Ryan Cormier

The News Journal

For its 21st birthday, Dogfish Head is getting cans.

That's right, 12-packs of Dogfish's flagship 60 Minute IPA in cans have begun appearing in local liquor stores, meaning you no longer need a bottle-opener to chug a Dogfish at home.

By early next year, Dogfish will also begin canning its 7.5 percent ABV Flesh & Blood IPA with more coming after that.

So why, after more than two decades of bottles, is Dogfish suddenly so canny?

Dogfish Head's founder and president, Sam Calagione, says there are two reasons: improved canning technology and demand from customers.

He says he looked into canning about a dozen years ago and was not impressed by the quality and consistency of the beer after canning. But he was recently sold on the process by the German-based Krones canning system, which Dogfish had installed.

Even though they cannot can at the same rate they bottle because it's a slower process – they now manufacture 250 cans per minute versus 700 bottles in the same time period – canned beer sales are up as consumers look for portability. And Calagione is going all in.

"Craft beer drinkers really appreciate the canned style to a degree that they did not a decade ago," he says.

Dogfish's move opens up a big can of debate among some beer drinkers: What's better? Bottles or cans?

Some swear they can taste a difference. Others say some packaging keeps beer colder and/or fresher.

For his part, Calagione says it's a bunch of malarkey.

"It's a misconception," he says. "The exact same 60 Minute is going out of a pipe going in one direction towards our bottling line and another towards our canning line."

Calagione insists there's no taste difference, so we here at The News Journal decided to put our taste buds to work and conduct a mini blind taste test pitting Dogfish Head's 60 Minute IPA against itself – bottles vs. cans.

In 2012, the Huffington Post gathered a panel of 25 beer drinkers and had them test cans vs. bottles of four brands: Budweiser, Heineken, Sierra Nevada and Sapporo. On average, only 54 percent of their testers correctly identified the canned beers.

Grand Gala turns the big 4-0

Pit bull mauling launches Newark 8-year-old on two year trek to save her arm

For our test, it didn't take long to decide who would be on our panel. We raided the newspaper's in-house beer club for a trio of beer drinkers: 55 Hours editor Sarika Jagtiani; business reporter Scott Goss; and IT manager Dave White, aka the guy who keeps the 'puters working.

They each were given two cups of beer – one from a bottle and one from a can. We labeled the bottom of each cup and had them drink up before picking which was which.

All three regularly drink both canned and bottle beers and weren't sure if they could pick one from the other during our wholly unscientific test.

They were right.

Goss was the only one who correctly picked out the canned beer, although all three said they noticed slight differences in flavor.

Years ago, White would avoid canned beer because much of the canned beer was the cheapest available. But in 2002, Colorado-based Oskar Blues became one of the first craft breweries to package their beer in cans and in the years since, many more have joined.

All three testers said the difference between the canned and bottled beer was so slight that they wouldn't necessarily choose one over the other when drinking in the future.

"There's definitely a slight variation in taste and aroma, but it's not enough to say one is necessarily better or worse," Goss said after celebrating his victory. "Based on this taste test, I would not turn my nose up at the can."

So if you're fan of bottles over cans or vice versa, confront your prejudices and do your own blind taste test. Based on our results, you just might surprise yourself.

Contact Ryan Cormier of The News Journal at rcormier@delawareonline.com or (302) 324-2863. Follow him on Facebook (@ryancormier), Twitter (@ryancormier) and Instagram (@ryancormier).