored drink, not real cherry
    • “drinkable,” but for girls / sweet
  • Explicit rating:
    • Rating: 7/10
  • He calls it ordinary apple cider pretending to be cherry.

Pros (unique points)

  • Gosar: clean, malty, best of the day, with proper bitterness.
  • Kalinkin Bohemian Pilsner: good hops-forward character, dense foam, generally pleasant.
  • Krusovica: richer body vs Kalinkin, caramel/malt character; one of the reviewer’s favorites.
  • Hunting strong beer: perceived as fresh and genuinely good, even compared favorably to Baltika 9.
  • Some beers have good foam retention (foam quality is repeatedly referenced as better than certain peers, though details vary).

Cons (unique points)

  • Systematic dislike of small package volumes (especially 0.33 and 0.40):
    • reviewer doesn’t see freshness benefits
    • argues 0.4 increases “math” costs/quantity hassle
    • says these sizes are awkward for personal purchasing
  • Frequent complaints:
    • weak malt body (especially Goldbier: “no grain/sweetness”)
    • rusty/dried-fish off notes (Arne; also “metal/iron” impressions elsewhere)
    • empty/“yellow water with gases” impression for some beers (Moskvich)
    • weak/odd aroma or “compost/rotting grass” in at least one “German” lager entry
  • Reviewer claims parts of the lineup are not popular, sold off at discounts; near-expiry beer becomes a “lottery.”
  • Cider misrepresentation: “cherry” presented with no real cherries (only flavor/coloring).

Comparisons made

  • Branding history: discussion of former Heineken assets and renamed Russian brands.
  • Specific taste comparisons:
    • Moskvich vs Efes/Baltika expectations (generally “not my fan” for big brands too)
    • Krusovica vs Kalinkin (Krusovica more body; Kalinkin missing malt body)
    • Goldbier vs Amstel past (reviewer says renaming made it worse)
    • Hunting beer vs Baltika 9 (hunting perceived as better)
    • Kalinkin vs Czech pilsner expectations (decent but not as filling as stronger Czech styles)

Verdict / overall recommendation (from the video)

The reviewer implies Bochkarev as a brewery is mostly not worth buying, with only a few standouts.

Recommended (best picks mentioned)

  • Krusovica (7/10)
  • Kalinkin Bohemian Pilsner (7/10) (but he won’t buy it in 0.4 glass format)
  • Gosar (7/10, best in tasting order)
  • Possibly Hunting strong beer (called awesome; no numeric score shown)

Not recommended

  • Goldbier (4/10)
  • Moskvich (6/10, “average/empty”)
  • Arne (6/10, unpleasant bitterness/off notes)
  • Several lagers/largers described as grainy/compost-like/off

Unique points list (condensed)

  • Bochkarev = rebranded from former Heineken/other assets; “flagship” branding.
  • Lots of beers under 100 rubles, but prices differ by volume.
  • Frequent volumes: 0.33, 0.40, 0.43, 0.4; reviewer dislikes <0.5.
  • Foam quality praised for some beers; others have weak foam.
  • Aroma often too faint/clean or sometimes “compost/rotting grass.”
  • Bitterness often too low (or unpleasant rusty/dried-fish).
  • Reviewer emphasizes drinking beer fresh; near-expiry stock becomes a “lottery.”
  • Strong preference for cans over bottles (storage stability + lighter weight).
  • “Cherry cider” is mislabeled (no real cherries; flavoring/coloring).
  • Ratings explicitly given: Moskvich 6/10, Arne 6/10, Goldbier 4/10, Kalinkin 7/10, Gosar 7/10, Cherry cider 7/10, Krusovica 7/10.

Speakers/views

  • Single main speaker (the reviewer/narrator) provides the ratings, tasting notes, and brand history context.
  • No other speakers appear to contribute separate evaluations beyond referenced voices/comments (“people say…”, “some say…”, but not distinct reviewers).

Original video